I lead a monthly improv team that performs shows for children. My team members were each picked by me, chosen for their talent, energy, positive attitudes, and rapport with children. Their time commitment is low–one one-hour practice per month and one forty-five minute show per month. I have nine people who are in the team, with the understanding that they don’t have to perform at every show. As long as I have four actors at a show, I am happy.
In the past few months, I have had a hard time getting four actors to sign up to perform at our shows. Sometimes we have performed with only two actors, which is possible, but it makes a lot of work for the two actors. I will jump in as well, but I’m also the host–it feels awkward to introduce myself into games. When I am hosting shows, I prefer to host exclusively and not perform in the games.
I am having a hard time motivating my team to sign up for shows. I know they are busy. My actors are not just actors–they are lawyers, secretaries, parents, doctors, security guards, etc. They are juggling a lot, as am I. Our shows are on Sundays, and Sundays are busy days for people who work full time. For me, Sundays are sometimes the only days I have to spend a good chunk of time with my family. But, our shows are only once a month, and our audience looks forward to them. I don’t want to give up on the team. I have to find some way to motivate them.
The Expectancy Theory was brought to my attention by Dr. Williams. He mentioned it to me as a theory that I could consider talking about in my policy paper. When I read about it, I realized that it might also help me with my problem with motivating my improv team.
Basically, the theory is comprised of three components: Expectancy, Instrumentality, and Valence. Expectancy is the confidence level that an employee has in being able to do a job well enough that the desired outcome is even attainable. Instrumentality is how confident an employee feels that the reward will actually come if they do the work. Valence is how much the employee values the promised reward. The theory suggests that all these factors work together to determine whether an employee feels motivated enough to put energy into a project. (The Pennsylvania State University, 2016).
So, how does this help me with my problem? How do I motivate my team to want to participate in shows? Desire is really important. Generally speaking, I can go into my day job feeling grumpy and not wanting to be there. But actors have to show up energized and happy, every time. The outcome of their work has to be more than just money–I’m paid to do my day job, after all, and money isn’t motivation enough to make me leap out of bed in the morning ready to happily seize a day. In short, I need to find a way to motivate actors to perform in shows that has the additional benefit of helping them feel happy and enthusiastic to do it.
Robert G. Isaac, Wilfred J. Zerbe, and Douglas C. Pitt, in their article Leadership and motivation: The effective application of expectancy theory, discuss practical ways to apply the theory in working life. One of the practical ways that the authors suggest is to get rid of the distinction between followers and leaders: “All employees need to be flexible to both lead and follow according to situations encountered regarding their jobs” (Isaac, Zerbe, and Pitt, 2001, p.214).
The authors summarize the expectancy theory as a process theory, based in external motivators, that emphasizes the way individuals perceive the working environment and then subsequently interact with it based on what they’ve come to expect in return (Isaac, Zerbe, and Pitt, 2001, p.214). Because the expectancy theory is based in external motivators, I may have a little trouble getting them to love being actors, which is intrinsic. They all may have intrinsic motivations for being part of the team (most actors do), but if they don’t, I can’t really use this theory to help them. But, I can still examine the theory a little further to see if I can find some external motivators that will support their intrinsic motivation enough to spark renewed enthusiasm for the team.
Returning to the point of removing the distinction between leader and followers, I can think of many ways that I can create that kind of environment. Although I normally host the shows, which puts me in the leader position, I could instead allow others to host, perhaps on a rotating schedule. I could also ask for help creating the game lineups, thinking up new games, leading a practice, etc. Blurring the line between leaders and followers fosters a less us vs. them environment and instead fosters an atmosphere of care, where leaders and followers have mutual interests (since everyone wears both hats).
How does this tie into the expectancy theory itself, though? Well, the answer is, it checkmarks some of the linkages between components of the theory mentioned above (Expectancy, Instrumentality, and Valence). The first, Expectancy, is the relationship between effort and performance, which the authors refer to as the E-P linkage. One way to encourage positive links between followers’ effort and performance is to provide reasonable challenges to followers based on their respective abilities, training, and confidence (Isaac, Zerbe, and Pitt, 2001, p.217). Giving my team opportunities to host shows, create new games, and decide the games that we will play at a show would be an adequate challenge for many of my team members. They are all very talented and capable, and perhaps their lack of motivation is at least partly due to their boredom with always having to follow me.
I’m excited to start planning ways to give my team more leadership opportunities, and I hope it works!
References:
Isaac, R. G., Zerbe, W. J., & Pitt, D. C. (2001). Leadership and motivation: The effective application of expectancy theory. Journal of Managerial Issues, 13(2), 212-226.
The Pennsylvania State University. (2016). PSYCH 484: Work Attitudes and Job Motivation. Retrieved from https://wikispaces.psu.edu/display/PSYCH484/4.+Expectancy+Theory
Cynthia A Wynn says
I enjoyed thinking through this dilemma, both because the improv troupe concept is unique and because I, too, have been disappointed by lack of engagement in social and civic clubs without a seemingly, simple solution to the issue. The Expectancy Theory suggests that leaders must “understand fully the goals of each follower and the rewards” (Northouse, p. 116) sought after by each follower, did you complete such an assessment of the team? If so, the findings were not included in the blog rather the solution to the attendance problem appears to be one hypothesized by you. Curiously, you posited your improv team would be motivated to attend shows if you increased their responsibilities from simply showing up and performing to involving them in the preplanning phase to include “helping creating the game lineups, thinking up new games, leading a practice, etc” (Blog, 10/20/2018). I characterize your suggestion as curious given that earlier in the piece you reference how busy your team members are, so it is not apparent how increasing their workload would inspire attendance.
Assuming that a bit of a fact-finding mission is in order with you and your team, I would like to suggest the Participative Leadership style as it should clarify team needs and uncover a path to arrive at the mutual destination (Northouse, p. 121). Reversing roles and serving as a follower and granting your team the power to lead is obviously comfortable territory for you, based on some of your comments in the blog. An important admission and useful for the participative leadership theory as followers typically respond well to being empowered with decision-making ability.
I hope you identify a viable solution, this troupe sounds like a needed outlet for you, your community, and your team members – even when they have competing priorities.
Good luck!
Cynthia Wynn
Reference:
Northouse, P.G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice. Los Angeles: Sage Publications. ISBN 9781483317533