CHAPTER ONE
1.0   Introduction
A milestone in success of an organization is to fulfill the continuous changing needs of organization and employees; heavy responsibility falls on top management to develop strong relationship between them. Organizations expect employees to follow the rules and regulations, work according to the standards set for them; the employees expect good working conditions fair pay, fair treatment, secure career, power and involvement in decisions. These expectations of both parties vary from organization to organization. For organizations to address these expectations, an understanding of employee’s motivation is required (Beer, Spector, Lawrence, Mills & Watson 1984).
Deeprose (1994) examined the effective reward system improve employee motivation and increases employee productivity which contribute to better enhanced organizational performance. Baron (1983) argues that there is very close relationship between motivation and job performance. Both performance and motivation are directly proportional to each other. The premeditated success For an organization lies in focusing attention at all levels specifically on important business actives which can be achieved through effective performance management Nel, Gerber. Van Schults, Sono & Werner (2001) Robert, (2005) took into account the work of Baron, (1983) in which he mentioned that not only motivation can influence performance, but performance can also influence motivation, if followed by rewards.
Organizations need to unleash the talents and motivations of all their employees if they are to achieve peak performance (Burke & Cooper, 2007, Katzenbach, 2000, Ulrich, 1997). There is considerable evidence, however, that many organizations are falling short (Burke & Cooper 2008; Sirota, Mischkind & Melzer, 2005). Recent efforts to improve organizational performance have begun to emphasize positive organizational behavior concepts and positive emotions (Cameron, Dutton & Quinn, 2003; Leiter & Bakker, 2009; MayGilson & Harter 2004; Bakker & Schaufeli; 2008. This includes concepts such as optimism and engagement, trust.
Stress has become one of the most serious health issues of the twentieth century, a problem not just for individuals in terms of physical and mental disability, but for employers and government who have started to asses the financial damage. Matteson & Ivancevich (1987) estimates that stress causes half of absenteeism, 40% of turnover, and 5% of total lost productivity due to preventable occupational stress ($300 billion for the US economy annually). Occupational stress has serious consequences for both individual employees and organizations.
The problem of occupational stress is particularly relevant for countries undergoing enormous economic and economic change. Nigeria is one of such society, with transformation of the industrial structure from labor-intensive to technology-intensive, as well as rapid westernization in both work and life styles. In this context, it is important for psychologists, occupational physicians, managerial executives and even government policy-makers to understand the problem of occupations stress, and to produce practical guidelines and interventions to enhance employee, well-being.
Usually, work motivations can be revealed by investigating the question “what do people want from their jobs”? Herzberg, Mausner & Snyderman (1959) found two general types of work motivations: intrinsic and extrinsic factors, and further lined these two to job satisfaction and dissatisfaction, respectively, using this dichotomy of work motivations, we may well argue that people who have strongly intrinsic motivations such as self-fulfillment and self growth will be more seriously affected by lack of control in their jobs. Similarly, people who have strong extrinsic work motivations such as pay and work conditions will care more about demands in their jobs. Hence it is possible that work motivations may alter the job stressor-strain relationship, and not as a moderator.
There is also increasing evidence that social support, both within the work settings, that is, help from colleagues or supervisors and outside the work settings, that is, help from friends and families can buffer the impact of occupational stress (House, 1981; Cummings, 1990).
1.2   Background to the Study
Within the behavior sciences in general and occupational health psychology in particular, there has been a specific focus on the importance of well being both physical and mental health, in affecting success in many life situations, including the work place. Indeed Seligman Steen, Park & Peterson (2005) challenged the field by asking “can psychologist take what they have learned about the science and practice of treating mental illnesses and use it to create a practice of making people lastingly happier?
Psychological well being has been found to be related to both work and personal life outcomes. In other words, although co-relational, the inference from this research would prove that one’s psychological well being levels to desired outcomes at work and in life.
Worrall & Cooper (2006) recently reported that a low level of well-being at work is estimated to cost about 5-10% of gross National Product per annum, yet quality of working life as a theoretical construct remains relatively unexplored and unexplained within the organizational psychology research literature.
A recent publication of National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) (2007) emphasizes the core role of assessment and understanding of the way working environments pose risks for psychological well-being through lack of control and excessive demand the emphasis placed by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence on assessment and monitoring well being springs from the fact that these processes are the key first step in identifying views for improving quality of working life and addressing risks at work.
Why do people work hard and does their motivation for working long hours in terms of their satisfaction and well being? Several streams of research based on these questions. First, a growing body of research on workaholism has shown that different types of workaholics exist (Scott, Moore & Miceli. 1997; Spence & Robbins 1992) and that some types of seem to be work satisfied and psychologically health while other types are dissatisfied with their jobs and careers, with their family relationships and in psychological distress (Buelens & Poelmans, 2004; Burke, 2007; Machlowitz, 1980; Kanni, Waskabayash: & Fling, 1996; Robinson, 1998; Spence & Robbins, 1992B).
Second, extensive research on sources of motivation (e.g., the effects of intrinsic versus extrinsic goals) and different processes or motivations for realizing these goals (e.g. internal versus external motivations) – the “what” and “why” of goal pursuits – has shown that individuals motivated by extrinsic goals and external sources of motivation report lower levels of satisfaction and psychological health (Deci & Ryan, 1985; 2000, Deci, Koestner & Ryan, 1999, Ryan & Deci 2000). Burke (2007) has shown that different types of workaholics are motivated by different beliefs and fears about people and their larger social and work environment.