On the other hand, Capozzi (2017) stated that companies face several
disadvantages if their employees are unmotivated. These include high turnover,
reduced productivity, poor performance, decreased revenue, poor customer
service and so on.
Motivation is essentially about commitment to doing something. A well-motivated workforce can
provide several benefits such as lower absenteeism levels as the employees are
content with their working lives, lower levels of staff turnover (the number of
employees leaving the business) which leads to lower training and recruitment
costs as well as improved industrial relations with trade unions. Contented
workers give the firm a good reputation and motivated employees are likely to
improve product quality, or the customer service associated with a product. This
can lead to increased employee performance and better productivity (amount
produced per employee) which can result in lower unit costs of production and
so enable a firm to sell its product at a lower price (Riley, 2009).
According to Meeajan (2012), there are also financial motivational
strategies like piece rates, times rates, commission and performance-related
pay as well as non-financial motivational strategies such as job enlargement,
job enrichment, job rotation and team working.
Frederick Herzberg approached the question of motivation in a
different way. Herzberg concluded that aspects of the work environment that
satisfy employees are very different from aspects that dissatisfy them. Herzberg
labelled factors causing dissatisfaction of workers as “hygiene” factors
because these factors were part of the context in which the job was performed,
as opposed to the job itself. In contrast, motivators are factors that are
intrinsic to the job. Motivators are the conditions that truly encourage
employees to try harder. The theory can be a valuable aid to managers because
it points out that improving the environment in which the job is performed goes
only so far in motivating employees (Bauer and Erdogan 2012).
There are several theories explaining the concept of motivation. The
earliest studies of motivation involved an examination of individual needs. Two
theories may be placed under this category: Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and
Herzberg’s two factor theory. Maslow’s theory is based on a simple premise:
human beings have needs that are hierarchically ranked. The most basis of
Maslow’s needs are physiological needs, then safety needs followed by social
needs. On the next level up, esteem needs, and lastly self-actualisation needs.
Once a lower level need is satisfied, it no longer serves as a motivator. This
hierarchy is a systematic way of thinking about the different needs employees
may have at any given point (Bauer and Erdogan, 2012).
Flanagan and Ruden (2008) stated
that conflict lowers the motivation level of employees and the motivation
amongst team members. Daft (2011, p.200) defines motivation as “the forces
either internal or external to a person that arouse enthusiasm and persistence
to pursue certain course of action.”
At Double C Technologies, according to the employees, the managers
barely focus on resolving conflict between workers. The only time they manage
conflict is when conflicting parties start personally attacking each other.
This demotivates the employees as they don’t feel encouraged to do their job.
According to Bergman and Volkema (1989) one of the most common
outcomes of conflict is that it upsets parties. However, conflict can
have both functional and dysfunctional consequences. On the positive side,
conflict can result in greater creativity or better decisions. On the other
hand, conflict can be negative if it is excessive or involves personal attacks
or underhanded tactics.
Some triggers that also result in conflict are organizational changes,
personality clashes, workloads, and stress (Hayes, 2008). Unfortunately, the
previously mentioned causes of conflict are present at Double C Technologies.
There are several common causes of conflict (Beckwith, 2016). Gibson,
Ivancevich and Donnelly (1994) identified some of the factors that can cause
conflict between individuals and groups at the workplace which included
differences in goals and perceptions, limited resources, unfair treatment, lack
of common understanding, poor communication skills as well as leadership
According to Stoner and Freeman (1992), a conflict can be defined as a
disagreement between two or more parties with perceived incompatible goals or
interests. Conflict situations are inevitable in organisations (Mashanne and
Glinow, 2008). Employee conflicts in the workplace is a common occurrence
resulting from differences in employees’ personalities and values (Johnson,