How to Improve Employee Motivation and Productivity

Introduction

Because of increasing competition and challenges, employees are putting in greater effort to enhance their performance. Employee motivation and productivity are important factors that can influence organizational success and improvement in a company among its competitors. This survey provides some strategies to increase workplace encouragement by examining both intrinsic and extrinsic productivity elements.

Drawing on recent exploration and theoretical frameworks like Daniel (2016) findings illustrates that the bank used both monetary as well as non-monetary to enhance employee productivity. Candra et al., (2023) likewise concluded that employees' job satisfaction and motivation are important factors and others papers identify key elements of employee productivity. Factors focus attention on promoting a supportive culture, providing clear goal mechanisms, offering professional development opportunities, and building strong teams among other competitors. Moreover, the role of leadership also plays an essential role in creating an authorized work environment, motivating open contact with leaders, and increasing a sense of motivation to work. Empirical findings recommend that identifying organizational aims with employees’ desires and making golden opportunities for innovation and independence significantly increase productivity.

This study highlights the essential of a holistic approach that integrates motivational statements with practical interventions to boost employee job satisfaction and performance. Employee motivation has a significant and positive impact on productivity and organizational commitment (Jalal, 2018).

Literature Review

Employee productivity depends on both monetary and nonmonetary strategies. Some researchers did surveys about how to improve employee productivity and motivation. Daniel (2016) used qualitative research to examine employee motivation's influence on productivity at the Commercial Bank of Ethiopia in Ambo. Data were gathered through a self-administered questionnaire, which was distributed to all employees of the branch. The findings show that the bank used both monetary as well as non-monetary to enhance employee productivity. While monetary incentives include cash rewards, periodic salary enhancement, and loans for the construction of houses, non-monetary strategies are flexible work scheduling, helping to be professional on the employee’s field by organizing short and long-term training and education, promotion, and recognition of outstanding work performance. However, existing strategies are insufficient for getting the desired outcome, and finding more successful approaches to boost the productivity of employees is recommended. The authors Candra et al., (2023) likewise concluded that employees' job satisfaction and motivation are important factors. The study aims to analyze a literature review that is connected to enhanced employee motivation, job satisfaction, and engagement of co-workers and reshape the outcome of the reviewed variables. The references were used to find combined related variables. The result of the research illustrates that some factors affect the evidence of submission in using matrices. The worker presentation study in this research article explicitly aids in supporting variables that can upgrade employee performance, such as encouragement, job satisfaction, and leadership. According to Kusuma and Arif (2023) to develop employee motivation companies must create some strategies to boost employee motivation. The most important strategy is providing some training, and practice or creating a convenient work environment for workers. To make the survey researchers used quantitative data to collect results from 99 sample workers. The outcome of this survey illustrates that leadership methods can have a positive impact on increasing motivation among employees. Encouragement in work can mediate good communication between training and employee performance. Additionally, as "putting one's heart and soul into one's work.” Emotional engagement is essential in the workplace. The study examined how work involvement can boost productivity in Erbil’s private businesses, using a quantitative research approach. The researcher excluded identifying information from the published findings in order to ensure anonymity as requested by participants, out of 110 questionnaires distributed to private enterprises in Kurdistan, 97 were completed and returned (Abdurahman, et al., 2022). The next researcher Amacom (2007), analyzed how coaching, counseling, and mentoring can significantly boost employee performance and happiness. However, there is a significant distinction between constantly urging individuals to do their tasks properly, striving to correct poor performance, and assisting top performers to excel (mentorship). Unfortunately, most managers do not fully understand how and when to do each. Coaching, Counseling, and Mentoring include useful tools such as self-assessments and real-life scenarios, as well as precise, practical instruction for managers on how to use these strategies to improve the performance of their entire team. This updated and improved second edition offers valuable scripts for talking to employees about sensitive matters, as well as additional content on themes such as working with off-site staff, what to say when an employee denies a problem exists, whether or not to coach temps, and for part-timer how to control among supervisory and mentoring roles. It is an important control for managers who try to build confidence and job satisfaction among their employees. However, no studies have found the impact of a reward system fostering democratic leadership and providing regular training to improve employee motivation, engagement, and overall productivity which can help to increase motivation and encouragement among workers.

Data and Methodology

The study is conducted in Uzbekistan, to find ways of increasing employee productivity and identify key influencing elements. Data were collected through structured surveys distributed to employees resulting in 54 completed responses. Both primary and secondary data were used to conduct the survey. The primary data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) program applying “Descriptive analysis” to summarize the main features of answers, ordinal regression to find the significance of factors in enhancing the productivity of employees, and examined relationship between variables which helps to assess deeper insight into how various factors impact by using cross-tabulations. Organizational records and written resources were used as secondary data.

Methodology

Employee Productivity (EP) = ß + αAge + α1Reward + α2Time + α3Worktype + α4Site(Place) + α5Engagement + α6WorkLifeBalance + α7Encorage_emp + α8Salary + α9Culture + α10Affiliation + α11MainFactor + α12LeadershipStyle + α13DailyHabit + ε

EP - is the dependent variable; α, α1 … α6 - are the coefficients of the independent variables;

ε - error term. ß - constant.

Items		Frequencies	Percentage
Gender	Male	23	42.59
	Female	31	57.41
Age	15-19	8	14.81
	20-30	35	64.81
	31-40	8	14.81
	40+	3	5.5
Work type	Office	17	31.48
	Distance	11	20.37
	Partly offline	16	29.63
	Does not matter	7	12.9

Demographic analysis of respondents is included for those who took part in the study, which helps to clearly understand the background of respondents, using descriptive analysis. The study analyzed the demographic characteristics of the respondents. Of the total 54 respondents, 23 were male and 31 were female. In terms of age distribution, 8 respondents (14.81%) were between the ages of 15 and 19, 35 respondents (64.81%) were between 20 and 30, 8 respondents (14.81%) were between 31 and 40, only 3 respondents (5.5%) were aged 40 or older.

Regarding type of work, 17 respondents (31.48%) were married, while 11 respondents (20.37%) were distant employees. 16 respondents (29.63%) worked partly and 7 respondents (12.9%) said it did not matter.

Result

The above bar chart displays the distribution of leadership styles among three age groups (15–19, 20–30, and 31–40). The most dominant leadership style is democratic across the different age groups, particularly among employees aged 20 to 30, where 16% prefer democratic management. The second most dominant leadership style is transformational, which emphasizes motivating employees, creating a vision, and encouraging them to fulfill it. Moreover, the preference for the “traditional, like training by elder people” leadership style is comparatively stable but less predominant across all age groups. Additionally, the least popular style is autocratic management, implying a general preference for less authoritative approaches. Hence, this graph indicates a clear trend towards democratic and transformational leadership styles among the younger generation, specifically in their 20s. The most predominant style, democratic, is favored across all age groups because it helps workers to work independently without experiencing stress or pressure, thereby boosting their productivity and motivation.

The next bar chart gives information about how encouraging employee impact maximizes productivity. The bar chart examines four strategies for maximizing productivity- By Giving More Freedom in Decision Making, By Offering Regular Training, By Rewarding Risk Takers, and By Setting Strict Guidelines analyzed across four timeframes: Annually, Monthly, Only When Necessary, and Quarterly. It provides insights into how employees or managers prefer these strategies to be implemented over time. Among the strategies, By Giving More Freedom in Decision Making received the highest number of responses, with 13 participants favoring implementation on a monthly basis, making it the most preferred option. Smaller numbers of participants supported this strategy on an annual (1), quarterly (2), or “Only When Necessary” (2) basis. “By Offering Regular Training” was another popular approach, with 8 participants preferring monthly implementation. Fewer people supported annual (2), quarterly (3), or “Only When Necessary” (2) schedules for this strategy. In terms of “By Rewarding Risk Takers,” there was an even split, with 5 participants each favoring annual and monthly implementation. Only 1 participant supported implementation “Only When Necessary” or quarterly. Lastly, “By Setting Strict Guidelines” had lower overall responses. No participants chose annual or “Only When Necessary,” while 3 participants each selected monthly and quarterly schedules. The chart highlights that monthly implementation is consistently the most preferred time frame across all strategies. “By Giving More Freedom in Decision Making” stands out as the most favored approach, while “By Setting Strict Guidelines” receives comparatively less support. These findings suggest that employees value consistent, regular actions to maximize productivity, particularly those that empower decision-making and skill development.

This graph illustrates data about how different leadership styles encourage employees through specific methods. The authority methods analyzed are autocratic, democratic, traditional, and transformational, with styles like giving more freedom in decision-making, offering regular training, rewarding risk-takers, and setting strict guidelines. Firstly, an autocratic leadership style seems to have minimal reliance on offering freedom in decision-making or rewarding risk-takers. However, strict guidelines dominate, though this method appears less popular compared to others. The most predominant management style is freedom in decision-making and offering regular training. The reason is that making independent decisions and ongoing practice can improve employees’ skills and encourage them to achieve their goals. The third, the traditional leadership style focuses mainly on structured training by elders in this method giving more freedom to workers and the best way to improve their job satisfaction. The last leadership style is transformational, which focuses on rewarding innovation or risk-taking, while also offering consistent freedom in decision-making. These findings suggest that the most effective leadership style is democratising style by offering regular training during work hours.

The table displays parameter estimates from a statistical model with the help of ordinal logistic regression. Ordinal Logistic Regression shows that creating opportunities for professional development is statistically significant at 0.01 level and we accept Ha and reject Ho, meaning that there is a positive relationship between Creating opportunities and employee engagement. If companies create opportunities for professional development, it leads to increased engagement of workers by 41%.

More team-building activities are statistically significant at 0.01 level and we accept Ha and reject Ho, meaning that there is a positive relationship between team-building activities and employee engagement. If companies build more team activities, it leads to an increased engagement of workers by 43%.

Offering higher wages is statistically significant at 0.01 level and we accept Ha and reject Ho, meaning that there is a positive relationship between offering higher wages and employee engagement. If companies offer higher wages, it leads to an increase in the engagement of workers by 45%.

The next is that Ordinal Logistic Regression shows that flexible working hours are statistically significant at 0.1 level and we accept Ha and reject Ho, meaning that there is a positive relationship between flexible working hours and employee engagement. If companies create opportunities for flexible working, it leads to increased productivity of workers by 3.9%.

High salary is statistically significant at 0.1 level and we accept Ha and reject Ho, meaning that there is a positive relationship between high salary and employee engagement. If companies increase workers' pay, it leads to increased productivity of employees by 1.9%.

Job security is statistically significant at 0.1 level and we accept Ha and reject Ho, meaning that there is a positive relationship between job security and employee productivity. If companies keep job security, it leads to increased productivity of employees by 3.4%.

Monthly performance awards are statistically significant at 0.1 level and we accept Ha and reject Ho, meaning that there is a negative relationship between monthly performance awards and employee engagement. If companies increase monthly performance awards, it leads to a decrease in the productivity of employees by 1.6%.

Access to snacks and beverages is statistically significant at 0.1 level and we accept Ha and reject Ho, meaning that there is a positive relationship between access to snacks and beverages and employee engagement. If companies increase access to snacks and beverages, it leads to an increase in productivity of employees by 2.4%.

However, equity in the company, peer regression program, and clear communication goals are statistically insignificant meaning that we accept Ho and reject Ha, and there is no relationship between these variables and employee engagement.

Conclusion and Policy Implication

This article explores the determinants of how to boost employee motivation and productivity in Uzbekistan using traditional gravity models and panel data analyses of 54 employees for the period 2016-2023. This study is the first empirical research exploring the determinants of how to improve employee engagement and job satisfaction. Data were collected through structured surveys distributed to employees resulting in 54 completed responses. Both primary and secondary data were used to conduct the survey. The primary data was analyzed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) program applying “Descriptive analyses” through cross-tabulations and “Ordinal regression” to find the significance of variables to increase the productivity of employees. The findings highlight that collaboration of leadership, work-life balance, motivation, salary, culture, affiliation, and reward systems have a significant influence on employee productivity and satisfaction as well. While promoting work-life balance prevents burnout and fosters employee well-being, effective leadership helps to create an atmosphere conducive to positivity and productivity. One key factor, which impacts employee satisfaction and performance is rewards. Moreover, a powerful workplace culture and a sense of relationship contribute to higher commitment and team building between employees. By addressing these factors comprehensively, organizations can generate an environment that not only drives productivity but also enhances employee morale and maintenance.

Employees who have meaningful tasks to do are more likely to be engaged and devoted. As a result, further research is needed to properly understand the impact of meaningful employment on all factors of organizational benefits. For this reason, companies or organizations should focus on present professional career development, flexible working hours, job security, and create opportunities for their future. In addition, providing ongoing practice, team-building activities, regular meetings with leaders, and high salaries can significantly increase engagement and morale among workers. Flexible work arrangements, for instance hybrid timetables, help workers focus on a healthy work-life balance, while clear professional steps help them to boost motivation for their work. Moreover, adopting a management style that emphasizes collaboration, employee involvement in decision-making, and recognition of new methods can establish a positive work environment. On the other side, from this survey directly managers can benefit. The reason is that they can find information about how to regulate their workers to work better for their companies or organizations. Finally, customers and stakeholders may benefit indirectly, as an encouraging workforce delivers higher-quality products and services enhancing customer enjoyment and strengthening the companies’ reputation in the market or among competitors.

While these methods can effectively boost employee productivity, there are some limitations to take into consideration. To begin with, the effectiveness of these policies may differ between industries, organizational culture or individual employee preferences can influence the common goal of a company. Second, implementing changes like flexible working hours, training programs and high salaries might be challenging, especially for small organizations and companies. Also, overdependence on awards or perks may lead to short-term productivity rather than fostering inherent engagement. Lastly, leaders or companies may struggle to find up-to-date data about how to improve employee motivation or have no access to the funding and latest data.