Issue Management at Gap Inc. Essay

Introduction Gap Inc. : Low Morale and Absenteeism Low morale and absenteeism of are serious problems of Gap Inc. that cuts across industry. On a distinctive day between 2 and 4% of employees at Gap Inc. fail to show up for work, which does not sound like a high rate of absence, but more time is lost for the reason that of low morale and absenteeism than through strikes and lockouts. The yearly costs of low morale and absenteeism in the United States are estimated to be $29 billion and a change of 4. 99% in the national absence rate changes the gross national product by $10 billion. (London, 2003) A great number of studies are done to identify the determinants of low morale and absenteeism. Many variables are found to be considerably related to indices of absence, the results appear to be unstable across situations and time. The Way Incentives Work Every incentive program is based on a formula for enhancing motivation that engages four fundamental variables: effort, performance, outcomes, and satisfaction. The logic behind these programs goes something like this: employees at Gap Inc. will put in the accurate quantity of effort to meet performance hopes if these part time employees at Gap Inc.obtain the types of outcomes that include pay raises and promotions which will provide part time employees satisfaction. In simpler words, Gap Inc. should provide its employees what they want, and employees will work hard to get it. Effort => Performance => Outcomes=> Satisfaction Conversely, the problem with most incentive programs like of Gap Inc. is that they centre exclusively on the submission of outcomes and overlook the three beliefs that are the key to making the motivation solution work: †¢ Can one do it? †¢ Will outcomes be tied to one’s performance? †¢ Will outcomes be satisfying to one? The first conviction compacts with the relationship between employee effort and performance. The second compacts with the relationship between performance and outcomes. And the third compacts with the relationship between outcomes and satisfaction. These three beliefs form the basis of the belief system of motivation and performance. Accepting that these beliefs are decisive preconditions for motivation helps to explain why incentive programs generally yield such lacklustre results like in case of Gap Inc. Since employees do not always hold these beliefs to be true, attempts to improve motivation by using incentives cannot make the grade, even when the incentives are highly desirable ones. Types of Motivation Problems One cannot do it Motivation problem: Lack of confidence Associated feelings: Self-doubt Anxiety Frustration Outcomes are not tied to one’s performance Motivation problem: Lack of trust Associated feelings: Scepticism Disbelief Mistrust Outcomes will not be satisfying to one Motivation problem: Lack of satisfaction Associated feelings: Anger Rebelliousness Low Morale and Absenteeism At Gap Inc. a major transformation attempt only makes difficult the situation. If any of three beliefs are shaky to begin with, organisational change at Gap Inc. can weaken them even further. The result is often serious motivation and performance problems, at a time when organisations can least afford them, and a resultant surge in the negative emotions associated with change. When an employee believes ‘one cannot do it’ for example, one may develop a lack of self-confidence and begin to experience many of the unpleasant feelings that go along with it: self-doubt, anxiety, and frustration. About a year into the change effort, one manager portrayed the inner turmoil one went through by comparing the restructuring to building a ship at the same time one is trying to sail it. (Mele, 2003) Worker beliefs that ‘outcomes are not tied to one’s performance’ can also escort to noteworthy motivation problems, especially lack of trust. This is normally accompanied by feelings of scepticism or disbelief; precisely the emotions that another manager felt when one was told early on change effort that power would be allocated differently. Employee beliefs that ‘outcomes will not be satisfying to one’ often escort to a third major problem, chronic dissatisfaction, and to feelings of anger, rebelliousness, low morale and absenteeism. (Miner, 2002) Like as the negative emotions allied with change can often go undetected, the motivation and performance problems that cause them frequently remain hidden and unresolved. Due to this, managers who lead change are sometimes frustrated in their efforts. They fail to realise that it is not enough to appeal to the intellect of their workers. So managers must also win employees’ hearts in order to implement change successfully. The reason behind why are motivation problems so difficult to uncover is that employees are afraid to speak about them or even admit that they exist like at Gap Inc. Though most employees know when they have a motivation problem, many feel that acknowledging it is tantamount to admitting failure, and, naturally, they do not want to appear weak or incompetent to their manager. The belief system approach is practical method that can help manager at Gap Inc. resolve these problems effectively. It takes the guesswork out of the search for motivation problems and alerts managers to the three principal types: †¢ Motivation problems caused by a lack of confidence. †¢ Motivation problems caused by a lack of trust. †¢ Motivation problems caused by a lack of satisfaction. The approach is based on the expectancy theory of motivation and on the research of Yale University professor Victor H. Vroom. In conducting Vroom’s analyses of why motivation improvement so often fails, Vroom came to the conclusion that motivation at work depends on certain employee expectations or beliefs: that effort will lead to performance, that performance will lead to outcomes, and that these outcomes, when received, will be satisfying. (Thomas, 2004) Like other expectancy theorists, Vroom maintained that the tendency of people to act in certain ways depends on the strength of the expectation that their actions will be followed by certain outcomes and on the perceived value — or â€Å"valence† — of those outcomes. This combination of expectation and valence is what determines people’s behaviour, Vroom and colleagues argued, and unless both expectation and valence are present to some degree, there will be little or no motivation to act. For example, if a person wants a certain outcome but doesn’t feel it can be achieved through one’s efforts, then that person won’t be motivated. Similarly, that person will also lack motivation if one believes that a certain outcome can be achieved but is undesirable. The application model relies on structured, facilitated meetings between managers and their direct reports to find the answers to the three basic questions that uncover motivation problems: †¢ Does the employee believe that one’s effort will lead to the expected performance? †¢ Does the employee believe that outcomes will be tied to one’s performance? †¢ Does the employee believe the outcomes will be satisfying? Preconditions for Employee Motivation AT Gap Inc. managers have to note that an employee is motivated to perform when †¢ The employee believes that effort will lead to performance. †¢ The employee believes that performance will lead to outcomes. †¢ The employee believes that outcomes will lead to satisfaction. AT Gap Inc. once a manager has recognised a specific motivation problem, one can then work with the employee to find its cause and develop an appropriate solution. There are several reasons that this model performs far better than managers expect such as: †¢ This model prepares managers and employees for solving motivation problems by getting them to think about these issues before they meet. †¢ This model promotes effective change by clarifying expectations, uncovering hidden agendas, and managing emotions before they escalate. †¢ This model relies on the cooperation and involvement of the one person who knows most about the problem and what may be causing it: the employee. (Caruth, 2001) By gently forcing an accurate diagnosis of problems and their causes, the belief system model increases the prospects of finding good solutions to performance shortfalls. After all, it takes information to solve problems, and the goal of the belief system model is to uncover critical information about performance and motivation and to guide managers and employees in applying it productively. The model works to generate an environment in which managers and employees divide the responsibility for solving performance problems, and it fosters the kind of communication that helps managers maintain the critical preconditions for employee motivation: confidence in their ability to meet performance expectations, trust in others to tie outcomes to performance, and satisfaction with their job and the outcomes that they receive. Works Cited Butkus T. Raymond, Thad B.Green, (1999), Motivation, Beliefs and Organisational Transformation. Quorum Books. Westport, CT. Cameron Judy, Pierce W. David, (2002), Pay and Motivation: Resolving the Controversy. Bergin & Garvey. Westport, CT. Caruth L. Donald, Handlogten D. Gail, (2001), Managing Compensation (And Understanding It Too): A Handbook for the Perplexed, Quorum Books. Gorman Phil, (2003), Motivation and Emotion. Routledge. New York. Hanlan Marc, (2004), High Performance Teams: How to Make Them Work, Praeger. London Manuel, (2003), Job Feedback: Giving, Seeking, and Using Feedback for Performance Improvement, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Mele R. Alfred, (2003), Motivation and Agency, Oxford University Press. Miner B. John, (2002), Organisational Behaviour: Foundations, Theories, and Analyses, Oxford University Press. Thomas Neil, (2004), The Concise Adair on Teambuilding and Motivation, Thorogood. White Geoff, Druker Janet, (2000), Reward Management: A Critical Text, Routledge. New York.