With such a rapid moving economy, large business opportunities and shortage of qualified workers, theme of motivating the employees has become very important and topical nowadays. Motivation of workers in any organization is important to achieve organizational goals. Employees are becoming aware that motivation increases productivity. This article proposes to explore the effects of motivation on the performance of the employees working in Public joint stock company «Yakutskenergo».
The ground of «Yakutskenergo» company is its employees. There are 5251 employees for 31.12.2014, executives – 818 (15.5%), experts – 1333 (25.4%), office employees – 164 (3.1%), employees – 2936 (56%). Public joint stock company «Yakutskenergo» is faced with numerous labor turnovers, for the last 2 –3 years (2012 – 835; 2013 – 972; 2014 – 914) employees left the company.
The main reasons for stuff turnover are as following: 1) dissatisfaction with the level of wages – 35.5%; 2) high intensity of work – 21%; 3) place of residence change – 14%; 4) wrong system of labor liability (deprivation of employee incentive) – 18% . The reason of choosing this company as the subject of research is its high labor turnover.
This research proposal will be carried out within the workforce of the Public joint stock company «Yakutskenergo». The population for this study consists of some employees. The employees of the company are informed about the purpose of the study and the willing employees participate in the research. Human resource department of the company helps in conveying the questionnaire and X respondents are interviewed. The questionnaire is available for filling for three weeks. The use of questionnaire is an efficient way to collect data.
The questionnaire is designed for better understanding what motivates the employees of «Yakutskenergo» company. This research is coordinated by the executive and human resources department of the company. The questionnaire contains both open and closed ended questions. The closed questions are short and direct. The respondents simply tick the most desirable clause. The closed questions are graded on a scale from 1–5. The open ended questions enable the respondents to express their opinion on some issues stated in the questionnaire. The questionnaire is divided into 7 sections which include the background information, leadership, work motivation, rewards, working conditions, job management and estimation. The background questions give some understanding of essence of the respondent. There are questions concerning gender, age, full-time or part-time working hours, work experience and position of the respondent.
The second section includes the relationship between the employee and manager, manager’s style etc. The third section includes the questions which help to understand how managers motivate the employees to work. In this section of the questionnaire employees are asked to rate their level of motivation within the scale of 1–5. The next question required from the employees is to rank what motivates them the most of all. The forth section of questionnaire is designed to understand the different rewards within the company. The aim of the questions in this section is to find out the satisfaction of employees with the current rewards. There are also questions about desired rewards which the employees would like to see. The fifth section concerns the working condition, examines how the company values the working conditions, employee’s satisfaction with the workplace. This section of the questionnaire links with the Herzberg’s two-factor theory. The respondents are asked to assess in a scale of 1–5 (1 – is very dissatisfied, 2 – dissatisfied, 3 – half-and-half, 4 – satisfied, 5 – very satisfied) their satisfaction with different factors of their work place. The sixth section is about the employees’ satisfaction with the job organization. The last section is about the expectations and this section is linked with expectancy theory. For example, the employees are asked to consider about rewards that they have received from their company. The question is following: do these rewards motivate them to make their best in future? The respondents are required to answer «Yes/No» [2, с. 345].
In addition, we carried out a personal interview with 3 representatives and some employees from «Yakutskenergo» company. The representatives were chosen because they do understand the goals and work system, policy of the company.
After gathering the data, the results of questionnaire and interview were analyzed. The results are entered into the excel program into tables.