Scenario A Consider a time when you had the experience of being led by someone who was able to get you to achieve more than you thought you could. Based on what you learned about leadership styles, describe events examining how your selected leader worked by certain principles. In addition, report details of an event demonstrating how you were led to perform. On the basis of the above scenario, answer the following questions: What style did the leader exhibit? Describe events pointing out how your selected leader worked by certain principles. Report details of the scenario demonstrating how you were led to perform. How did you improve your overall attitude and motivation based on a supportive leader in the workplace? Positive influence can help team members develop their skills and knowledge. Do you agree to this statement? Why and how? How does working in a positive organization with supportive leadership encourage staff performance at work each day? What leadership skills will you take from your positive experience and use when you are in a leadership position? Scenario B Now, recall a time when you were led by someone who could not motivate you. Describe events pointing out how your selected leader's working style made subordinates feel uncomfortable. On the basis of the above scenario, answer the following questions: What style did the leader exhibit? Describe events pointing out your selected leader's leadership style. Report details of the scenario demonstrating how you were led in his or her team. How did the manager's action make you feel? Explain. Which leadership behaviors do you think your selected leader lacked? Do you think the leader had ever had a chance to learn about leadership styles? How important is it for a leader to be trained to guide and motivate the staff members to enhance team unity, enthusiasm, and positive attitudes? What role should the individual staff member have to motivate himself or herself instead of relying on a manager? EXPECTANCY THEORY One widely cited theory of motivation is Victor Vroom’s ( 1964 ) Expectancy Theory (also referred to as the VIE Theory). Expectancy Theory suggests that for any given situation, the level of a person’s motivation (force in Vroom’s conceptualization) with respect to performance is dependent upon (1) his or her desire for an outcome; (2) the perception that individual’s job performance is related to obtaining other desired outcomes; and (3) the perceived probability that his or her effort will lead to the required performance. The theory may be expressed as M = V × I × E (see  Figure 6–1 ). Vroom ( 1964 ) explains that the force that drives a person to perform is dependent upon three factors: valence, instrumentality, and expectancy (pp. 15–19). Valence  is the strength of an individual’s want or need, or dislike, for a particular outcome. An outcome has a positive valence when the person prefers attaining it to not attaining it, a valence of zero when the person is in.

1. Scenario A
Consider a time when you had the experience of being led by
someone who was able to get you to achieve more than you
thought you could. Based on what you learned about leadership
styles, describe events examining how your selected leader
worked by certain principles. In addition, report details of an
event demonstrating how you were led to perform.
On the basis of the above scenario, answer the following
questions:
What style did the leader exhibit? Describe events pointing out
how your selected leader worked by certain principles.
Report details of the scenario demonstrating how you were led
to perform.
How did you improve your overall attitude and motivation
based on a supportive leader in the workplace?
Positive influence can help team members develop their skills
and knowledge. Do you agree to this statement? Why and how?
How does working in a positive organization with supportive
leadership encourage staff performance at work each day?
What leadership skills will you take from your positive
experience and use when you are in a leadership position?
Scenario B
Now, recall a time when you were led by someone who could
not motivate you. Describe events pointing out how your
selected leader's working style made subordinates feel
uncomfortable.
On the basis of the above scenario, answer the following
questions:
What style did the leader exhibit? Describe events pointing out
your selected leader's leadership style.
Report details of the scenario demonstrating how you were led
in his or her team.
How did the manager's action make you feel? Explain.
Which leadership behaviors do you think your selected leader

2. lacked? Do you think the leader had ever had a chance to learn
about leadership styles?
How important is it for a leader to be trained to guide and
motivate the staff members to enhance team unity, enthusiasm,
and positive attitudes?
What role should the individual staff member have to motivate
himself or herself instead of relying on a manager?
EXPECTANCY THEORY
One widely cited theory of motivation is Victor Vroom’s (
1964
) Expectancy Theory (also referred to as the VIE Theory).
Expectancy Theory suggests that for any given situation, the
level of a person’s motivation (force in Vroom’s
conceptualization) with respect to performance is dependent
upon (1) his or her desire for an outcome; (2) the perception
that individual’s job performance is related to obtaining other
desired outcomes; and (3) the perceived probability that his or
her effort will lead to the required performance. The theory may
be expressed as M = V × I × E (see
Figure 6–1
).
Vroom (
1964
) explains that the force that drives a person to perform is
dependent upon three factors: valence, instrumentality, and
expectancy (pp. 15–19).
Valence
is the strength of an individual’s want or need, or dislike, for a
particular outcome. An outcome has a positive valence when the
person prefers attaining it to not attaining it, a valence of zero
when the person is indifferent to attaining or not attaining it,
and a negative valence when the person prefers not attaining it

3. to attaining it. As such, valence can have a wide range of both
positive and negative values. The strength of a person’s desire
for, or aversion to, an outcome is based on the intrinsic
properties of an outcome that are valued or not (a second-level
outcome in Vroom’s conceptualization), and/or on the
anticipated satisfaction or dissatisfaction associated with other
outcomes that are related to any given outcome (a first-level
outcome in Vroom’s conceptualization). For example, some
workers may value an opportunity for promotion or
advancement because of their need for achievement. (One
outcome, advancement, is positively related to or instrumental
with respect to achieving another outcome—achievement.)
Others may not want the promotion because it would require
additional time commitment and, therefore, less time for family
or friends. (One outcome, advancement, is negatively related to
or instrumental with respect to another outcome—need for
affiliation.)
Figure 6–1
Vroom’s Expectancy Theory (VIE)
Instrumentality
is an individual’s perception that his or her performance is
related to other outcomes, either positively or negatively. It is
an outcome–outcome association. In other words, an individual
will perform in a certain manner because he or she believes that
behavior will be rewarded with something that has value to the
individual. For example, a person believes that by producing
both high-quality and -quantity work, it will result in
recognition (e.g., praise or bonus) or a promotion from his or
her supervisor.
Expectancy
is an individual’s perception that his or her effort will
positively influence his or her performance. It is an action–
outcome association. It can be defined as a momentary belief
concerning the likelihood that a particular act (effort) will be
followed by a particular outcome (performance). Expectancies
can be described in terms of their strength. Maximal strength is

4. indicated by subjective certainty that the act will be followed by
the outcome, while minimal (or zero) strength is indicated by
subjective certainty that the act will not be followed by the
outcome. For example, an individual perceives that if he or she
works overtime, the management report will be completed by
the deadline (maximal strength). However, if the employee
perceives the deadline to be unrealistic and not obtainable
because of the time required to complete the report, the
expectancy strength is minimal.
Newsom (
1990
) summarized Expectancy Theory with what he termed the “Nine
Cs”:
1.
Challenge:
Does the individual have to work hard to perform the job well?
Managers need to review an employee’s job design. Is it routine
and unchallenging? Does the job incorporate Herzberg’s
motivators (see
Chapter 5
)?
2.
Criteria:
Does he or she know the difference between good and poor
performance? Managers need to effectively communicate to an
employee the responsibilities and/or requirements of the task
and how the employee will be measured as to its successful
completion. A manager should not assume that an employee
knows the criteria for performing satisfactorily. In addition,
managers need to provide feedback so an employee is aware of
what he or she is doing right and what needs to be improved.
3.
Compensation:

5. Do the outcomes associated with good performance reward the
individual? Nadler and Lawler (
1983
) discussed the mixed message an organization sends to
employees when employees are rewarded for seniority rather
than performance. What the organization gets is behavior
oriented toward safe, secure employment rather than efforts
directed at performing well.
4.
Capability:
Does the individual have the ability to perform the job well?
Employees who lack the necessary skills, knowledge, and
experience to perform a task well will become frustrated and
avoid future growth opportunities.
5.
Confidence:
Does the individual believe he or she can perform the job well?
Employees need to believe that they can perform a task well.
Although an employee may have the knowledge and skill, he or
she may not see himself or herself with the ability to perform
the task well. This may be based on past experiences of failure.
6.
Credibility:
Does the individual believe that management will deliver on
promises? Managers must deliver what they promised.
7.
Consistency:
Does the individual believe that all workers receive similar
preferred outcomes for good performance and similar less
preferred outcomes for poor performance? Managers need to
treat all employees equally, on the basis of objective criteria.
8.

6. Cost:
What does it cost an individual in time and effort to perform
well?
9.
Communication:
Does management communicate well and consistently with the
individual in order to affect the other eight Cs? Managers need
to set clear goals and provide the right rewards for different
people. (See
Figure 6–2
.)
For managers, Expectancy Theory is very useful because it
helps to understand a worker’s behavior. If employees lack
motivation, it may be caused by their indifference toward, or
desire to avoid, the existing outcomes. Expectancy Theory is
based on the assumption that individuals calculate the “costs
and benefits” in choosing among alternative behavioral actions.
So the important question for managers to ask is, “What rewards
(outcomes) do my employees value?” (See
Case Study 6–1
: Why Aren’t My Employees Motivated?)
Figure 6–2
Application of Expectancy Theory Using Newsom’s Nine Cs
Case Study 6–1
Why Aren’t My Employees Motivated?
Roger Harris is the founder and managing partner of a large
health management consulting firm that specializes in strategic
planning for hospitals. The firm has six partners, including
Roger, and 20 professional staff (all with graduate degrees in
health administration). The staff is evenly divided between
males and females, single and married individuals between 25 to
35 years old. Of the 10 married, two spouses work outside the
home. All the married individuals have families of at least two

7. children and all children are under 10 years old.
The philosophy of the firm is to serve the needs of its client and
have fun serving those needs all while making a profit. Because
of the tight labor market, the firm’s salaries for its
professional staff are well above the market in order to attract
and retain the best talent. In addition, each employee has a
private office, breakfast served daily, free weekly car washes,
and his or her dry cleaning delivered to the office. The firm also
offers the staff home computers if they prefer to work at home
on weekends during the firm’s busy time, which usually runs
from October to May.
During this period, staff are required to work approximately 55
to 60 hours per week. Staff receive two weeks’ vacation
annually, in addition to one week for continuing professional
education and one week personal time, which is utilized by 100
percent of the staff.
Roger Harris is concerned because, although partners’ billable
hours (i.e., hourly rates charged to clients for services rendered)
have increased 12 percent over the last two years, the staff’s
billable hours have decreased by 14 percent. In addition, Roger
Harris noted that the turnover rate (i.e., percentage of the newly
hired graduates that stay with the firm for approximately three
to four years before taking a position in one of their client’s
hospitals) has increased to 50 percent (from 10 percent five
years earlier).
In order to increase the firm’s productivity and retention rate,
Roger Harris initiated a bonus program as follows:
If a staff member bills out 2,000 hours annually, he or she
receives a bonus equal to 5 percent of his or her annual salary.
For every hour billed over the minimum 2,000 hours, the
employee is paid twice the hourly rate.
All employees earned their 5 percent bonus, but no one’s
productivity increased over the minimum 2,000 hours base.
Roger Harris is quite concerned by this lowering productivity
and increasing turnover rate. Thinking that the staff needed
outside professional recognition, he encouraged everyone to

8. publish articles for the various health management journals
discussing aspects of their most interesting cases. All the staff
displayed their willingness to do so, as long as the time required
to develop the articles would be applied toward their minimum
2,000 hours’ bonus calculation.
Roger Harris related to staff that anyone who demonstrated
technical competence and the ability to attract and retain clients
to the firm has the opportunity to become a partner. Even
though individuals from the outside filled the last two senior
management-level positions, four of the six partners were
promoted from within (after 8 to 10 years of continuous
employment with the firm). However, the most recent promotion
to partner was made to an individual hired from the outside
after only three years of employment with the firm.
Roger Harris thinks that the consulting firm is a great place to
work with interesting and challenging cases, an excellent
compensation package, and growth opportunity. Therefore, he
cannot understand why staff’s productivity continues to decline
and the turnover rate continues to increase.
Using Expectancy Theory, explain to Roger Harris why
nonpartner productivity level is low and why the firm is
experiencing a high turnover rate with its professional staff.
J. Stacy Adams (
1963
,
1965
) proposed his Equity Theory, stating that a person evaluates his
or her outcomes and inputs by comparing them with those of
others. Adams’ theory is based in the social-exchange theories
that center on two assumptions. First, that there is a similarity
between the process through which individuals evaluate their
social relationships and economic transactions in the market.
Social relationships can be viewed as exchange processes in
which individuals make contributions (investments) for which
they expect certain outcomes (Mowday,

9. 1983
). The second assumption concerns the process through which
individuals decide whether a particular exchange is satisfactory.
If there is relative equality between the outcomes and
contributions of both parties to an exchange, satisfaction is
likely to result from the interaction (Mowday,
1983
). If an inequality is perceived, then dissatisfaction occurs,
which triggers an internal tension within one or more of the
individuals.
The two major components in Equity Theory are inputs and
outcomes. Inputs are defined as those things a person
contributes to an exchange. In the workplace, an employee’s
inputs would be experience, education, efforts, skills, and
abilities. Outcomes are those things that result from the
exchange, such as salary, bonuses, promotions, and recognition.
Adams states that equity exists when the ratio of a person’s
outcomes to inputs is equal to the ratio of others’ outcomes and
inputs (see
Figure 6–3
).
Several important aspects of Adams’ theory are noted. First, the
determination of whether inequity exists is based on the
individual’s perceptions of input and outcomes, which may or
may not be reality. Second, inequity will not exist if the person
has high inputs and low outputs, as long as the other person has
the similar ratio. Third, inequity exists when a person is either
underpaid or overpaid. For example, if employees perceive they
are overcompensated, they may increase their level of
productivity. If employees perceive they are undercompensated,
they may either decrease their level of productivity or attempt
to obtain additional compensation.