The Motivational Profile of Employees in Simulated Enterprises

Introduction

Understanding the motivational particularities of human resources has gained a special significance for the society of knowledge (Antoni, 2014; Guillén & Saris, 2013). Donovan et al. (2014) stated that a problem is socially relevant when it has an impact on the political, social, and economic life and when it contributes to the understanding of something that significantly affects the life of many people, or the understanding of some events. Without a doubt, motivation is a problem of temperament. Some individuals are more passionate than others and more dedicated to their work (Gong et al., 2009; Kara et al., 2007). There are methods likely to contribute to changes in attitude toward work for both the success of individuals in organizations and for the organization’s success in the market. The new conditions of competition as well as the needs of personal autonomy and professionalism in the organization have led to gradual changes in employee–enterprise relations, and thus it can be difficult to predict how relationships will change, based the science of management (Kark & Van Dijk, 2007; Shipper & Davy, 2002).

Today, employees must be informed, educated, protected, consulted, have certain autonomy, and be treated as collaborators (Van der Linden et al., 2017). Innovation in this area can be the modernization of people’s work so that everyone contributes to surviving the competitive modern (Conway & Peetz, 2012; Gibson, 1973; Perel, 2005). This means changing social relations, transforming employees into actors and partners, and getting their active contribution to adaptation and progress. However, a good economic strategy is not enough anymore; we must add participative, open, and modern management and a strategy able to make every employee an actor and an effective and efficient partner. The new vision of training motivation requires the ability to influence employee behavior at work and achieve higher performance. Organizations have to motivate their employees if they want to become successful (Cohen, 1990; Liu & Ding, 2012; Rigby, 2003; Winter et al., 1998). One of the current trends moving in a wrong direction is that many organizations wish to have as few employees as possible at a much reduced expense, which they hope will help them manage their costs efficiently.

Thus, motivation is not just a theoretical concept. It is a valuable tool used increasingly by successful managers to obtain superior performance (Brumbach, 1988; Peters & Waterman, 1982). They understand that superior performance will result in optimal consumption, reduced costs, and higher quality conditions. To achieve optimum motivation, managers must take into consideration a permanent combination of extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation to achieve not only an increase in performance but also the development of human potential in workers’ personal lives (Bierly et al., 2009). It is preferable that negative extrinsic reasons be applied only in exceptional conditions and for quantitative performances that require simple tasks. Positive extrinsic reasons play an important role in motivating performance activities.

Despite these shortcomings, management performance remains an important tool for organizations that seek to achieve high performance and is simultaneously one of the most important responsibilities of the manager. However, proper implementation of a performance management system in the organization, oriented to its needs and organizational culture, can only lead to significant profits for shareholders, managers, and employees.