Expectancy Theory and Goal Setting Theory: A Critical Analysis

Introduction
The theory of expectancy was designed by Vroom in the year 1963 and in the year 1968, it
was modified by Porter and Lawler. This theory stated that the degree of motivation of an
individual depends on the possible outcome of the job. Also, the goal setting theory refers
to the effects of setting targets for consequent achievement and how the setting of goals
affects the performance of an individual. This essay shall examine the theories of
expectancy and goal setting and at the same time and review the connection between the
two theories. It shall also examine the strengths and weaknesses of both the theories
(Behaviour, 2014).
Expectancy Theory
Expectancy theory is based on motivation and how employees make decisions about
alternative behaviours and degree of endeavour. It focuses on how the employees of an
organization decide on the type of behaviors for performance and the amount of effort to
be exerted in order to derive at a desirable outcome. Vroom’s Expectancy Theory is based
on three components and they are: valence, instrumentality and expectancy. Valence is the
desire for a particular outcome for an individual employee. In an organization, there can be
various outcomes, like pay rise, job security, bonus, promotion etc, but the importance of
each shall differ from one worker to the other. The availability of highly valent outcomes
should be made available to the workers and this becomes a very significant factor in
motivating an employee and moving the organization ahead. The second factor
instrumentality decides the relation between the level of effort and the desirable outcome.
A -1 instrumentality says that the worker does not perceive the effort will yield the desired
result, and +1 means the worker definitely thinks that the effort shall yield the result,

whereas an instrumentality of zero, signifies that the worker does not perceive any relation
between the effort and outcome. It denotes the perception of the employee about the
relationship between the effort and the outcome. The third component of Vroom’s Theory
is expectancy, which signifies the perception of the employee about the scope to which the
individual’s effort will yield a certain level of job performance (Barba-Sanchez & Atienza-
Sahuquillo, 2017). Lyman Porter and Edward Lawler had used the Expectancy Theory of
Victor Vroom as a foundation and had developed their own modified version of the
Expectancy Theory. They made the theory more in-depth and more complex. They identified
nine factors which affect motivation at work. The factors are:
1) Perception about the value of the outcome
2) The expectation that a particular performance shall pave the way for reward
3) Effort
4) Individual capacities
5) Perception of the roles that they are involved in
6) Job performance
7) Intrinsic Rewards and Extrinsic rewards
8) Perception about the equity of the rewards
9) Satisfaction at job
(Lloyd & Mertens, 2018)
This theory is assumed to be a comprehensive model with varied aspects of the relationship
between attitudes of employees at the workplace and the job performance. It has a great
contribution to a better understanding of motivation at work and the intrinsic relationship
between achievement and fulfillment. The Expectancy Theory also does not take into

consideration the emotional state of an individual or also the individual’s experience, skills,
knowledge and personality traits. This theory also does not perform well in a group
environment where more than one individual needs to be motivated for a single project.
Once the management understands the concept of this theory they can utilize it to their
benefit by understanding the gap in skills and provide appropriate training, the exact thing
that they need to keep their employees motivated, and a commitment towards delivering
the reward. Also, the positive side of a well applied theory is the happiness of the
employees and their willingness to participate. Recent research also shows that the decision
making approaches based on the Expectancy Theory is well supported. However, this theory
has proved to be one of the best in understanding an individual’s decision making process.
But, the theory needs to be understood well by the management and the managers and
their active participation, in particular, or else this theory fails to serve its purpose. Another
issue with this theory is the management’s lack of understanding the employee and their
basis of motivation. The rewards offered by the management, might not be valued by the
employees or they may not have enough trust in the management to believe that the
reward is for real (Gaffney, 2018).
Goal Setting Theory
Goal Setting Theory was developed and modified by Edwin A. Locke in the year 1968.
According to this theory, the goal should be measurable and quantifiable and affects the
outcomes through choice, effort, persistence and cognition. Goal Setting Theory involves
specific, measurable, achievable, realistic, and time-targeted goals or shortly known as
SMART. The components of the Goal Setting Theory involve: