Motivation At Work Application At Making Of Hotplates

Motivation At Work Application At Making Of Hotplates


TOC o “1-3” h z u Introduction PAGEREF _Toc379447670 h 1Changes in the workplace accounting for increase in productivity and decrease in controllable rejects PAGEREF _Toc379447671 h 1What might account for the drop in absenteeism and the increase in moral PAGEREF _Toc379447672 h 2The major changes in the situation, changes were under the control of the manager, which were controlled by workers? PAGEREF _Toc379447673 h 2What might happen if the workers went back to the old assembly line method? PAGEREF _Toc379447674 h 3

IntroductionIn the case study, Making of Hotplates, Workers seems to be having jobs which are extremely specialized. Each task is balanced for three minutes per each station making the work to be extremely monotonous to the workers making them to become unhappy, Because of unhappiness of workers at the workplace; these would have resulted in poor morale as well as low motivation. Motivation in the workplace is a form of force that makes the employees to do things which will result to high production by having an inspiration of completing the tasks allocated. When there is motivation in organization, the employees try to put more effort to increase the output standard (Whiteley, 2002). This paper analyzes the importance of motivation to the workers in the workplace and problems that result when there is low motivation.

Changes in the workplace accounting for increase in productivity and decrease in controllable rejects

An increase in productivity and a decrease in controllable rejects are due to the change introduced in the workplace. The enlargement of job in the workplace gave the workers a higher percentage of total tasks which was scheduled for the workers. Instead of the workers working on one subassembly for many hotplates, they manage to finish the entire hotplate at once then moving on to another hotplate allowing them to be responsible for more portions of other tasks. The workers on the other hand also felt more motivated and so the overall productivity increased. Motivation in organization always drives many workers forward. Little motivation on individual subassemblies make workers to be careless as well as, slow, however when they feel motivated by each having an ownership of the entire hotplate “Now it is my hotplate” enabling them to have the control of the defects and, producing more products (Stack, 2010).

The individual work seemed to have been provided a sense of clarity and speed therefore, increasing the productivity since each individual chose a goal to meet and creating a plan of actions that need to be followed. Increase in productivity could have also been brought by the idea that there are some employees who cannot work well when they are in a team; however they can do much better if they are given individual tasks where they make quicker decision since there is no need for discussion and explanation. Because of these, the work was done quickly hence increasing the productivity and decreasing the controllable reject (Stack, 2010)..

What might account for the drop in absenteeism and the increase in moralThe drop in absenteeism and the increase in morale were due to the increase that was brought about by satisfaction of workers with what they were doing in their jobs. Satisfaction is a sense of job which is worth to be done, or being contented with a task. Overspecialization of job design is brought due to job dissatisfaction, this is because, many workers no longer feel the sense of ownership or control over what they do as their jobs. They fail to feel the self-fulfilled as they have no opportunity of advancing in their jobs resulting in a tedious as well as monotonous work. All the above mentioned factors create unhappiness to the workers creating a tendency of absenteeism (Woerkom & Poell 2010.

The major changes in the situation, changes were under the control of the manager, which were controlled by workers?The major changes in the situation were the enlargement and enrichment of the work where there were so many responsibilities for the infections of final work which was added. The changes which were under the control of the manager is a change in the situation where the manager changed various jobs by reorganizing work lines creating range of movements as well as, setting tasks for each worker. Training program was also added by the manager to the workers where they were left by themselves to decide if they would like the new program or go back to the old one. The training program as well as, decision-making ability also contributed to motivation and workers empowering. Workers on the other hand, are the only people who have the ability of increasing the quality as well as productivity. However, managers alone cannot change errors which can lead to defects in the business. Because of that, they tend to punish the workers not knowing that it is the system that causes an error while not the mistake of individuals to fail making difference in business. Managers have also made it easier for workers to be more efficient and productive by setting job designs which are effective, the manager also maintained the quality of product by increasing the satisfaction as well as improving morale (Rush, 2008).

What might happen if the workers went back to the old assembly line method?If the workers happen to go back to the old assembly line method, the problem will absolutely arise suppose the method was reinstated. There would be dissatisfaction and low motivation for the workers making things to get worse and worse since they would have seen better ways of work approach. In most cases, the management did not have problems with the workers deliberately sabotaging the flow of work in an organization; it is therefore possible that, the managers might start practicing such behaviors under those circumstances. Workers would never feel the responsible for the quality of the individual hotplates compared to what they seem to do now while the gains made would also be lost instantly.


Rush, H. M. (2008). Job design for motivation; [experiments in job enlargement and job enrichment,. New York: Conference Board.

Stack, L. (2010). Super competent the six keys to perform at your productive best. New York: Wiley.

Whiteley, P. (2002). Motivation. London: Capstone Pub..

Woerkom, M. V., & Poell, R. F. (2010). Workplace learning: concepts, measurement, and application. New York: Routledge.

0 replies

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply