Expectancy theory victor vroom

1.  ARUN KUMAR – 1368
Ramanujan College (University of Delhi)

2. Professor of Organization
and Management
School of Management
Yale University
victor.vroom@yale.edu

3. Is a business school professor at the Yale School of Management.
He holds a PhD from University of Michigan.
Vroom's primary research was on the expectancy theory of motivation,
which attempts to explain why individuals choose to follow certain
courses of action in organizations, particularly in decision-making and
leadership
His most well-known books are Work and Motivation, Leadership and
Decision Making and The New Leadership.

4. This theory emphasizes the needs for organizations to relate rewards directly to
performance and
to ensure that the rewards provided are those rewards deserved and wanted by the
recipients.
Victor H. Vroom defines motivation as a process governing choices among alternative
forms of
voluntary activities, a process controlled by the individual. The individual makes choices
based on
estimates of how well the expected results of a given behaviour are going to match up
with or
eventually lead to the desired results. Motivation is a product of the individual’s
expectancy that a
certain effort will lead to the intended performance, the instrumentality of this
performance to
achieving a certain result, and the desirability of this result for the individual, known as
valence.

6. Expectancy theory is based on four assumptions
 One assumption is that people join organizations with expectations about their
needs, motivations, and past experiences. These influence how individuals react to
the organization.
 A second assumption is that an individual’s behaviour is a result of conscious
choice. That is, people are free to choose those behaviours suggested by their own
expectancy calculations.
 A third assumption is that people want different things from the organization (e.g.,
good salary, job security, advancement, and challenge).
 A fourth assumption is that people will choose among alternatives so as to optimize
outcomes for them personally.

7. Expectancy, instrumentality, and valence. A person is motivated to the degree that
he or she believes that
(a) effort will lead to acceptable performance (expectancy),
(b) will be rewarded (instrumentality), and
(c) the value of the rewards is highly positive (valence).

10. Instrumentality is an individual’s estimate of the probability
that a given level of achieved task performance will lead to
various work outcomes. As with expectancy, instrumentality
ranges from 0 to 1. For example, if an employee sees that
a good performance rating will always result in a salary
increase, the instrumentality has a value of 1. If there is no
perceived relationship between a good performance rating
and a salary increase, then the instrumentality is 0.

13. Effort
Expectancy:
Person’s
perception that
their effort will
result in
performance
Instrumentality
perception that
performance
results in
outcomes
Valence:
How desired
are the outcomes
from a
job
Performance Outcomes

14.  Decision making tree that enables a leader to examine a situation and
determine which style or level of involvement to engage- Victor Vroom+
Philip Yetton+Arthur Jago.
 The model helps us identify 5 different leadership styles.

15. Decision Making Style Description
Autocratic l (Al)
Leader solves the problem along
using information that is readily
available to him/her
Autocratic ll (All)
Leader obtains additional information
from group members, then makes
decision alone. Group members may
or may not be informed.
Consultative l (Cl)
Leader shares problem with group
members individually, and asks for
information and evaluation. Group
members do not meet collectively,
and leader makes decision alone.
Consultative ll (Cll)
Leader shares problem with group
members collectively, but makes
decision alone
Group ll (Gll)
Leader meets with group to discuss
situation. Leader focuses and directs
discussion, but does not impose will.
Group makes final decision.

16. Vroom’s expectancy theory differs from the content theories of Maslow, Alderfer,
Herzberg, and
McClelland in that Vroom’s expectancy theory does not provide specific suggestions
on what
motivates organization members. Instead, Vroom’s theory provides a process of
cognitive variables
that reflects individual differences in work motivation.
Need theories of motivation (Alderfer, 1972; Herzberg, 1968; Maslow, 1970;
McClelland, 1976)
attempt to explain what motivates people in the workplace. Expectancy theory is
more concerned
with the cognitive antecedents that go into motivation and the way they relate to
each other.