what motivates you to work what motivate microsoft employees
Motivation to Work
Each week, you will be asked to respond to the prompt or prompts in the discussion forum. Your initial post should be 300+ words in length, and is due on Sunday. By Tuesday, you should respond to two additional posts from your peers.
What motivates you to get up every morning and do your best? Do you work hard for your family? For personal satisfaction and to meet personal goals? To earn more money? To be recognized by your peers and the community? There is a wide variety of elements that motivate people to work hard. Successfully managing a workforce requires managers to understand, acknowledge, and carefully implement rewards to motivate their employees to perform to the best of their abilities.
First, read Chapters 9 & 10 in the text.
Next, please watch the following video clips from the lab:
- Chapter 10: Concept Clip: Expectancy Theory
- Chapter 10: Concept Clip: Equity Theory
- Chapter 10: Concept Clip: Types of Compensation
Research the total compensation plan for the company you have chosen for your final project. Very briefly describe the elements they use to reward their employees (base pay, bonuses, time off, daycare, flex time, benefits, etc). Is their approach the best that it could be? If you were leading the company, what would you do to ensure their approach to motivating employees was fair and equitable? Is your approach financially feasible? Would you choose to be 100% transparent in your approach? Why or why not?
Review a minimum of two of your classmate’s posts and respond with additional insights, information, questions, or links to more information on the reward and motivation system they shared. Would their approach to motivating their employees work for your organization? Why or why not? Your responses should be academic in nature and linked to research and management topics discussed this week rather than personal stories of shopping with the company they chose for example.
Grading Rubric (The discussion grading rubric explains expectations and will be used to evaluate your contribution based on the quality of work in your initial posts and replies. A total of 50 points are possible, distributed among the three criteria listed below.)
|
Criteria |
Far Exceeds Expecations |
Exceeds Expectations |
Meets Expectations |
Partially Meets Expectations |
Does Not Meet Expectations |
|
Application and Content. (Apply critical thinking and analysis to demonstrate an understanding of lesson topics.) |
18 – 20 points – Thoroughly answered the discussion question(s) and replied with clear, well-developed, and meaningful thoughts. – All critical points were addressed individually and supported by evidence of having read the assigned course readings and applying the majority of the basic concepts in the initial post. – Relevant ideas or practical experiences are used to emphasize the understanding of the discussion topic(s). |
16 – 17 points – Answered the discussion question(s) and replied with clear, well-developed, and meaningful thoughts. – Most critical points were addressed individually and supported by evidence of having read the assigned course reading sand applying some of the basic concepts in the initial post. – Relevant ideas or practical experiences are used to emphasize understanding of the discussion topic(s). |
14 – 15 points – Answered most of the discussion question(s), but not fully developed to demonstrate strong analytical and critical thinking skills. – Some critical points were addressed individually, but not supported by evidence of having read the assigned course readings and applying basic concepts in the initial post. – Relevant ideas or practical experiences were absent or limited. |
12 – 13 points – Partially answered the discussion question(s) by identifying the main topic(s), but lacked elements of critical thinking and analysis. – The points addressed were not clear or well-developed. – Relevant ideas or practical experience(s) were not provided. – Evidence of having read the assigned course readings was not clearly demonstrated. |
0 – 11 points – Insufficiently answered the discussion question(s). – The points addressed inadequately addressed the topic. – Relevant ideas and practical experience(s) were not provided. – The points discussed lacked evidence of having read the assigned course readings. |
|
Engagement and Participation. (Encourage further discussion from peers and provide meaningful contribution on the topic. Participate in a respectful manner, with appropriate length and punctuality.) |
18 – 20 points – Engaged in the discussion forum by offering extended or in-depth posts and generating relevant conversations and questions among peers. – Participated multiple days throughout the week. Met deadlines, and exceeded the participation guidelines. |
16 – 17 points – Engaged in the discussion forum by offering substantive posts and generating relevant conversations or questions among peers. – Participated multiple days throughout the week. Met deadlines and exceeded the participation guidelines. |
14 – 15 points – Engaged in the discussion forum by offering satisfactory posts, but did not promote further conversations or questions among peers. – Participated multiple days throughout the week. Met deadlines and the participation guidelines. |
12 – 13 points – Engagement was lacking in the discussion forum. The posts did not generate relevant conversations or questions among the peers. – Participated multiple times during the week, but did not meet the deadlines or participation guidelines. |
0 – 11 points – The posts were not engaging, and prevented others from participating in a discussion that added value to the forum. – Participated at least once during the week, but did not meet the deadlines and participation guidelines. |
|
Clarity and Organization. (Present well-reasoned, organized, and structured ideas, with an appropriate use of writing style.) |
9 – 10 points – Paragraphs and sentences are well-developed, properly formatted, and contain a strong topic sentence. – All arguments and point(s) presented are consistent, clear, and concise. – Exceptional use of grammar, and free of spelling, punctuation, or other mechanical errors. – All references used are identified by proper in-text citations and are listed at the bottom of the post(s). |
8 points – Paragraphs are well-developed, properly formatted, and include a topic sentence. – Most arguments and point(s) presented are consistent, clear, and concise. – Outstanding use of grammar, and free of spelling, punctuation, or other mechanical errors. – Most references used are identified by proper in-text citations and are listed at the bottom of the post(s). |
7 points – Paragraphs are adequately developed, but lack a topic sentence. – Insufficient clarity and inconsistencies are present in argument(s) and post(s). – Adequate use of grammar with minimal spelling, punctuation, or other mechanical errors. – References used are identified and are listed at the bottom of the post(s). |
6 points – Paragraphs and sentences are underdeveloped and disorganized. – It is difficult to determine the argument(s) and point(s) being presented. – Inadequate use of grammar, and frequent spelling, punctuation and other mechanical errors. – References used are not identified or listed at the bottom of the post(s). |
0 – 5 points – Paragraphs and sentences are incomplete. – The argument(s) and point(s) being presented are not relevant to the discussion topic. – Unacceptable use of grammar, and frequent spelling, punctuation and other mechanical errors. – References are not identified or listed at the bottom of the post(s). |
