Motivation of temporary employees vs permanent

Most challenging task for managers is that of keeping people motivated at workplace (Roger Chevalier). Motivation is attractive to social scientists as an intellectual topic; it has a much stronger practical significance to managers. The interest of managers in motivation is very high and by understanding what factors motivate people, managers hope to control their work perk performance so that they work harder and enthusiastically (Roilinson, 2008). Motivation in a workplace as one the HR managerial practises, has been paid more concern in current years among both working managers and organisation researchers.

The above researchers directed their attention towards what can be done to motivate employees at workplace. Quality work that raises job satisfaction and health enjoys key importance in industry all over the world. Motivation and performance are not merely reliant upon environmental needs and external rewards (Herzberg, 1993). Motivational theories can be used to support high performance in an organisation. Herzberg theory suggest that ignoring maintenance factors such as security, friendly relationship, salary and supervision will produce dissatisfaction and negatively impact the work environment (Evans el al, 2009)

From the above statement the study focuses on investigating factors that help in motivating employees and is there is an optimistic relationship between motivation and behavioural influences.


Changing employee’s desires lead to different kinds of motivation and influences employee’s satisfaction. Factors such as profession, gender, social culture and organisational structure will affect the employee’s motivation. This study will attempt to discover the differences in motivation between temporary and permanent workers and whether these differences in motivation are distinct.

The literature review revealed that alike motivators may not be essentially appropriate to employees working at different levels in organisation. But literary approve that intrinsic and extrinsic motivation leads to job satisfaction in the work place. Hence, the aim of this study is to explore and determine whether there are distinctive motivators for employees working at different levels in the work place.

The literature review allowed researcher to know the numerous concepts of motivation and the environmental and ethnic impacts on motivational approaches. The researcher developed a survey to gather primary data concerning the motivational altitudes in the workplace, with intend to discover each individual’s motivation in their particular positions. The response from survey will revealed that the motivators for temporary and permanent workers are indeed distinctive. Hence, it is very important for managers and practitioners to develop separate motivational strategies of temporary and permanent workers by serving as a potential significant method of dealing with workforce dearth in the industry.


Motivation is viewed as individual phenomenon (Mitchell). Traditional motivational theory is categorised as content as well as process theory and the research is based on individual demand. There is no single method that can work well on all employees, although modern scholars suggest that the satisfaction at workplace as a key element can encourage most employees. It becomes easier for specialist to formulate motivational polices on employees, if they categorised into several groups according to their identical characteristics. Many organisations have divided their workers into two groups- temporary workers and permanent workers.

Hence, the aim of the study is to establish whether there is individual motivational approach between temporary and permanent workers. The main objective of the study may be listed as:

To investigate difference in motivation between temporary and permanent workers.

To investigate whether temporary workers presume to get intrinsic motivation or permanent workers presume to get extrinsic motivation.

To investigate whether high motivation leads to job satisfaction



Motivation has been defined by Juicus (no date, quoted in Aquinas) as “the act of stimulating or oneself to get a desired course of action”. In the words of (Allien, no date, quoted in Aquinas) “Motivation is the work a manager performs to inspire, encourage and impel people to take required actions”.

Motivation in another word is individual phenomenon where every person is unique and all traditional theories of motivation allow for this uniqueness to be demonstrated in one way or another (Mackay, 2006). Motivation is considered as intentional that is any change that is seen as influenced by motivation is viewed as actions deliberately chosen by individual (Mackay, 2006).

(Mitchells, 1982, quoted in Mullins) identifies four common features which can better explain the definition of motivation.

Motivation is considered as individual phenomenon that is every individual is unique and motivational theories allow for this uniqueness to be established in one way or another.

Motivation is multifaceted and the two factors of greatest importance are arousal and direction or choice of behaviour.

Purpose of motivational theories is to predict behaviour. Motivation is not the behaviour itself and is not a performance. Motivation influences a person’s choice of action by internal and external forces.

Motivation is described, as individual.

On the basis of above features, (Mitchells, 1982, quoted in Mullins, 2007) defines motivation as “the degree to which an individual wants and choses to engage in certain specified behaviour”.

(Kreitner et al, 1999, quoted in Mullins, 2007) suggests motivation is a necessary factor for job performance and it’s not the only one, rather motivation is a combination of level of skill, knowledge about how to complete the task, feelings and emotion. In order to improve the work of the organisation, managers must give importance to the level of motivation of its members. Organisation goals and objectives can be attained by encouraging members to direct their efforts (their driving force).

Read also  How Project Managers Manage Diverse Teams Management Essay


The study of motivation can be better understood by internal cognitive processes- that are ‘how they think’ and ‘what people feel’. These understandings help managers to predict likely behaviour of employee in a given situation (Mullins, 2007).

According to (James L. Bowditch and Anthony F. Busno, no date, quoted in Draft, 2007) categorise motivation theory as Content as well as Process theory. Content theory (Draft, 2007), stress on the analysis of underlying human needs. It provides the need of people in organisation and help managers, how needs can be satisfied at workplace. On the other hand, Process theory describes work performance in terms of the rational procedure, which the employees go over before and throughout the behaviour.


Abraham Maslow’s ‘Need Hierarchy Theory’ most broadly studied Content theory of motivation. Maslow model states that there are five distinct groups of human needs and emerge in a specific sequence or hierarchy. The five distinct groups identified by Maslow are Physiological needs, Safety needs, Social needs, Esteem needs and Self- actualisation needs. Once the lower level needs are fulfilled, the individual travel up one level in hierarchy, achieve the next higher-order needs (Maslow, 1954, quoted in Fiore, 2004). (Wabha and Birdwell, no date, quoted in Prasad et al, 1989) argued that there is no clear evidence that human needs are categorised in five different groups or structured in hierarchy. However, there is some evidence for the existence at possible two kinds of needs, insufficiency and development needs, although this categorization is not always operative.

Herzberg’s Motivation theory is also known as two-factor theory. Herzberg finds two features, which should lead to job satisfaction (motivation factors) and job dissatisfaction (hygiene factors) (Fiore, 2004). Herzberg suggested job-related factors such as employee self-esteem and actualization, responsibility advancement and recognition (Riggio, 1995, quoted in Davies et al, 2007) lead to job satisfaction. Other hygiene factors like safe-working condition, reasonable salary condition lead to dissatisfaction. The two-factor theory argues that successful managers must reduce job satisfaction by providing employees with hygiene factors (Riggio, 1995, quoted in Davies et al, 2007). However, to motivate employees require that motivators must be implemented to encourage employees to loyalty and growth (Riggio, 1995, quoted in Davies et al, 2007). Critics against Herzberg research indicates that the same factor that cause job satisfaction for some employee, may cause dissatisfaction to others. It also been argued that a given factor can cause both satisfaction and dissatisfaction to the same group of co-workers (steers and porter, 1983, quoted in slipp).

McCEELLANDS achievement motivation theory

This theory of motivation explains the relationship between hunger needs and extends to which imagery of food dominated through processes. Mcclellands developed four main motives:

Achievement motive

Power motive

Affiliative motive

Avoidance motive

The first three motives of Mcclellands correspond to self-actualisation, esteem and love needs. This motive varies between individual and different occupations. Mcclellands saw the achievement need (n-ach) as the most critical for the country’s economic growth and success. He suggests that n-ach is not hereditary but result from environment influences and has investigated the possibility of training people to develop a greater motivation to achieve.

(Mcclellands, 1988, quoted in Mullins, 2007)


(Victor Vroom’s, 1964, quoted in Borkowski, 2010) Expectancy theory suggest that the level of person’s motivation with respect to performance dependents upon (1) individual desire for outcome; (2) individual performance to obtain desired outcomes (3) perceived probability of individual will lead to the required performance.


(Katzell and Thompson, 1995, quoted in Hosie et al, 2006) suggest causal relationship between affective wellbeing and manager’s performance exists. (Faragher, Cass and Cooper, 2005, quoted in Hosie et al, 2006) found that when individual mental health is compromised at work, it results to dissatisfaction. However, they argued that inadequate personal job satisfaction is likely to lead to feelings of unhappiness which could eventually lead to emotion exhaustion. Happy people are believed to be more productive than those who are unhappy. Happiness provides motivation to continue to perform difficult task well and ensure high productivity (Peter Hosie, Cary L. Cooper). Extrinsic job satisfaction is determined by external factor like reward systems, performance evaluations and training-development incentives that influence job satisfaction (Brown, 1992).

Many motivational theories suggest that firms can motivate employees to perform their task well by confirming job satisfaction. Some factors that affect job satisfaction are security, money, work schedule and involvement at work. Organisation provides job enrichment programs to motivate employees, designed specially to increase the job satisfaction for employees. This study measure what major’s motivators lead to employee job satisfaction. (Madura, 2006)


In the work atmosphere, motivation contrasts as a function of several factors including reward system, evaluation expectation, performance feedback and nature of work. Two distinct types of motivation have been keen interest for researchers; Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation (Deci and Ryan, 2000, vallerand, 1997, quoted in Deci et al, 2004). Intrinsic motivation refers to behaviour performed out of interest and enjoyment, on the other hand extrinsic motivation refers to behaviour carried out to obtain contingent outcomes (Deci, 1971, quoted in Deci et al, 2004).

Read also  Stakeholder And Issues Management Approaches Management Essay

Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation can both motivate individuals to do their task. The concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are not similar; rather there is a dynamic relationship between the two called ‘Crowding effects’. (Deci and Ryan, 1985) suggested intrinsic and extrinsic motivation does not work in opposition. (Thomas, 2009) argues extrinsic motivation can have a great influence on behaviour when intrinsic motivation is low. If the intrinsic motivation is already high-with individuals extremely thrilled-monetary motivations provides minor or no added force.

However, the study investigates whether employees tent to be motivated by intrinsic approach of motivation or extrinsic approach. (Feldman and doerpinghaus, 1992, quoted in Yammarino et al, 2004) suggest that for an organisation permanent employees are more valuable than temporary employees because training cost is low and contribution to organisation is effective over longer period of time. According to this research, he points out that permanent workers pursued personal loyalty and interesting work and good conditions. Moreover, research found that employees who are temporary have lees challenging jobs and lower levels of internal work motivation and dissatisfaction than permanent employees (Yammarino et al, 2004).


All traditional theories are based on same concept. They suggest workers are lazy by nature and are afraid of taking any responsibilities in organisation. (McGregor, no date, quoted in Singla, 2010) feels that this concept is based on false notions. Therefore, in order to produce higher productivity from workers it is not necessary to pressurise them. Infect pay them more remuneration and working environment should be created so that worker’s willingly move ahead and work (Singla, 2010).

Modern theories

The concept of Modern theories of motivation is different from traditional theories. The concept of traditional theories is getting work done from employees under threat or fear because they thought to be lazybones by nature. Concept of modern theory however, thinks that by giving employees more responsibility and authority, they can be motivated. It means managers should not put pressure on employees rather create an environment in which everybody starts working according to his available ability and efforts should continue to increase performance (Singla, 2010).


Recently, some specialists found that environmental pressure significantly effects workers motivation. Environmental behaviour of employees is affected by their values, attributes, belief and knowledge (Ramus, 2003). Employee’s values have special relevance in the case of workers motivation to participate in environmental concern (Rands, 1990, quoted in Ramus, 2003). In job assignment, individual participation conflict between job and individual self-image (March and Simon, 1958, quoted in Ramus, 2003). (Gointein, 1989, quoted in Ramus, 2003) reinforce the role of supervisor values is to raise the environmental concerns within the firms. (Kiernan and Levinson, 1997, quoted in Ramus, 2003) argues that employee satisfaction can be increased by proactive company environmental policies if the employee values environmental protection. (post and altman, 1994, quoted in Ramus, 2003) in his research suggest there are number of factors influencing the success of environmental change in organisations such as improving reward and evaluation corporate culture and adaptation of corporate systems of communication and information sharing.

(Alkinson’s, 1984, 1985, 1986, quoted in Gallie, 1998) suggested that on different employment condition, employers were meeting new market condition by dividing workforce into two different categories-a temporary and a permanent. Functional flexibility through job rotation can easily increase flexibility among these employees (Gallie, 1998). Comprehensive changes taking place in organisation as the use of temporary employees increased. An increasing number of new openings are filled with part time, contract and other types of temporary workers. In comparison to permanent workers, temporary workers receive little or no health care coverage, pensions or other benefits. As such, they do not display the same commitment as permanent employees have in organisation (Sims, 2001). Permanent workers are used for job requiring distinct and short term period, for mixing labour efforts to the peaks and demand, or to prolong opening or production hours, avoid suffering extra cost of overtime rates of pay. Organisation are attracting women into workforce by offering part-time jobs to them, while part-time female workers likely to be flexible rather working as a permanent workers (Gallie, 1998).. Most part time workers have the opportunity to develop their skills and promotion as compared to permanent workers. Since this method been presented into western nations, proportion of part time workers increased in Europe. During 1995, there were 1.5 million temporary workers in UK (CSO 1996) and this proportion is expected to grow.

Researchers indicate that part time workers are no longer considered as unskilled or ordinary jobs. Instead, part time job is becoming accepted as normal business activity. It could be argued that part time workers are likely to work hard and are more energized than full time workers due to lower likelihood that they will become over worked, over tired or stressed as a result of long hour culture still prevalent in many British organisations (McDonald, 2003).

The use of temporary employee in regular task had traditionally been fulfilled by permanent employee. (Smith, 2001, quoted in Seddon, 2010) see this as a ‘paradigmatic shift’ in the way that manager view temporary employees. (Abel, 1984, quoted in Seddon, 2010) and Barker, 1998, quoted in Seddon, 2010) have recognised an essential shift in the locus of control and motivation of temporary staff. Abel argues that in early 1980’s, motivation and control for temporary staff was mostly intrinsic whereas Baker noticed that in mid-1990’s motivation became more extrinsic.

Read also  Challenges faced by marks and spencer

(Deem, 1998, quoted in Seddon, 2010) argued that new managerial and business practises have led to an inconsistent labour market where temporary workers exist side by side with permanent workers. Individuals serve similar functions (Smith, 2001, quoted in Seddon, 2010) but temporary workers are mandatory to transfer this possible unequal market on their own; those with less skills and capabilities may be valued in several markets; while those with mutual skills find themselves on the wrong side of the market gap (Carnoy 2000, Castells 2000, Smith 2001).


This study employs a quantitative and qualitative mix of techniques of research.

The quantitative design of methodology will be tested using questionnaire designed to bring about questions regarding cash versus non cash incentives for the efficiency and job performance so as to generate data on the current employee viewpoint of motivational rewards. An independent researcher will be responsible of the survey to be administered. Sample group will consist of responses from 50-100 employees from different industries and questionnaire to be distributed to members of organisation staff for the approval to conduct the study.

The qualitative design methodology will be tested using semi-structured interviews to bring closed-ended questions regarding cash versus non-cash incentives and how these have been productive or unproductive at enhancing long-tern staff motivation. Semi-structured methodology was considered an opportunity to discuss the issue with interview respondents not formerly considered in the interview design to provide unique perception of employee motivation and reward.

To know the current nature of business environment and its role in motivating performance, it is important to study the perception of both modern workers and contemporary managers. The qualitative research is most applicable to determine whether any calculable tendencies exist regarding employees values affecting to reward incentives. Questionnaire will be structured in a multi-tick format ranging from 1-10 and demonstrating different cash or non-cash incentives.

Responses from both the administrative sample and secondary sample will be collected and demonstrated in order to accomplish the study objectives on administration lookout, employee lookout and nature of motivational, performance incentives.


This suggested study developed research instrument for testing the possibility of the chosen research method. Pilot questionnaire concerning about cash and non-cash motivational incentives and were distributed to five individuals working in the current market and categorised according to ‘country’ (coded as UK-1, Ireland-2, Scotland-3) and ‘type of company’ (small cap-1, mid cap-2, large cap- 3 and consulting/services- 4) using SPSS.

The responses from candidate survey will be scored using pre assignment values (strongly disagree 1, strongly agree 10). They will be analysed using graphic statistics since the sample size and nature of survey may not allow inferential statistics. Study will also be directed on basis of age and occupation, which will be obtained from the information provided by respondents. Finer analyses will then be categorised into 2 categories namely; (1) contract workers (2) permanent workers.

The four ranges of age will be coded as 20-24 (1), 25-28 (2), 29-32 (3), 33-36(4).

The structure of the questionnaire illustrated several varieties of non-cash incentives, asking the five respondents to indicate to what degree they were inspired or otherwise interested in differing non-cash incentives.

To determine whether there is a specific non-cash variety which is more effective or whether employees just, as a matter of preference and personal value, desire money as a reward for productivity. Hence, the pilot study created the necessity to build a broader employee-targeted questionnaire utilising a wider variety of potential non-cash incentives for the tangible research study. If employee perceptions of multiple non-cash incentives return a very low interest rate in comparison to cash based rewards, this will clearly indicate the state of the contemporary worker regarding the most efficient motivational tools available for today’s business leaders.

Pilot Study Questionnaire

1. To what amount would the following non-cash incentive appeal to you: Luxury gift products such as wine baskets or gourmet foods?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2. To what amount would the following non-cash incentive appeal to you. Winning a trip to an interesting location as a reward for high productivity?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

3. To what degree would the following non-cash incentive appeal to you: Off-site recreational activities, funded by the business, such as staff dinners or business conference invitations?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

4. To what degree would the following non-cash incentive appeal to you: Merchandise as a reward option, such as DVDs or various modern technological products?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

5. To what degree do you feel that cash incentives are LESS important than non-cash incentives?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

6. To what degree would you prefer increased job autonomy (meaning less management intervention and assessment of your job function and productivity) over that of a small-scale cash incentive?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please comment (in less than 50 words) on how you believe a company can best motivate you to perform to high expectations when using different incentives?


Order Now

Order Now

Type of Paper
Number of Pages
(275 words)