Valence Instrumentality Expectation Theory

According to the VIE theory (for valence , instrumentality , expectation ) by Vroom (1964), the question of whether a person shows achievement motivation depends not only on the result of their individual dispositions or their socialization, but above all on factors in the situation. The VIE theory therefore belongs to the category of process theories in the field of motivation theories, i.e. it does not describe the content -related aspects (e.g. satisfaction of needs, striving for status), but considers the dynamics of motivation (how does motivation come about? Rules follow motivational processes?). Within the VIE theories, attempts are made to calculate the intention of the behavior from the value of the goals, the instrumentality of the action for achieving these goals and the subjective probability of being able to show this behavior ( Lutz von Rosenstiel , 2007).

The VIE theory specifically deals with those processes that lead to the decision for a certain alternative course of action ( predecisional phase according to Heckhausen ).

Basis of the theory

The basis of the VIE theory is the path-goal approach by Georgopoulus, Mahoney & Jones (1957): according to this, performance (the “path”) of individuals is only considered worth striving for if it is a desired goal can be achieved. Accordingly, the degree of performance shown is based on the effort that is necessary to achieve the goal.

This approach is based on the paradigm of the utility maximizer : the perception of a “relative utility” is essential for the willingness to provide a service.

VIE theory assumptions

In his theory, Vroom distinguishes between two types of consequences that result from human action: the action results (results of the first stage) and the action consequences (results of the second stage).

Action results (E) are the direct results that result from the action or non-action of a person, e.g. B. the promotion at work, which is offered as a result of committed work. A result of an action is therefore always the consequence of an alternative action.
As action sequences (F) the effect is called, which has an action result to other areas of life. In the case of transport, this would be e.g. B. more responsibility, less free time, better pay and more reputation.

You have to distinguish between three levels: 1. Motivation and action → 2. Action result → 3. Action sequence

According to Vroom, the following three aspects are necessary to explain how people make motivational decisions (“Do I make an effort or not?”): The instrumentality of the outcome of the action, the valence of the sequence of actions and the associated expectation of the person.

Instrumentality

Instrumentality here stands for the relationship between the action result and the resulting action consequences, "ie action results can have favorable or unfavorable effects" . Behind the concept of instrumentality hides the question to what extent the result of my efforts has desirable consequences.

A result of an action can therefore have positive and negative instrumentality (impact) at the same time, related to different consequences of the action. The above Promotion, for example, has positive instrumentality in terms of income (this increases after promotion). At the same time, however, it also has a negative instrumentality on leisure time (with greater responsibility you are less dispensable and have to work longer).

valence

Under valence Vroom understands the value, have certain conditions for an individual. Thus, valence indicates the degree to which a certain state is desirable for an individual or how important this is. In the context of the VIE theory , valence relates to the outcome of the action, and valence to the consequences of the action. Because according to the theory, the valence of the action result results from the valences and the instrumentalities of the action consequences ${\ displaystyle V}$ ${\ displaystyle V '}$ ${\ displaystyle V}$ ${\ displaystyle (E)}$ ${\ displaystyle V '}$ ${\ displaystyle I}$ ${\ displaystyle F.}$

Vroom postulates that a person calculates the specific instrumentality “ ” of the outcome of the action for each sequence of actions. How significant these effects are in detail for the evaluation of the outcome of the action depends on the respective valence of the sequence of actions . The valence of a certain sequence of actions gives more or less weight to the change in the outcome of the action. How desirable the direct action result is (“ ”) results from the sum of the weighted instrumentalities of all action consequences. This can be represented mathematically as follows: ${\ displaystyle I (F)}$ ${\ displaystyle V '(F)}$ ${\ displaystyle valence (E)}$

{\ displaystyle {\ text {Valence (E)}} = \ sum _ {i = 1} ^ {n} {(V '(F_ {i}) \ ast I (F_ {i}))}}

Using the promotion as an example, let's say the employee who might be offered a promotion has just become a father. He would like to spend as much time as possible with his child, but will have less free time after a possible promotion (negative instrumentality for F1). On the other hand, the young father may think that he now has to look after his family all by himself, a raise would be just the thing (positive instrumentality for F2). Depending on how important the remaining free time or the higher income is for him, either the negative or the positive instrumentality has a stronger effect on the valence of the promotion. Overall, this appears to him to be less or more desirable.

At this point, however, it is only decided how desirable the result of the action is. However, this is not yet accompanied by a decision as to whether to act accordingly, whether to invest effort.

Expectation

The term expectation describes the degree of the subjectively perceived probability of occurrence of a result. Vroom measures expectation on a scale from 0 to 1: with an expectation of 0, the individual considers the occurrence of an event as a result of a certain action to be unlikely, with an expectation of 1 the occurrence of an event is considered certain.

In VIE theory, it is important to distinguish between expectation and instrumentality. Both are subjective assessments of the individual, but are located differently in Vroom's model:

Expectation = action-result-relationship: the assumed probability that the prerequisites for the action result will be met through the use. This expectation depends largely on personality traits of the individual himself, such as skills and self-confidence.
Instrumentality = result-consequence relationship: the probability with which the result of one's own performance leads to the desired consequences of action. This is mainly influenced by the behavior of superiors and organizational rules.

The motivational decision

According to Vroom, a person's decision about whether or not to invest performance ultimately results from the interaction of their expectations and the value of the outcome of the action:

{\ displaystyle {\ text {Decision}} = \; {\ text {Valence (E)}} \; \ ast \; {\ text {Expectation (E)}}}

The individual will therefore resort to the alternative action that has the highest F-value. The multiplicative connection of valence and expectation shows that both aspects must reach a minimum for a person to be ready to perform. Even so, an extremely desirable goal will not have a performance-enhancing effect if the person assumes that this result cannot be achieved (e.g. because one is convinced that promotions "will always be overlooked" or because one considers oneself incompetent) holds enough). At the same time, goals for action that would be very easy to achieve will still not have a motivating effect if they do not have a positive valence (e.g. turn the yard away from the neighbor).

According to this view, work performance is extrinsically motivated, it is an instrument for the individual to achieve the consequences of actions with positive valence.

Evaluation of the VIE theory

The statement of the theory that the motivation of employees depends on the skillful combination of operational and individual goals is particularly important for corporate practice. The basic idea of the VIE theory is very plausible, but at the same time also relatively complex. Nevertheless, the VIE theory forms a useful basis for deriving concrete motivational strategies in everyday business. Its mathematical formulation enables precise empirical testing of the theory and also makes it particularly interesting for science. This has made it one of the most dominant motivational theories today.

When applying the VIE theory, however, it must be noted that it only considers a section of the performance and motivation process (decision for or against alternative courses of action). The willingness to perform must then first be implemented, controlled and evaluated in actions and services.

Conclusion for practice

According to Vroom's theory, an employee would perform well if they saw a high probability (high expectations) that:

his personal efforts (actions) lead to high work performance
good job performance leads to desired personal goals / results
if these goals / results are perceived as attractive (have high valence)

When it comes to the question of motivation in the sense of a management task, the first thing that matters is "in discussions with employees to determine their expectations, valences and instrumentalities in order to increase their willingness to perform by influencing these parameters in a targeted manner."

criticism

The criticism of Vroom's model can be summarized in the following points:

People only act rationally to a limited extent and thus do not meet the basic assumptions of the model.
In addition, they do not calculate every action, but also carry out routine actions.
According to Vroom, motivation also leads to action. However, there is often a gap between the desire to act and the actual act.

literature

Nerdinger, FW (2001). Motivation . In: H. Schuler, Textbook of Personnel Psychology . Göttingen: Hogrefe (pp. 354–356).
Staehle, WH (1999). Management . Munich: Vahlen.
Vroom, VH (1964). Work and motivation . New York, NY: Wiley.

Individual evidence

^ Georgopoulus, BS, Mahoney, CM & Jones, NW (1957). A Path Goal Approach to Productivity . In: Journal of Applied Psychology , 41, pp. 599-611.
^ Nerdinger, FW (2001). Motivation . In: H. Schuler, Textbook of Personnel Psychology . Göttingen: Hogrefe (p. 354).
^ Nerdinger, FW (2001). Motivation . In: H. Schuler, Textbook of Personnel Psychology . Göttingen: Hogrefe (p. 355).

[1] Georgopoulus, BS, Mahoney, CM & Jones, NW (1957). A Path Goal Approach to Productivity . In: Journal of Applied Psychology , 41, pp. 599-611.

[2] Nerdinger, FW (2001). Motivation . In: H. Schuler, Textbook of Personnel Psychology . Göttingen: Hogrefe (p. 354).

[3] Nerdinger, FW (2001). Motivation . In: H. Schuler, Textbook of Personnel Psychology . Göttingen: Hogrefe (p. 355).