GENERAL MANAGEMENT An Overview of Motivation Theories: The Impact of Employee Motivation on Achieving Organizational Goals Fari BUSHI Professor Assistant Dr., Faculty of Tourism and Environment, Department of Tourism and Hotel Management, University of Applied Sciences in Ferizaj, Kosovo E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org Abstract The aim of this paper is to provide a clear summary of motivational theories. It is known that in order to start and finish a certain job, there must firstly be a motive that pushes the person to do something. This motive may be related to the satisfaction that person has while performing the job, to his/her desire to act, or to his/her expectations of the outcome. All of these are related to the motivation that a person has to perform in one way or another. The higher the motivation, the better the result of a job done. In this way, motivation theories present explanations, each in its own form, of how individuals should be motivated for better performance, respectively how employees in the organization should be motivated so that their work results in achievement of organizational goals. Keywords: motivation; motivation theories; employees; task performance; organizational goals.. 1. Introduction Employee Motivation is a widely practiced exercise today across all corporate sectors regardless of their size of being either big or small. The concept of motivation is derived from a Latin word “movere” which means “to move”. Motivation is what moves the employees from dullness to interest (Mohsan, et al., 2004). Managers, in order to avoid and solve potential challenges and problems, should use their knowledge, skills, attitudes and experiences in formulating effective development strategies that will enable the achievement of goals (Tahiri & Kovaçi, 2017). When it comes to motivation, managers take various actions and invest significant amounts of time, energy and money in improving the employees’ labour performance. We believe, however, that some practitioners focus on identifying and satisfying the employees’ needs alone (of physiological, material, social, professional, moral, spiritual, cognitive nature, etc.), ignoring the fact the efficiency and effectiveness of a motivational process are influenced by other constituents of the motivational system, also. Motivation is considered to be the process through which an employee is able to gain superior work performance as a consequence of going through the following phases: motivation, satisfaction, self motivation, work involvement. The motivational system is an ensemble of very diverse components that include a multitude of interconnected physical, mental and moral (spiritual) variables, which influence the process of motivation (Popa & Salanţă, 2012). Motivation refers to the process by which a person’s efforts are energized, directed, and sustained toward attaining a goal. This definition has three key elements: energy, direction, and persistence. The energy element is a measure of intensity, drive, and vigor. A motivated person puts forth effort and works hard. However, the quality of the effort must be considered as well as its intensity. High levels of effort don’t necessarily lead to favourable job performance unless the effort is channeled in a direction that benefits the organization. Effort directed toward and consistent with organizational goals is the kind of effort we 8 want from employees. Finally, motivation includes a persistence dimension. We want employees to persist in putting forth e ort to achieve those goals (Robbins & Coulter, 2018). It is crucial to admit that business organizations need proper motivation inputs as a source of energy to produce outputs. Organizations are systems created by people, who being motivated and in cooperation with each other achieve the set of objectives. The more motivation an organization transmits to an employee, the more rewards the employee will provide, being more effectively involved in an organization (Lee & Bruvold, 2003) and at higher output levels (Gardner, Van Dyne, & Pierce, 2004). Considering the fact that human resources or organization officials are an added value and the main and most valuable source of the organization, it requires professionals and motivated persons (Shoraj & Llaci, 2015). The real assets of the organizations are employees (Mohsan, et al., 2004) and it’s considered as the engine of any company. There is a growing need to have staff doing their jobs properly and the organization gets the required output from employees. To achieve those objectives, we need employee who has a real desire to perform their duties as well as has stimulus and incentive to attain the required goal (Al-Madi, et al., 2017). 2. Literature review 2.1. Motivation Theories There are a number of motivation theories which, in the main, are complementary to one another (Armstrong, 2009). Traditional motivation theories focus on specific elements that motivate employees in pursuit of organizational performance. However, current research on employee motivation is more cross disciplinary and includes fields such as neuroscience, biology and psychology. It seems that current research is aiming to bring together and revolutionize traditional motivation theories into a more comprehensive theory that encompasses the traditional perspectives of management, human resources, Vol. 22, No. 183/ August 2021 QUALITY Access to Success GENERAL MANAGEMENT organization behavior with new perspectives in neuroscience, biology and psychology (Lee & Raschke, 2016). In the early 20th century, motivational theories were the major organizing forces within both experimental and applied psychologies (Ryan, 2012). 2.1.1. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory The best-known theory of motivation is probably Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory. Maslow was a psychologist who proposed that within every person is a hierarchy of five needs (Figure 1) (Robbins & Coulter, 2018): 1. Physiological needs: A person’s needs for food, drink, shelter, and other physical requirements; 2. Safety needs: A person’s needs for security and protection from physical and emotional harm as well as assurance that physical needs will continue to be met; 3. Social needs: A person’s needs for affection, belongingness, acceptance, and friendship; 4. Esteem needs: A person’s needs for internal esteem factors such as selfrespect, autonomy, and achievement and external esteem factors such as status, recognition, and attention; 5. Self-actualization needs: A person’s needs for growth, achieving one’s potential, and self-fulfillment; the drive to become what one is capable of becoming. Figure 1. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Source: Robbins, S. P. & Coulter, M., Management, Fourteenth Edition, Pearson, New York, 2018. 2.1.2. Alderfer’s ERG Theory Clayton Alderfer devised a theory of human needs that postulated three primary categories (Armstrong, 2009): 1. Existence needs such as hunger and thirst – pay, fringe benefits and working conditions are other types of existence needs; 2. Relatedness needs, which acknowledge that people are not self-contained units but must engage in transactions with their human environment – acceptance, understanding, confirmation and influence are elements of the relatedness process; 3. Growth needs, which involve people in finding the opportunities “to be what they are most fully and to become what they can”. 2.1.3. McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y Douglas McGregor is best known for proposing two assumptions about human nature: Theory X and Theory Y. Very simply, Theory X is a negative view of people (Robbins & Coulter, 2018) and summarizes these assumptions (Kasimati & Manxhari, 2002): Employees do not like the job and whenever they can they avoid it; Since employees do not like the job, they need to be forced, controlled, threatened with punishment in order to achieve the desired goals; Employees prefer the formal direction; Most employees place security above all other work factors and they are not ambitious. QUALITY Access to Success Vol. 22, No. 183/ August 2021 Theory Y is a positive view (Robbins & Coulter, 2018) which assumes that (Llaci, 2010): Spending physical or mental energy at work is as natural as playing or resting; External control and threat of punishment are not the only ways to make people work to achieve their goals. People will exercise self-direction and self-control for goals for which they are committed; Their commitment to achieve goals depends on the rewards that will be used; Under appropriate conditions, people will not only accept responsibility, but will also demand it themselves; The imagination and creativity for solving organizational problems is spread across a set of employees of the organization; In the conditions of modern industry, the intellectual potential of people has only been partially exploited. 2.1.4. Ouchi’s Theory Z Theory Z represents management theory implemented in Japanese management in the 1980s. This theory has been formulated as genuine theory by William Ouchi (Ramosaj, 2013). McGregor’s concern with management styles is reflected in later studies, including Ouchi’s notion of “Theory Z”. According to Ouchi one of the key factors in the success of Japanese manufacturing industries was their approach to the management of people (Worthington & Britton, 2006). The essence of Theory Z lies in two basic conditions (Ramosaj, 2013): a) Complex knowledge of work and b) High decentralization of responsibility and the right to make decisions. The characteristics of Theory Z are (Ramosaj, 2013): Long-term employment; Collective decision-making; Individual responsibility; Gradual employee progress system; Specialized professional career; Mechanism of indirect control; Care for all employees in the company taking into account their families. For Ouchi, the key to organisational effectiveness lay in the development of a Japanese-style Theory Z environment, adapted to western requirements (Worthington & Britton, 2006). 2.1.5. Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory Psychologist and management consultant Frederick Herzberg developed the two-factor content theory of motivation. The two factors are the dissatisfiers-satisfiers, the hygiene-motivators, or the extrinsic-intrinsic factors, depending on who’s discussing the theory. The original research testing this theory included a group of 200 accountants and engineers. Herzberg used interview responses to questions such as, “Can you describe, in detail, when you felt exceptionally good about your job?” and “Can you describe, in detail, when you felt exceptionally bad about your job?” Rarely were the same kinds of experiences categorized as both good and bad. This systematic procedure resulted in the development of two distinct kinds of experiences: satisfiers and dissatisfiers (Figure 2) (Gibson, et al., 2012). Referring to Figure 2, several important managerial implications of Herzberg’s two-factor theory are apparent (Gibson, et al., 2012): 1. Low job dissatisfaction, high job satisfaction: An employee who is paid well, has job security, has good relationships with co-workers and the supervisor (hygiene factors are present – low job dissatisfaction), and is given challenging duties for which he or she is accountable will be motivated. Managers should continue to assign challenging tasks and transfer accountability to high performing subordinates. Pay raises, job security, and good supervision need to be continued. 9 GENERAL MANAGEMENT Figure 2. Traditional and Herzberg Views of Satisfaction-Dissatisfaction Source: Gibson, J. L., Ivancevich, J. M., Jr. Donnelly, J .M. & Konopaske, R, Organizations: Behavior, Structure, Processes, Fourteenth Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2012. 2. Low job dissatisfaction, low job satisfaction: An employee who is paid well, has job security, has good relationships with co-workers and the supervisor (hygiene factors are present – low job dissatisfaction) but is not given any challenging assignments and is very bored with his or her job (motivators are absent – no job satisfaction) will not be motivated. Managers should reevaluate subordinate’s job description and enlarge it by providing more challenging and interesting assignments. Pay raises, job security, and good supervision need to be continued. 3. High job dissatisfaction, low job satisfaction: An employee who is not paid well, has little job security, has poor relationships with co-workers and the supervisor (hygiene factors are not present – high job dissatisfaction) and is not given any challenging assignments and is very bored with his/her job (motivators are absent – low job satisfaction) will not be motivated. To prevent low performance, absenteeism, and turnover, managers should make drastic changes by adding hygiene factors and motivators. 2.1.6. McClelland’s Three-Needs Theory David McClelland and his associates proposed the threeneeds theory, which says three acquired (not innate) needs are major motives in work (Robbins & Coulter, 2018). McClelland based it mainly on studies of managers. He identified three needs as being most important (Armstrong, 2009): 1. The need for achievement, defined as the need for competitive success measured against a personal standard of excellence. 2. The need for affiliation, defined as the need for warm, friendly, compassionate relationships with others. 3. The need for power, defined as the need to control or influence others. 2.1.7. Locke’s Goal-Setting Theory The term goal has long been used in scientific accounts of motivation. The theoretical and empirical utility of goals has been richly documented over the years, and it is difficult to predict a complete account of motivation that does not take into account, implicitly or explicitly, the goal driven by the nature of the behavior. In fact, many theorists incorporate the inclusion of purpose precisely in their definition of motivation (Shah & Gardner, 2008). 10 According to Edwin Locke, the goal “is what an individual strives to achieve; it is the object or purpose of an action”. Research shows that goals can be an important source of motivation (Kasimati & Manxhari, 2002). Goal-setting theory says that specific goals increase performance and that difficult goals, when accepted, result in higher performance than do easy goals (Robbins & Coulter, 2018). Goal theory is in line with the 1960s concept of management by objectives (a process of managing, motivating and appraising people by setting objectives or goals and measuring performance against those objectives) (Armstrong, 2009). To successfully apply this theory, managers must consider a few key points (Kutllovci, 2004): Firstly, it is better to set goals in close collaboration between manager and subordinates; Secondly, the goals must be specified; Thirdly, goals must not only be specified, but must also be achievable; Fourthly, managers need to provide continuous information to their subordinates. 2.1.8. Skinner’s Reinforcement Theory Skinner proposed reinforcement theory which presupposes that people behave in a certain way, which is conditioned by the reinforcers or stimulus they have received for such behaviour in the past. According to this theory, there are four types of reinforcers that managers can use to influence people's behavior: positive reinforcers (salaries, bonuses, praise, awarding a prize, etc.), negative reinforcers (reprimand), extinction (disappearance) and punishment (Kutllovci, 2004). Reinforcement theory ignores factors such as goals, expectations, and needs. Instead, it focuses solely on what happens to a person when he or she does something (Robbins & Coulter, 2018). 2.1.9. Adams’ Equity Theory According to the equity theory, the founder of which is Stackey Adams, individuals are satisfied only in cases where their inputs and outputs are equal. According to this theory, employees compare their inputs and outputs with the inputs and outputs of other members of the organization. In fact employees start with an idea of what inputs and rewards has another employee and then compare them to themselves. If the other employee with the same effort in the workplace has the same reward, then the employee comes to the conclusion that he is treated fairly and equally with other employees of the organization, while otherwise he will consider that injustice is being done to him in the organization. It should be noted here that in reality there may be equality between employees, but it should not be understood as such by the respective employee. Figure 3. Equity Theory Relationships Source: Robbins S., DeCenzo D. & Coulter M., Fundamentals of Management, Essential Concepts and Applications, Eighth Edition, Pearson Education Inc., USA, 2013. 2.1.10. Vroom’s Expectancy Theory The most comprehensive explanation of how employees are motivated is Victor Vroom’s expectancy theory. Although the theory has its critics, most research evidence supports it. Vol. 22, No. 183/ August 2021 QUALITY Access to Success GENERAL MANAGEMENT Expectancy theory states that an individual tends to act in a certain way based on the expectation that the act will be followed by a given outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the individual (Robbins, DeCenzo & Coulter, 2013). Expectancy theory describes the cognitive process that employees go through to make choices among different voluntary responses. The theory suggests that our choices depend on three specific beliefs that are based in our past learning and experience: expectancy, instrumentality, and valence (Colquitt, LePine & Wesson, 2015). Expectancy is the probability perceived by the individual that exerting a given amount of effort will lead to a certain level of performance (Robbins & Coulter, 2018). Instrumentality is the degree to which the individual believes that performing at a particular level is instrumental in attaining the desired outcome (Robbins & Coulter, 2018). Valence represents the attractive (seductive) power, i.e. the affective orientation of the individual according to a certain goal- result. Valence or the value of goals can change: positively (when the individual achieves a certain goal), has zero value (when the individual is indifferent to the goal), and negatively (when the individual wants to escape the achievement of the goal) (Ramosaj, 2013). 2.1.11. Porter-Lawler Expectancy Theory Expanding the concepts of expectancy theory offered by Vroom, Lyman Porter and Edward Lawler III, proposed their expectancy theory, which essentially appears to identify the source of valences and expectations for different individuals, as well as the link between effort, task performing and job satisfaction (Kasimati & Manxhari, 2002). Porter and Lawler start with the premise that motivation (effort or force) does not equal satisfaction or performance. Motivation, satisfaction, and performance are all separate variables and relate in ways different from what was traditionally assumed (Luthans, 2011). Figure 4. The Porter-Lawler Motivation Model Source: Luthans, F. (2011). Organizational Behavior, An Evidence-Based Approach, Twelfth Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York. Figure 4 depicts the multivariable model used to explain the complex relationships that exist among motivation, performance, and satisfaction. It is important to note, however, that Porter and Lawler point out that effort (force or motivation) does not lead directly to performance. It is moderated by abilities and traits and by role perceptions. More important in the Porter-Lawler model is what happens after the performance. The rewards that follow and how these are perceived will determine satisfaction. In other words, the Porter-Lawler model suggests – and this is a significant turn of events from conventional wisdom-that performance leads to satisfaction (Luthans, 2011). 3. Methodology The methodology of this paper also relies on direct market research in addition to the theoretical approach based on the study of literature, scientific papers and other relevant sources. For the purpose of this paper, a research has been undertaken in 50 enterprises of the Republic of Kosovo, be they production, service or trade enterprises. We surveyed owners, managers and employees. We have personally met with the managers of these 50 companies in which case they have answered the questions of the structured questionnaire and also given us additional explanations by orienting us in the environments of their businesses so that we could see more closely the work the employees do. Meeting with employees gave us the opportunity to conduct real-time interviews about their motivation in work. This has helped us to assess how motivated they are in their work and how their level of motivation affects the achievement of organizational goals. 4. Results Organizations, regardless of industry and size, strive to create a strong and positive relationship with their employees. However, employees have various competing needs that are driven by different motivators. For example, some employees are motivated by rewards while others focus on achievement or security. Therefore, it is essential for an organization and its managers to understand what really motivates its employees if they intend to maximize organizational performance (Lee & Raschke, 2016). Achieving organizational goals is an essential element of the existence of organizations and to achieve this point employee motivation must be at a high level. Employee motivation in enterprises in Kosovo has proven to be in several ways. In table and in figure below we present the factors that influence the increase of employee motivation at work in the enterprises taken as the sample of the research. Figure 5 clearly shows the percentage of influence of factors Table 1. Factors that motivate employees for better performance Compiled by the authors QUALITY Access to Success Vol. 22, No. 183/ August 2021 11 GENERAL MANAGEMENT References Figure 5. Factors that motivate employees for better performance Compiled by the authors based on Table 1 that increase employee motivation for better performance. Thus, the biggest impact on increasing employee motivation are monetary benefits and opportunities for promotion. Workers would be motivated by obtaining the highest possible wages through working in the most efficient and productive way (Mullins, 2010). Another influential factor in the level of employee motivation is the positive evaluation of work by managers, i.e. performing tasks efficiently and effectively by employees and achieving certain results made managers give positive evaluations to them. In the 4% that refers to the “other” option, we received additional explanations, respectively we asked what else motivates the employees besides the mentioned factors. And it turns out that employee motivation increases when they are rewarded with a day off (as a result of the good work they have done), when they are given a gratitude for a certain project which has been successfully completed, when highest scale collaboration is allowed between employees (for reasons of better performance), when they are rewarded with any small gift that symbolizes high positive performance and achievement of organizational objectives and goals. 5. Conclusions Motivation may be defined as a planned managerial process, which stimulates people to work to the best of their capabilities, by providing them with motives, which are based on their unfulfilled needs. Motives are forces which induce people to act in a way, so as to ensure the fulfillment of a particular human need at a time. Behind every human action there is a motive. Therefore, management must provide motives to people to make them work for the organization. The purpose of motivation theories is to find out what drives individuals to work towards achieving a goal or outcome. Thus, organizations are interested in understanding which motivation theory to follow in order for employees to be more motivated and productive, leading to more economical use of resources. Depending on the work being done, the motivating factors may be different. We noticed that in the surveyed enterprises, the employees were mainly motivated by the monetary benefits, the opportunities for promotion and the positive evaluations they receive after fulfilling their duties. What is worth noting is that motivation is the key element that influences employees to show their skills and work toward achieving organizational goals. Motivation is one of the forces that lead to performance. Finally, we say that employee efforts increase and their performance improves when they are motivated to work. This obviously leads to achieving organizational goals. 12  Mohsan, F., Nawaz, M. M., Khan, M., Shaukat, Z., & Aslam, N. (2004). Are Employee Motivation, Commitment and Job Involvement Inter-related: Evidence from Banking Sector of Pakistan, International Journal of Business and Social Science, Vol. 2 No. 17, 226-233.  Tahiri, A. & Kovaçi, I. (2017). Management in Tourism, Theoretical Managerial Approach, Research Center, Peja.  Popa, M. & Salanţă, I. I. (2012). A Model of Six-Step Process of Employee Motivation, Proceedings of the 6th International Management Conference “Approaches in Organisational Management” 15-16 November 2012, Bucharest, Romania.  Robbins, S. P. & Coulter, M. (2018). Management, Fourteenth Edition, Pearson, New York.  Lee, C. H., & Bruvold, N. T. (2003). Creating value for employees: Investment in employee development, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 14(6), 981-1000.  Gardner, D. G., Van Dyne, L., & Pierce, J. L. (2004). The effects of pay level on organization-based self-esteem and performance: A field study, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77(3), 307-322.  Shoraj, D. & Llaci, Sh. (2015). Motivation and Its Impact on Organizational Effectiveness in Albanian Businesses, SAGE Open, Volume: 5, Issue: 2, 1-8.  Al-Madi, F. N., Assal, H., Shrafat, F. & Zeglat, D. (2017). The Impact of Employee Motivation on Organizational Commitment, European Journal of Business and Management, Vol. 9, No. 15, 134-145.  Armstrong, M. (2009). Armstrong’s Handbook of Human Resorce Management Practice, Eleventh Edition, Kogan Page, London and Philadelphia.  Lee, M. T. & Raschke, R. L. (2016). Understanding employee motivation and organizational performance: Arguments for a settheoretic approach, Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, Vol. 1, Issue 3, 162-169.  Ryan, R. M. (2012). The Oxford Handbook of Human Motivation, Oxford University Press, New York.  Kasimati, M. & Manxhari, M. (2002). Organizational Behavior, University of Tirana, Tirana, Reprint.  Llaci, Sh. (2010). Management, University of Tirana, Faculty of Economics, Tirana.  Worthington, I. & Britton, C. (2006). The Business Environment, Fifth Edition, Prentice Hall, UK.  Ramosaj, B. (2013). Management, Fundamentals of Management, University of Prishtina, Prishtina.  Gibson, J. L., Ivancevich, J. M., Jr. Donnelly, J .M. & Konopaske, R. (2012). Organizations: Behavior, Structure, Processes, Fourteenth Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York.  Shah, J. Y. & Gardner, W. L. (2008). Handbook of Motivation Science, The Guildford Press, New York.  Kutllovci, E. (2004). Human Resource Management, University of Prishtina, Economic Faculty, Prishtina.  Zeqiri, I. (2006). Management: Concepts, Practices, Skill Development, Tringa Design, Tetovo.  Robbins, S., DeCenzo, D. & Coulter, M. (2013). Fundamentals of Management, Essential Concepts and Applications, Eighth Edition, Pearson Education Inc., USA.  Colquitt, J. A., LePine, J. A. & Wesson, M. J. (2015). Organizational Behavior: Improving Performance and Commitment in the Workplace, Fourth Edition, McGraw-Hill Education, New York.  Luthans, F. (2011). Organizational Behavior, An Evidence-Based Approach, Twelfth Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York.  Mullins, L. J. (2010). Management & Organisational Behaviour, Ninth Edition, Pearson Education Limited, England. Vol. 22, No. 183/ August 2021 QUALITY Access to Success Reproduced with permission of copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.