Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 10


Issues in Organizational Leadership Artifact

Ashley D. Solis

South Texas College



This is a research done on identifying if there is a relation between rewards, motivation and job

performance and productivity. An experiment was also conducted to further understand how

rewards and motivation can aide an organization. The findings correlated with the research made

on peer reviewed journals that presented the same conclusion.


Issues in Organizational Leadership Artifact

As children in a school setting, we were often told “Everyone who passes the state exam

gets to go to the pizza party”. There we’d go applying all the skills taught to us in hopes of

passing to earn that invitation for pizza. Now, as adults we have a similar concept applied by

leaders of an organization to their employees. Except now instead of pizza they use pay,

incentives, and benefits to entice employee to increase job performance and productivity.

Part of being a leader is understanding what motivates your employees to perform well.

Getting a grasp could possibly be used to an organization's advantage and aide in employee job

performance. As found in Benigno (2017), when a study was conducted on school counselors

and how they felt with their superiors demands and lack of support. There must be clear

communication and understanding between leaders and their subordinates to be positively


The purpose of this research was to find out if there is a relationship between employee

motivation, rewards, and how well they perform for their organization. I predicted that

motivation and rewards result in productive job performance.


To test my hypothesis, I conducted an experiment of my own to see if there is

relationship between motivation, rewards, and job performance. Not a business organization but

some representation of leadership (myself), employees (participants), organization (my house)

and job performance (chores).


The participants of the experiment are my three children and husband. Participant 1 is my

husband, male, thirty years old, works ten hours a day, and constantly needs to be reminded

about what needs to get done at home. Participant 2 is my oldest daughter, twelve years old,

glued to her phone, and must be told more than five times to get a chore done. Participant 3 is my

second daughter, who is eight years old, independent, but not into team effort. Participant 4 is my

youngest daughter, seven years old, very needy, and needs a lot of pushing to get things done.


Deciphering what chore would be designated to each participant, I made two table charts.

One for Monday and one for Tuesday. Both charts consisted of an area to record how many

times each participant was told to do their assigned job, how long it took them from start to

finish, if what they performed needed correction, and if they complained about having to follow

through with what they were given to fulfil. I also made note that I would allow one minute

between each time I was to remind them about getting their chore done and use the timer on my

phone to measure time.


Independent Variables are the rewards, motivation and incentives. Dependent variables

are the Participants and their job performance.

According to Chandra and Priyono (2017), “it seems that the key elements of leadership

is that person’s influence and role in leadership is the attempt of a person playing the role of a

leader to influence others in an organization/institution to achieve the goal”.

For my experiment I (as the leader) was to assign chores to get done by the Participants

(employees). Participant 1 would be assigned to take out all the trash from the household,

Participant 2 would be assigned to sweep the kitchen, Participant 3 would be in charge of folding

ten towels and placing them in the restroom closet, and Participant 4 would hold the

responsibility of dusting the living room entertainment console.


No incentives, allowance, or perks were offered to motivate my family to get what they

were assigned Monday to complete. The following day, Tuesday, I assigned the same chores

they each had the previous day, except this time I used money, luxuries, and incentives as forms

of rewards and motivation and see if it would result in improved job performance.

Identifying Participants

As the leader of the household, I have identified what is of importance and value by each

participant. I am aware that Participant 1 loves enchiladas, Participant 2 enjoys her phone,

Participant 3 prides herself on how much money she stashes in her piggy bank, and Participant 4

loves ice cream. In a study conducted in “A Mixed Method Study of the Relationship between

EFL Teacher’s Job Satisfaction and Job Performance in Iran” (2018), a questionnaire was sent

out to forty EFL teachers and found that there is a linkage between pay, rewards and job


No Rewards or Incentives

Monday came and I rallied all the participants. I let them know that I was going to hand

out chores and they are to do get started as soon as possible and complete within a timely

manner. I also emphasized how I would appreciate it if they could complete their task

successfully without me having to come and correct what they did. I immediately heard sighs of

complaint from Participant 1, Participant 3, and Participant 4. Proceeded with reminding certain

participants to get started. As each participant began their chore, I stared to record the length of

time they each took from start to finish. After each completed their chore I went to go observe if

they had done so properly and made notation. At the end of the evening I gathered my data and

recorded it on the table chart assigned for Monday.

Rewards and Incentives


Tuesday came around and they were designated the same chores but this time around I

used money, food, and phones to get their attention. Participant 1 and I usually rotate taking out

the trash. With that in mind I asked him if you take out the trash for me, I’ll cook enchiladas for

you. I already had plans to make enchiladas, but he took the bait and I got out of throwing out the

trash. Knowing what his favorite meal is I knew what incentive to pitch at him. He did have to be

told more than once and complained but improved on his time and didn't have to be corrected.

Now, I moved on to Participant 2 who I regularly take the phone away by 8pm. Before telling

her to sweep I stated, “Can you please sweep, and I’ll let you stay an extra 20 minutes on your

phone today”. Sure, enough she didn’t have to be told more than once, no correction, improved

on time. And, instead of hearing a complaint there was a “Yes!”. Participant 3 is big on saving

money, so I offered to reward her to fold ten towels again and put them in the closet. Money was

enough to get her started right away, no complaint, no correction and seemed to get done quicker

than the previous day. Participant 4 has a sweet tooth. Although, I did have to tell her more than

one get started, needed correction, and made a few complaints, her time improved

As found in the peer reviewed journal, “Effect of Job Satisfaction and Motivation

towards Employees Performance in XYZ Shipping Company” (2017), “decision makers must

have the ability to improve the performance of employees including by increasing job

satisfaction and employee motivation”.


The following are the results from the experiment I conducted and are provided in tables

1 and 2 for comparison.


Outcome 1

Monday chores assigned to participants with no incentives. Participant 1 was to take out

all the trash from the household. I had to tell Participant 1 seven times before he started, and it

took him four minutes and thirty-two seconds to complete the task. He did need to be corrected

since he forgot the trash from the restroom and did complain. Participant 2 oversaw sweeping the

kitchen. Participant 2 was told four times took six minutes and twenty-eight seconds. Had to be

corrected because she swept the trash to the side but left it there failing to pick it up and throw it

in the trash and but did not complain about assignment. Participant 3 was assigned to fold ten

towels and put them in the restroom closet. It took Participant 3 two times to be told and five

minutes and seven seconds to complete. Did not need to be corrected nor complained. Participant

4 was assigned to dust the entertainment center console. Participant 4 was told five times before

she attempted her assigned chore and it took her eight minutes and fourteen seconds to complete.

She did need to be corrected as she missed the bottom shelf and did complain the whole time,

she performed her duty.

Experiment 1 (Monday)

Times Told Time to Complete Corrected Complained

Participant 1 7 4:32 YES YES

Participant 2 4 6:28 YES NO

Participant 3 2 5:07 NO YES

Participant 4 5 8:14 YES YES


Outcome 2

Tuesday and incentives are told to participants before assigning them the same chores

from Monday. Participant 1 went down to only being told three times, spending two minutes and

thirty-nine second completing chore, still needed correction, didn’t need correction, but did

complain. Participant 2 was only told 1 time, spent five minutes and forty-four seconds

completing chore, and didn't need correction nor complained. Participant 3 was only told one

time, spent three minutes and twenty-one seconds completing chore, and did not need to be

corrected nor complained. Participant 4 was told four times, spent seven minutes and thirty-eight

seconds, was corrected, and complained when she was first told what to do but not throughout

the whole assignment. This outcome goes with what was found by Jung and Shin (2015), when

they conducted a research on Administrative staff members which found that “inner motivation

and rewards system are significantly positive”.

Experiment 1 (Tuesday)

Times Told Time to Complete Corrected Complained

Participant 1 3 2:39 NO YES

Participant 2 1 5:44 NO NO

Participant 3 1 3:21 NO NO

Participant 4 4 7:38 YES YES



When comparing table 1 and table 2 you can see some form of improvement in the

participant’s adhering to their chores. At the end of the experiment I admitted to all participants

that I had been conducting an experiment to test my hypothesis. I asked why they felt they

improved their performance from one day to the other. Participant 1 “Because I love your

enchiladas”. Participant 2 “I wanted to be able to use my phone”. In Doosti and Soodmand,

(2016), they investigated of job satisfaction and the relation to Iranian teachers’ job performance.

In this investigation they concluded that the teachers would leave their job if offered more pay

elsewhere. I interpreted this as “money talks”. As was made clear when I asked Participant 3

what motivated her to get the job done and she replied, “because you said you would pay me

three dollars”. Participant 4 “I wanted ice cream”. My hypothesis proved to be right that

motivation and satisfaction result in better job performance and productivity.



Benigno, S. (2017). Counselor Perceptions: Let Us Do Our Job! Journal of Education and

Learning, 6(4), 175.

Chandra, T., Priyono, P. (2015). The Influence of Leadership Styles, Work Environment and

Job Satisfaction of Employee Performance-Studies in the School of SMPN 10 Surabaya.

International Educational Studies, 9 (1), 131.

Hassan, S.A., Dootsi. Mehdi (2016). Investigating the Impact of Job Satisfaction/ dissatisfaction

On Iranian English Teacher’ Job Performance. Indian Journal of Language Teaching

Research 4(1)

Jung, J., & Shin, J.C (2014). Administrative staff members’ job competency and their job

Satisfaction in a Korean research university. Studies in Higher Education, 40 (5),


Kuswanto, S., Pandjaitan, N.K., Octaviannand, R., (2017). Effect of Job Satisfaction and

Motivation towards Employee’s Performance in XYZ Shipping Company. Journal

Of Education and Practice.

Rezaee, A., Khoshima, H., Bahtash, E.Z., & Sarani, A. (2018). A Mixed Method Study of

The Relationship between EFL Teachers’ Job Satisfaction and Job Performance in Iran.

International Journal of Instruction, 11(4), 391-408.