IMPACT OF EMPLOYEE MOTIVATION ON PRODUCTIVITY AT MANUFACTURING PRIVATE SECTOR

Abstract

The current study is done to explore the relationship between Employee motivation and organizational productivity with the mediating role of job satisfaction. The organizational productivity of Indian organization is decreasing despite adopting various strategies. There was a need to pinpoint the cause of this problem. This study revealed the fact that impact of employee motivation can be a cause of decrease in organization productivity. The result of this research suggests offering extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to the employees. In addition, measures should be taken to increase employees’ job satisfaction as these factors will directly lead to an increase in organizational productivity. KEYWORDS: Employee motivation, job satisfaction, organizational productivity, Electronics industry

Full text

39
EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Reviewwww.eprapublishing.com
Research Paper
e-ISSN : 2347 - 9671| p- ISSN : 2349 - 0187
ISI Value:1.433 |Journal DOI URL :https://doi.org/10.36713/epra2012
Volume - 8, Issue -5, May 2020 |
EPRA International Journal ofEconomic and Business Review-Peer Reviewed Journal
SJIF Impact Factor(2020) : 8.107||
ABSTRACT
IMPACT OF EMPLOYEE MOTIVATION ON
PRODUCTIVITY AT MANUFACTURING PRIVATE
SECTOR
Dr.S.Gomathi Senior Professor,VIT Business School, Vellore Institute
of Technology, Vellore-632014. Tamil Nadu, India.
Mr.Vishnumoorthy VIT Business School, Vellore Institute of Technology,
Vellore-632014. Tamil Nadu, India.
Article DOI URL: https://doi.org/10.36713/epra2939
The current study is done to explore the relationship between Employee motivation and organizational productivity with
the mediating role of job satisfaction. The organizational productivity of Indian organization is decreasing despite
adopting various strategies. There was a need to pinpoint the cause of this problem. This study revealed the fact that impact
of employee motivation can be a cause of decrease in organization productivity. The result of this research suggests offering
extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to the employees. In addition, measures should be taken to increase employees’ job
satisfaction as these factors will directly lead to an increase in organizational productivity.
KEYWORDS: Employee motivation, job satisfaction, organizational productivity, Electronics industry
INTRODUCTION
All organizations are concerned with what should be
done to achieve sustained high levels of performance through
people. Consequently, the subject of adequate incentives for
workers, as derived from the so many attempts made by
management practitioners, is to look for the best way to
manage to accomplish an objective or mission with the least
inputs of materials and human resources available.
Certain problems of inadequate motivation, however,
do arise as it concerns certain individuals who come into the
work situation with differences in expectation, behavior, and
ou t loo k. Th ese p rob l em s o f in d ividua l mo t iva ti o n
inadequately may be divided into two categories. Firstly, the
inability of certain individuals to be motivated may stem from
the fact that there is a deficiency in their personality. For
such people, the desire to avoid failure may be too strong
while paradoxically, the motive to produce positive results
may be too weak. This could produce a general resistance to
ach ievement-or iented activity that shou ld naturally be
overcome by other extrinsic modes of motivation if there is to
be any spur to achievement-oriented activity at all. Secondly,
even when the achievement motive is relatively strong, the
challenges before the individual worker may be proven to be
inadequate or too difficult, whichever of these that apply to
the individual worker will usually manifest themselves in
different ways such as lack of enthusiasm or premature
surrender.
Despite all these app arent att enda nt problems of
mo ti vatio n, an d pro duc ti vit y, ev er y o rg an isa ti o n do
necessarily seek means of ensuring continuous productivity,
which would be geared towards the accomplishment of
organisation goals. The organizational system under study
cannot be said to be different in any way, in terms of producing
the results for which it was set up. In all these processes the
private organisation and indeed the Electronics industry has
thus helped to make India the country it is today.
This study will examine to what extent the financial and
non-financial incentives participation, raise the morale of the
worker for high productivity.
Research Objectives
The main objective of the study is to investigate the impact
of motivation on the productivity of employees in private
manufacturing industries India.
Specifically, the study seeks to
1.
Determine how motivation influence the staff approach
to work
2.
Find out any relationship between motivational factors
and the performance of the staff and
3.
Establish whether motivation has any influence on the
staff.
FRAMEWORK FOR ANALYSIS
Regression and Anova methods were used for data
analysis since it is considered as a reliable method for the

40 EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review www.eprapublishing.com
e-ISSN : 2347 - 9671| p- ISSN : 2349 - 0187
Volume - 8, Issue- 5, May 2020|
SJIF Impact Factor(2020) : 8.107||DOI:10.36713/epra2012
study and helps to relate with two or more variables. These
methods were used to find the analytical response of the data
given by the respondents.
HYPOTHESIS OF THE STUDY
For the purpose of study, the following research hypotheses
have stated based on the review of the literature:
Hypothesis 1
H0: Employee well-being has a significant effect on the level
of effectiveness of the work
Hypothesis 2
H0: Relationship with managers have a significant effect on
the level of efficiency of the worker
Hypothesis 3
H0: Compensation has a significant effect on the level of
effectiveness of the worker
Hypothesis 4
H0: Training and career development have a significant effect
on the level of efficiency of the worker
Hypothesis 5
H0: Employee motivati on is a significan t pred ictor of
organizational productivity
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
RESEARCH DESIGN
Research design specifies methods and procedures for
the study. In this study, the importance of motivation of
employees and the organizational productivity is analysed. I
have selected a Descriptive research design as a tool for my
study. This research study will fit my project & provide
effective results for the study.
Research instrument: Structured questionnaires were used for
the purpose of collecting the data.
Sampling method: Nonprobability - Convenience sampling
SAMPLE SIZE
The sample size is limited with a fixed number of
respondent s covered under the research study from the
employees.
The sample size for the research is 103 which were
collected from the employees of the organization the total
population of company is 4000 where 25 respondent from
each shift is been covered in these research.
SOURCE OF DATA
Primary Data
This study is based on the analysis of the primary data
collected from an adequate and representative sample of
workers. The researched has used a structured Non-disguised
question naire. The questi onnai re was prepare d for the
conducting surve y. Workers of different processe s of
respondents were conducted and surveyed.
Secondary Data
Secondary data was collected through various articles
that were referred for carrying out the project.
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
In ‘Beyond the Fringe’, Simms discusses how various
organizations utilize tailored versions of “non-cash rewards”
as employee incentives. Simms suggests that Herzberg’s view
of salary as not being a motivator holds. The ability to hold
up an incentive that doesn’t get absorbed by the employee’s
monthly bills has a larger effect on employee motivation.
He also suggests it may be more acceptable to boast
about a special award or party rather than an employee’s
salary raise. Simms then goes on to expand the discussion of
non- cash rewards such as flextime, an employee of the month,
and tailored goal incentives. Simmsargues it is important for
employers to communicate these benefits to employees
becau se many emp loyee s don ’t understand their total
compensation package. By communicating the total package,
the employer reinforces their commitment to the employees
and helps to motivate the employee. This motivation leads to
greater employee satisfaction and performance (Simms, 2007).
The case study of the Harrah’s Entertainment sales teams
lays out the use of team incentives to increase sales across the
various branches of the Harrah’s Entertainment family of
products. However, the core to the incentive packages, that
Jakobson discusses, is the use of Merchandise Awards.
Jakobson states that Merchandise Awards are even more
effective than Top Seller Trips. Harrah’s also uses simple
employee motivation tactics such as recognition at weekly
and monthly sales meetings of the top sales teams (Jakobson,
2007).
Whiteling (2007) looks at the cases of Reuters and
supermarket giant Sainsbury’s to show how important it is
to create a culture where employees become directly involved
in suggestions for change. By creating a culture where
employee input is valued and utilized, the changes faced by
the organization are better understood and receive the support
of the employees. This also has the side effect of creating
empl oy ee motiv at io n to su pp ort and accompli sh the
organizations goals and change efforts (Whiteling, 2007).
Silverman utilizes a si milar strategy to create a high-
performance workforce.
Employees need to feel their stories are being heard,
understood, and valued by those requesting the stories. By
forging these relationships, the employee feels valued by the
employer, supervisor, and organization as a contributor. This
value translates into higher work performance and stake within
the organization (Silverman, 2006; Whiteling, 2007).
Sharbrough’s (2006) study looks at the correlations
between the leader’s use of Motivating Language (ML) and
employee job satisfaction and the perception of a supervisor’s
effectiveness. In both cases, there was a statistically significant
correlation in this study between a leader’s use of ML and
employee job satisfaction and the perception of a supervisor’s
effectiveness. This correlation can be utilized by organizations
to measure a leader’s use of ML and determine levels of
employee satisfaction as well as determine the perceived
effectiveness of a supervisor.
DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
This chapter comprises discussions associated with the
findings of the entire research. This includes a summary of
the work, findings both theoretical and empirical findings,
co nclus ion s, the po lic y impl ic ati on of the find in gs,
recommendations, limitation of the research, suggestions for
further study and contribution to knowledge.

41
EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Reviewwww.eprapublishing.com
Employee well-being has a significant effect on the level of effectiveness of the work Table
Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. Error of the
Estimate
1
.672a
.451
.42
.56004
Th e ta ble abov e re ve aled that th ere is a stron g
relationship at R = .672 between employee well-being and
the level of effectiveness of the worker. An examination of
the table shows that R square = .451 which implies that
employee well-being accounts for 42% of variations having a
significant effect on the level of effectiveness of the worker.
Anova
Model
Sum of
Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig
.
1
Regression
25.033
5.00
15.96
.000
b
Residual
30.424
9
.31
Total
55.456
10
a. Dependent Variable: Effectiveness
b. Predictors: (Constant), Employee Well-being
The table shows that the F-value is the Mean Square
Regression (5.007) divided by the Mean Square Residual
(0.314), yielding F=15.962. From the results, the model in
this table is statistically significant (Sig =.000). Therefore,
employee well-being is a significant predictor of effectiveness
at F = 15.96.
Table: Coefficients
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
B
Std. Error
Beta
1
(Constant)
.244
.28
.862
.391
EW
-.028
.10
-.031
-
.269
.789
a.
Dependent Variable: Effectiveness
The table above revealed the degree of influence of
employee well-being on the effectiveness of the worker and
its level of significance. The statistical results are given as;
(Employee
Well-being; β=.028; t=.269; p<0.05). The statistical
result implies that employee well-being is a statistically not
significant predictor of effectiveness.
Linear Regression Model is given as Y = a + βX Where Y =
Effectiveness
Relationship with managers have a significant effect on the level of efficiency of theworker
Table: Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R
Square
Std. The error of the
Estimate
1
.644a
.414
.384
.59995
a. Predictors: (Constant), Employee Relationship with Managers
a = constant
βx = Coefficient of X
Therefore Effectiveness = .244 + 0.028EW
Based on the results in the Anova table above, the
significance level for all items is less than 0.05, therefore, we
accept the alternative hypothesis and reject the null hypothesis.
That is, employee well-being has a significant effect on the
level of effectiveness of the worker.
The table above revealed that there is a relationship at R
= .644 between employee relationships with managers and
the level of efficiency of the worker. An examination of the
table shows that the R square = .414 which implies that
employee relationship with managers accounts for only 4.1%
of variations having a significant effect on the level of efficiency
of the worker.
Table: ANOVA
Model
Sum of
Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
1
Regression
24.717
5
4.94
13.734
.000
b
Residual
34.914
97
.36
Total
59.631
102
a.
Dependent Variable: EFFICIENCY
b.
Predictors: (Constant), Employee Relationship with Managers
Dr.S.Gomathi & Mr.Vishnumoorthy

42 EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review www.eprapublishing.com
e-ISSN : 2347 - 9671| p- ISSN : 2349 - 0187
Volume - 8, Issue- 5, May 2020|
SJIF Impact Factor(2020) : 8.107||DOI:10.36713/epra2012
The table shows that the F-value is the Mean Square
Regression (4.943) divided by the Mean Square Residual
(0.360), yielding F=13.734. The model in this table shows
that employee relationship with managers is statistically
significant at (Sig =.000) and is a significant predictor of
efficiency at F = 13.734.
Table: Coefficients
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
B
Std. Error
Beta
1
(Constant)
.462
.293
1.577
.118
RWM
.306
.089
.340
3.444
.001
a. Dependent Variable: Efficiency
The table above revealed the degree of influence of
employee relationships with managers on the efficiency of
the worker and its level of significance. The statistical results
are given as; (Employee Relationship with Managers β =.306;
t=3.4 44 ; p>0.05). The stat istic al result impl ies that a
relationship with mana gers is a statisticall y significant
predictor of efficiency. Linear Regression Model is given as
Y = a + βX
Where Y = Efficiency
a = constant
βx = Coefficient of X
Therefore Efficiency = 0.462 + 0.306RWM Based on
the results in the Anova table above, the significance level for
employee relati onship with managers is less than 0. 05,
therefore, we accept the alternative hypothesis and reject the
null hypothesis. That is employee relationships with managers
have a significant effect on the level of efficiency of the worker.
Compensation has a significant effect on the level of effectiveness of the worker
Table: Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. The error of the
Estimate
1
.679a
.461
.433
.55511
a. Predictors: (Constant), Compensation
The table above revealed that there is a relationship at
R= .679 between compensation and the level of effectiveness
of the worker. An examination of the table shows that the R
square = .461 which implies that compensation accounts for
46.1% of variations having a significant effect on the level of
effectiveness of the worker.
Table: ANOVA
Model
Sum of
Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
1
Regression
25.566
5
5.113
16.593
.000b
Residual
29.891
97
.308
Total
55.456
102
Dependent Variable: Effectiveness
Predictors: (Constant), Compensation
The table shows that the F-value is the Mean Square
Regression (5.113) divided by the Mean Square Residual
(0.308), yielding F=16.593. The model reveals that
compensation is statistically significant at (Sig =.000) therefore
it is a significant predictor of effectiveness at F = 16.593.
Table: Coefficients
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
B
Std. Error
Beta
1
(Constant)
.221
.270
.817
.416
COMP
.251
.101
.247
2.492
.014
a. Dependent Variable: Effectiveness
The tabl e above rev ealed the degree of influence
compensation had on the effectiveness of the worker and its
level of significance. The statistical results are given as;
(Compensation; β =.251; t=2.492; p<0.05). The statistical
result implies that compensation is a statistically significant
predictor of the level of effectiveness of the workers.
Linear Regression Model is given as
Linear Regression Model is given as Y = a + βX
Where Y = Effectiveness a = constant
βx = Coefficient of X
Therefore Effectiveness = .221 + 0.251COMP
Based on the results in the Anova table above, the
significant levels for compensation are less than 0.05 therefore
we accept the alternative hypothesis and reject the null
hypothesis. That is, compensation has a significant effect on
the level of effectiveness of the worker.

43
EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Reviewwww.eprapublishing.com
Training and career development have a significant effect on the level of efficiency of the worker
Table: Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. The error of the
Estimate
1
.628a
.394
.369
.60714
a.
Predictors: (Constant), Training and Career Development
The table above revealed that there is a relationship at
R= .628 between training and career development and the
level of efficiency of the worker. An examination of the table
shows that the R square = .394 which implies that training
and career development accounts for only 39.4% of variations
having a significant effect on the level of efficiency of the
worker.
Table ANOVA
Model
Sum of
Squares
df
Mean
Square
F
Sig.
Regression
23.507
4
5.877
15.943
.000b
Residual
36.124
98
.369
1
Total
59.631
102
a. Dependent Variable: Efficiency
b. Predictors: (Constant), Training and Career Development
The table shows that the F-value is the Mean Square
Regression (5.877) divided by the Mean Square Residual
(0.369), yielding F=15.943. The table shows that training
and career development are statistically significant at (Sig
=.000). Therefore it is a significant predictor of efficiency at
F=15.94.
Table: Coefficients
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
B
Std. Error
Beta
1
(Constant)
.611
.254
2.406
.018
TCD
.220
.106
.237
2.072
.041
a. Dependent Variable: Efficiency
The table above revealed the degree of influence training
and career development has on the efficiency of the worker
and its level of significance. The statistical result is given as
(Training and Career Devel opment; β =.220; t=2 .072;
p<0.05). The statistical result implies that training and career
development is a significant predictor of the level of efficiency
of the workers.
Linear Regression Model is given as Y = a + βX
Where Y= Efficiency
a = constant
βx = Coefficient of X
Therefore Efficiency = .611 + 0.220TCD
Based on the results in the Anova table above, the
significant levels for training and career development are less
than 0.05 therefore we accept the alternative hypothesis and
reject the null hypothesis. That is , training and caree r
development have a significant effect on the level of efficiency
of the worker.
Employee motivation is a significant predictor of organizational productivity
Table: Model Summary
Model
R
R Square
Adjusted R Square
Std. The error of the
Estimate
1
.777a
.604
.446
.54868
a. Predictors: (Constant), Extrinsic Motivational Factors, Intrinsic Motivational Factors
Th e ta ble abov e re ve aled that th ere is a stron g
relationship at R= .777 between employee motivation and
the level of productivity of the workers. An examination of
the table shows that R square = .604 which implies that
employee motivation accounts for only 60.4% of variations
having a significant effect on the level of productivity of the
worker.
Table: ANOVA
Model
Sum of
Squares
Df
Mean
Square
F
Sig.
1
Regression
33.480
29
1.154
3.835
.000
b
Residual
21.977
73
.301
Total
55.456
102
a. Dependent Variable: PRODUCTIVITY
b. Predictors: (Constant), Extrinsic Motivational Factors, Intrinsic Motivational Factors
Dr.S.Gomathi & Mr.Vishnumoorthy

44 EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review www.eprapublishing.com
e-ISSN : 2347 - 9671| p- ISSN : 2349 - 0187
Volume - 8, Issue- 5, May 2020|
SJIF Impact Factor(2020) : 8.107||DOI:10.36713/epra2012
The table shows that the F-value is the Mean Square
Regression (1.154) divided by the Mean Square Residual
(0.301), yielding F=3.835. From the results, the model in this
table is statistically significant (Sig =.00 0). Therefore,
employee motivation that is both intrinsic and extrinsic factors
combined are significant predictors of productivity at F= 3.835.
Table: Coefficients
Model
Unstandardized
Coefficients
Standardized
Coefficients
t
Sig.
B
Std. Error
Beta
1
(Constant)
.075
.319
.236
.814
IMF
.253
.145
.282
1.744
.085
EMF
.176
.128
.198
1.375
.173
a. Dependent Variable: Productivity
The Anova table above revealed the degree of influence
of both motivational factors on the level of productivity of
the workers and their levels of significance. The statistical
results are as follows; (Intrinsic Motivational Factors; β =.253
t=1.744; p<0.05, Extrinsic Motivational Factors; β =.176;
t=1.375; p<0.05). The statistical results imply that both
employe e’s intrins ic motivat ional factors and extrinsic
motivational factors are significant predictors of productivity
however extrinsic factors are more statistically significant.
Multiple Regression Model is given as
Y = a + β1X1 + β2X2 + β3X3
Where Y = Productivity
a = constant
βx = Coefficient of X
Therefore Productivity = 0.75 + 0.253IMF + 0.76EMF
Based on the results from the Anova table above, the
significant level for all items is less than 0.05. Therefore we
accept the alternate hypothesis and reject the null hypothesis.
That is, employee motivation has a significant influence on
organizational productivity. However, it is important to note
that extrinsic motivational factors had a more significant effect
on productivity than intrinsic motivational factors.
FINDINGS
Findings Based on the hypothesis of the Study
The findings of this study are presented below in line with
the hypothesis of the study:
Hypothesis 1: To determine the effect of employee well-
being on the level of effectiveness of the workers.
• The findings of this study are based on statistical
da ta an alyses and h ypo the sis t est ing . The
descriptive analysis of data collected revealed that
th e ab ove -s t ated emp loyee we ll- b ein g is a
significant predictor of effectiveness. Therefore, the
alternate hypothesis which states that employee
well-being has a significant effect on the level of
effectiveness of the worker is accepted and the null
hypothesis rejected.
• These findings corroborate the findings of Lin
(2013) in the research titled assessment of intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation on employee productivity.
Findings from the study revealed that intrinsic
factors like employee well-being and organizational
po li cy have a sign if icant effec t on work er s’
ef fe cti ven ess wh i ch is a ls o a mea sur e of
productivity.
• Thi s was further vali da te d by Jibo wo (2007)
establishing that intrinsic motivation is a significant
predictor of employee effectiveness and plays a
major role in improving worker performance and
productivity levels in an organization.
• He further stated that managers should ensure that
an employee’s well-being is taken seriously and
that workers are extrinsically well rewarded to
remain intrinsically committed to their jobs.
Hypo the sis 2: To det er mi ne th e effec t of empl oyee
relationships with managers on the level of efficiency of the
workers.
• The findings from the study revealed that employee
relationship with managers is a significant predictor
of worker efficiency as a measure of productivity.
• As such the alternate hypothesis which states that
empl oyee rela ti ons hip wit h manager s ha s a
significant effect on the level of efficiency of the
workers was accepted while the null was rejected.
• Findings also showed that it had a minimal effect on
the level of efficiency of the worker as such was
not rated as highly as expected. This could be since
other factors could also affect the efficiency of
workers which may not be intrinsic. These factors
could be extrinsic such as compensation, training,
and career development, etc. also it could be due to
other intrinsic factors like organizational policies
that may not have been included in this study.
• These findings agree with Centres and Bugental
(2007) in their study of the relationship between
motivational factors and workers’ performance using
the two- factor theory where effectiveness and
efficiency were used as measures of performance.
• It was discovered that there was a significant
relationship between both intrinsic and extrinsic
factors and worker efficiency levels. Taylor (1992)
further sup ported his statemen t that extrinsic
factors tend to be rated more highly than intrinsic
factors especially for those at lower levels of the
organization.
• He further stated that employees who enjoy
friendly relationships with their co-workers both
within and outside the workplace tend to be very
efficient at their jobs than those who don’t.
Hypothesis 3: To examine the effect of compensation on the
level of effectiveness of the workers.
• The findings from the study reveal that compensation
is a significant predictor of worker effectiveness.
As such the alternate hypothesis which states that
compensation has a significant effect on the level of
effectiveness of the worker was accepted while the
null was rejected.
• Findings also showed that compensation was rated
highly by the respondents and is believed to have a
great effect on the level of effectiveness of the
workers. This couldbe since extrinsic factors

45
EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Reviewwww.eprapublishing.com
especially monetary rewards tend to appeal more
to workers especially in developing nations where
the standard of living is poor and basic amenities
are lacking is seen as a way of fulfilling other needs
which intrinsic factors may not provide.
• These findings correspond with the findings of
Taylor & Vest (199 2) in his research, which
investigated the influence of monetary incentives
and it s removal on workers’ performance and
productivity; it was observed that subjects in the
expe rimenta l group who rece iv ed mo ne tary
incentives performed better than those who did not.
Also (Assam, 2002) further pointed out in his study
that extrinsic factors like adequate compensation
tend to positively influence the level of a worker’s
effectiveness much more than intrinsic factors.
Hypothesis 4: To examine the effect of training and career
development on the level of efficiency of the workers.
• The findings from the study revealed that training
and career development is a significant predictor of
worker efficiency. As such the alternate hypothesis
which states that training and career development
has a significant effect on the level of efficiency of
the worker was accepted while the null was rejected.
• Findings also showed that only “training and career
development” was deemed statistically significant.
This could be because although extrinsic factors
especially monetary rewards tend to appeal more
to workers, training and career development provide
them with opportunity for growth through skill
acquisition.
• Also, the lack of required tools, skills, and resources
necessary to carry out their work efficiently in an
organization may affect the level of efficiency of
the worker. Furthermore, the lack of adequate job
schedule may also be responsible for inefficiency
in most organizations.
• Similarly, Lake (2000) in his study which is of
importan ce to this research inves ti ga te d th e
correlation between motivation and job performance
us ing em plo ye e effect i ve nes s, effic ien cy,
commitment, and innovation levels as a measure of
performance.
• Th e stud y con c lud ed tha t mos t work ers in
developed nations placed more importance on
intrinsic factors than those in less developed nations
who opted for extrinsic factors citing the need to
satisfy other needs as a major criterion for their
choice.
• He further stated that the need for career growth
through training and development was deemed a
major criterion for an improved level of efficiency
of workers citing the acquisition of necessary skills
as a determining factor.
Hypo thesis 5: To determine th e influ ence of employee
motivation on organizational productivity.
• Th e find i ngs fr om the stu dy rev eal ed t hat
motivational factors are significant predictors of
the level of productivity of the worker. As such the
alternate hypothesis which states that employee
mo tiv ati on has a si g nif ic ant in flu ence o n
organizational productivity was accepted while the
null was rejected.
• However, most importantly is that findings from
the study showed that motivational factors were
rated significantly at 60.4% as factors affecting
worker productivity in this study.
• Findings from the study also showed that both
intrinsic and extrinsic motivational factors were
statistically significant and can independently affect
the level of productivity of the workers.
• Ho wev er , it was di sco ver ed t h at e xtr ins ic
motivation al factors were fou nd to b e more
significant than intrinsic motivational factors. That
is extrinsic motivational factors were believed to
have a greater effect on the level of productivity of
the workers.
• The remaining 39.6% not accounted for as factors
affecting employee productivity levels could be due
to other factors that may not have been covered in
this research. This could include factors such as
organizati onal cult ure, leaders hip styl es, and
organi zat ional st rategy and structure amongst
others.
• In corroboration, a related study by (Akerele, 2001)
co mpa red the rela tiv e imp o rt a nc e o f t en
motivational factors such as pay, training, security,
etc. Which are extrinsic to the job, and other intrinsic
factors like employee well-being, good relationships
wit h managers, responsibility, etc. among 80
employees of an organization.
• And it was hypothesized that higher values will be
placed on intrinsic rather than extrinsic job factors.
However, the result did not uphold the hypothesis
and it showed several extrinsic factors such as
ade quate compensation, job secur ity, training
amongst others were rated as the most important
factors affecting productivity levels in selected
organizations.
• Similarly, Lake (2004) posits that motivational
factors regardless of nature i.e. intrinsic or extrinsic
cannot be underestimated when productivity is
concerned.
• Baase (2009) Nwachukwu (2004) also suggested
that for an organization to be profitable, relevant,
and remain competitive in a rapidly changing and
constantly evolving business environment, it must
be ready to cater to the needs of its workforce. This
is because workers are regarded as an asset to any
organization as such ensuring high productivity
levels amongst them requires adequate motivation
Recommendations
The following recommendations are made based on the
findings of the study;
i. Managers must ensure employees are adequately
motivated. Employee well-being should be given
due con siderat io n and health and well-bein g
programs should be organized to cater to the needs
and welfare of employees.
ii. Management should encourage interpersonal relations
amongst co-workers and their managers to promote
a sense of belonging and unity amongst staff. Also,
managers should ensure employees are involved in
decision-making processes and given a chance to air
their views.
Dr.S.Gomathi & Mr.Vishnumoorthy

46 EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review www.eprapublishing.com
e-ISSN : 2347 - 9671| p- ISSN : 2349 - 0187
Volume - 8, Issue- 5, May 2020|
SJIF Impact Factor(2020) : 8.107||DOI:10.36713/epra2012
iii. Also, management must ensure they create a work
environment that is conducive for workers with
adequate working conditions as well as providing
the right to ols and resources to ensure worker
effectiveness in discharging their respective duties.
iv. Furthermore, proper scheduling of job activities is
key to achieving efficiency in the workpl ace.
Adequate compensation packages in the form of
monetary or non- monetary rewards are essential
to e nsu re t h at e mpl oye es s ta y pro duc tiv e.
Management should ensure that rewards and benefits
are fairly, justly, and competitively allocated to
employees.
v. Management must also strive to ensure that all
employees engage in training programs to acquire
new skills and also have equal opportunity to utilize
their skills and competencies. Management should
make sure that career development opportunities
are communicated to employees.
vi. An established career p at h an d an adequ at e
dev elopment plan should be put in place for
employees, development programs should be linked
to each employee’s career needs and not just the
organization’s needs. Employees should be selected
for sponsored training programs fairly and justly.
vii. Organizatio ns shoul d ensure that performance
management provides adequate information about
the strength and weaknesses of employees in the
form of feedback from employee evaluations.
viii. Employees who offer the same level of inputs
concerning skills, efforts, qualifications, experience,
should be entitled to equitable outcomes in terms
of pay, promotion, job security, and opportunity
for advancement. Additional inputs and outstanding
pe rfo rman ce sh oul d ent itl e an em ployee to
additional rewards.
Finally, this study recommends that management should
make po lic ies that aids in ensuring that emplo yees are
adequately extrinsically motivated to remain intrinsically
motivated on the job. This will, in turn, enhance or boost
employee morale resulting in a competitive edge through higher
commitment levels, employee engagement, lower turnover,
and improved performance and productivity levels.
CONCLUSION
Employees are and should be considered the most vital
above other factors of production, the most valuable resource
available to an organization. This is because they are an integral
part of the organization as such it is very important for
organizations, in pursuit of a competitive edge, to ensure that
the satisfaction of their employees is made a top priority.
This is to ensure that employees display a positive attitude
to work through improved performance and productivity
levels. Also, it is important to note that a lack of adequate
motivation results in low productivity and vice versa.
Furthermore, the advent of Globalization has resulted in
the ability of different organizations to source for employees
across several countries and the previously existing barriers
have been reduced, this has resulted in higher competition for
personnel with the right skills and experience. As such it is
important for employers and their managers who value their
staff to recogni ze tho se factors that affect employe e
performance and productivity levels on the job or in the
workplace and ensure they are fulfilled accordingly. (Brown
& Yashioka, 2003; and Sinha & Sinha, 2012). The concept of
motivation may be complex particularly in the workplace
and may pose a serious challenge to managers as it is relative
to individuals. This is because people differ in what they
need and want as such what may be seen as a source of
motivation to an individual may not seem so to another. As
such managers tend to find it extremely difficult in coping
with such a dilemma in trying to figure out how to keep
members of the workforce motivated. Although, several factors
may affect worker productivity levels in an organization such
as organizational culture, leadership style, organizational
str ategy, and stru cture, etc. The aspect of Motivation,
however, plays a major role in improving worker productivity
levels and therefore should not be underestimated. This study
concludes that employee motivation be it intrinsic or extrinsic
has a significant effect and is a predictor of productivity
levels in an organization. It also concludes that both intrinsic
and extrinsic factors of motivation appeal to employees and
the right mix of both are essential in bringing out the best
performances from a workforce. These findings validate the
Herzberg two- factor theory, Maslow’s hierarchy of
needs theory, and Vroom’s expectancy theory. From the
findin gs of the study, one can deduce that most workers
perceive extrinsic motivation as generally having a larger
in fl uence on the psych olo gi ca l aspec ts of em plo yee
productivity. We also found that intrinsic motivation is of
importance to employee productivity, albeit to a lesser extent
psychologically but rather as a part of the total package that
is offered to the employee by an organization.
REFERENCES
1. Broussard, S. C., & Garrison, M. E. B. (2004). The
relationship between classroom motivation and
academic achievement in elementary school-aged
children. Family and Consumer Sciences Research
Journal, 33(2), 106–120.
2. Brown, W. A., & Yashioka, C. F. (2003). Mission
attachment and satisfaction as factors in employee
retention. Journal of Non-profit Management and
Leadership 14(1), 5-18.
3. Burns, A. J., Roberts, T. L., Posey, C., Bennett, R. J. &
Courtney, J. F. (2015). Assessing the role of security
education, training, and awareness on insiders’
security-related behavior: An expectancy theory
approach. In: System Sciences (HICSS), 2015 48th
Hawaii International Conference.
4. Centers, R. & Bugental D. E. (2007), Intrinsic and
extrinsic motivations among different aspects of the
working population. Journal of Applied Psychology,
15(1), 7-20.
5. Chapman, E., & Goodwin, C. (2001). The supervisor’s
survival kits your first step into management (9th
Edition). Prentice-Hall.
6. Cooper, D., & Schinder, P. (2006). Business research
methods. (8th edition). New York. McGraw-Hill.
7. Cummins, R. C. (2010), Job stress and the buffering
effect of supervisory support. Group Organization.
Management. 15, 92–104.
8. Davies, J. (2005). Review of the effects of task factors
on job attitude and job behavior II. Job Enlargement
and Organizational Context, Perdonsi Psychology
22, 418 –426.
9. Deci, E. L., Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and the
“why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-
determination of Behavior, Psychological Inquiry,
11, 227-268.

47
EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Reviewwww.eprapublishing.com
10. Eshiteti, S. N., Okaka, O., Maragia, S. N. Odera, O. &
Akerele, E. K. (2013). Effects of succession planning
programs on staff retention. Mediterranean Journal
of Social Sciences, 4(6), 157.
11. Farr, R. (1977). On the nature of attributional artifacts
in qualitative research: Herzberg’s two-factor theory
of work motivation. Journal of Occupational
Psychology, 50(1), 3-14.
12. George, J. M. & Jones, G. R. (2012). Understanding
and Managing Organizational Behavior. 6th edition.
Reading, MA: Prentice-Hall.
13. Giancarlo, F. L. (2014). Should HR professionals
devote more time to intrinsic rewards? Compensation
& Benefits Review, 46(1), 25-31.
14. Gillenson, M. L., & Sanders, T. C. (2005). Employee
relationship management: Applying the concept of
personalization to U.S. navy sailors. Information
System Research, 22(1), 45-50
Dr.S.Gomathi & Mr.Vishnumoorthy