Production Environment Motivation Levels between Superior and Subordinate; Exploring the Relationship in Small and Medium Enterprises in Pune

Authors

  •  Anand Kapildeo Mohan Associate Professor, Amity Global Business School, Pune, Maharashtra
  •  Ranjeet Harihar Chitale Associate Professor, Department of Management Sciences, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune, Maharashtra

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.53739/samvad/2019/v19/149361

Keywords:

Motivational Levels, Production Environment, Relative Motivation.

Abstract

The subject of Production Environment and Motivation is a complex one. Production is affected because of motivational levels between superior and subordinate. On one hand the environment is marked by various mechanical systems and contrivances, on the other hand there are various elements which affect the Hygiene Factors around an employee. Motivation involves the inner self and the outside factors in a subtle way. For employees working in a typical production system; the external work environment changes from one type of operation to another. The motivational level of superior influences the motivational level of subordinate. The researchers put effort to find out whether different work environments in a production system influence the working relationship in the subordinate-superior dyad. The concept of ‘Relative Motivation’ was used to explore the relationship by the researcher in the research work. The subject was chosen in context of Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) in Pune which is considered the hotbed for SME activities in different kinds of production systems.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Additional Files

Published

2019-12-31

How to Cite

(1)
Mohan, A. K.; Chitale, R. H. Production Environment Motivation Levels Between Superior and Subordinate; Exploring the Relationship in Small and Medium Enterprises in Pune. samvad 2019, 19, 48-54.

Issue

Section

Articles

References

Delić, Dragiša (2011). The motivation of managers and their influence on employee’s motivation, Zbornik Radova Ekonomskog Fakulteta u Istocnom Sarajevu, 5, 359-368.

Ronen, J., & Livingstone, J. L. (1975). An expectancy theory approach to the motivational impacts of budgets, Accounting Review, 50(4), 671-685.

Burdsal Jr., Charles (1976). An examination of the relationship between personality traits and motivational dynamics, Journal of Psychology, 94(2), 261-267. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1976.9915847. PMid: 994072.

Arazy, Ofer, Gellatly, & Ian R. (2012). Corporate Wikis: The effects of owners’ motivation and behavior on group members’ engagement, Journal of Management Information Systems, 29(3), 87-116. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222290303

Ehiobuche, Chris (2012). Organizational dynamics and the imperatives of leadership and motivational theories, Leadership and Organizational Management Journal, 2012(2), 105-120.

Oncioiu, Ionica, Petrescu, Marius, Duicã, Mircea Constantin, & Croitoru, Gabriel (2018). The impact of employee motivation on romanian organizational performance, Information Resources Management Journal, 31(4), 59-74. https://doi.org/10.4018/IRMJ.2018100104.

Kanfer, Ruth, Chen, Gilad (2016). Motivation in organizational behavior: History, advances and prospects, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 136, 6-19. 14p. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2016.06.002.

Hitchcock, Jennifer A., & Stavros, Jacqueline M. (2017). Organizational collective motivation: A new framework for motivating employees in organizations, OD Practitioner. 49(4), 28-35. https://www.academia.edu/8127918/Organizational_Collective_Motivation_Motivating_for_ Organizational_Change_and_Transformation.

Benkhoff, Birgit (1996). Catching up on competitors: How organizations can motivate employees to work harder, International Journal of Human Resource Management, 7(3), 736-752. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585199600000153.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.