Team Research and Opinion Paper

BA 302
Dr. Shung Jae Shin
3-14-16

Sara Whang
Erick Ponce
Timothy McDonald
Zhaojie Zheng
Camelia Verduzco

Table of Contents
Table of Contents.............................................................................................................................2
Executive Summary.........................................................................................................................3
Company Overview.........................................................................................................................4

Motivation Theories in Practice at Intel: Expectancy Theory.........................................................5

Motivation Theories in Practice at Intel: Job Characteristics Model...............................................6
Psychological States: Meaningfulness, Responsibility, Knowledge of Results..............................7
Outcomes: Motivation Increase, Performance, Employee Satisfaction.......8
Motivation through Job Design- Job Rotation.................................................................................8
Recommendations........................................................................................................................9
Conclusion.........................................................................................................................10
Appendix........................................................................................................................................11
Works Cited...13

I.

Executive Summary
The Intel organization has developed a valued workforce of motivated employees. We
find the Expectancy Theory is used by Intel to increase self-efficacy of new employees and
develop increases in expectancy. Specifically, this is initiated in their recruiting and new hire
training process; as new hires are paired with a buddy mentor and given access to resources
through Business Group Units that Intel contributed to. Furthermore, Intels use of the
Expectancy Theory increases employee instrumentality and valance through the use of
consistent and fair performance appraisals and competitive compensation rewards.
Overall, the motivational theory found to be of the most valuable and widely used within
the Intel organization is the Job Characteristic Model. Furthermore, the most influential job
characteristics at Intel are expressed by our interviewees to be autonomy and feedback. By
increasing employees freedom of responsibility and knowledge necessary for employee
improvement, Intel has attained the outcomes of employees possessing a high level of intrinsic
motivation, high rates of job satisfaction, and increased levels of work effectiveness.

Lastly, we find that Intels effective uses of the practices of job design and rotation
increases employee motivation. Intel employees are periodically rotated to different departments,
thus developing the employees skills while simultaneously improving comprehensive quality
and ability to perform work. It is through the increase in each employees skill level that raises
the organizations overall skill level.
Based on our findings, we recommend Intel implement the following recommendations
in order to enhance the level of motivation within their organization. In finding that Intel
employees feel a level of unattainability in reaching promotion goals, we recommend Intel
establish specific and timely guidelines with employee expectations for the organization's
promotions process.
Additionally, employee perception of unattainable goals is in part due to a lack of honest,
goal-oriented feedback from management during performance reviews. As a recommendation,
to improve this gap in the feedback process, management should focus on the leadership growth
of employees. Specifically, Intel should implement a reward system for management who
display increased levels of subordinate employees in departmental leadership roles.

II.

Company Overview
Intel being one of the main contributors to the revolution of personal computers and
technology as a whole, advancements to technology would not be what they are today without
Intels innovations. If you have owned a PC, you have most likely owned one with Intels
processor. The leading producer of microprocessors was founded in 1968 by two engineers from
Silicon Valley - Robert Noyce and Gordon Moore (Intel.com). Although the company is most
recognized for its processors, it started as a memory chip manufacturer before introducing the
first microprocessor to the world in 1971 (Intel.com). Not too long after introducing the first
microprocessor, Intel invented the x86 the processor found in most PCs. Intels innovations
not only power our computers but most of the data centers in the world, and can be found in
mobile and medical devices, cars, and automated factories (Intel.com). They have also expanded
into other business segments producing products and services for security and cloud
computing. Today, Intel is one of the largest manufacturers of semiconductor chips - a
multinational company employing 106,700 people as of 12/27/14 almost half employed outside
of the U.S (Intel.com).
As one of the most valued brands in the tech industry, and one the of the largest
employers in Oregon, we examine how Intel motivates its employees to maintain a high

performing environment. Three employees were interviewed from different departments in an

effort to identify the different methods used and the level of effectiveness across various
departments within the organization.
The first person interviewed is Dave Nickel - current finance professor at Portland State
University who has worked in various departments within Intels finance sector. His 15-year
tenure with Intel made Professor Nickel an ideal candidate to provide us with great insight into
the company. The second interviewee is Katie Conrad, a current undergrad student at Portland
State University and a Data Analyst at Intel. The third person interviewed, Dmitriy Yovko, is an
engineer at Intel. He has been with the company for about one year. His educational
background is in chemical engineering while studying at Oregon State University. Dmitriy gives
us a great insight on what it is like to be a new employee in such a large company from an
engineers standpoint.

III.

Motivation Theories in Practice at Intel: Expectancy Theory

According to the expectancy theory, an individuals motivation level is determinant upon
three factors.
1. Expectancy (effort) Does the individual believe their efforts will lead to the level of
performance or success they desire?
2. Instrumentality (performance) Does their performance lead to desired outcomes?
3. Valence (rewards) Are the outcomes desirable to the individual?
The core argument of the expectancy theory is that our behavior is driven by the
likelihood of our efforts leading to performance, and the likelihood of our performance leading to
outcomes/rewards we value (LZROIU, 2015). Every individual is said to rationally calculate
the likelihood of each, and the outcome of an individual's calculations is influenced by their past
experiences with the organization, and individual differences and perceptions.
To increase the expectancy level, employers must first carefully select the right individual
for the job and provide adequate training. Individuals who feel they do not have the ability,
knowledge, and resources to fulfill their duties will have low expectancy (Issac, Zerbe, and Pitt,
2001). Recruiting the right individual for each role is a priority within the organization and great
efforts are made to ensure the right candidate is selected. They not only look for the person with

the right experiences and skills, Intel also makes efforts to find the right personality fit for the
team. Once the right candidate is carefully selected, they are paired with a buddy who helps the
new recruits learn their various job duties. Intel also has designated teams Business Group Unit
specifically there to provide the new hires with the tools and resources to be successful in their
new roles. These efforts made by Intel contribute to increasing self-efficacy, which in turn leads
to increase in expectancy.
Consistency and fairness in performance appraisals and rewards procedures are
imperative for employees to feel confident that their performance will lead to desired outcomes.
Although all three of our interviewees felt Intels performance evaluations were fair and
consistent, evaluations for promotions are rigorous and one of our interviewees felt promotions
were hard to attain. When employees feel desired outcomes are too hard to achieve, this leads to
low instrumentality and may lead to de-motivating individuals. To improve instrumentality,
performance must consistently lead to rewards and the evaluation procedures must also be
consistently fair. Inconsistency and low distributive justice can lead to the employer losing
credibility and may lead to rewards no longer being effective.
One way Intel keeps their employees satisfied is by providing competitive compensation.
Average salary of an Intel employee is well over the average salary of the state of Oregon as a
whole. Some of the other ways employees are rewarded are through restricted stocks and
promotions. In addition, Intel has a peer based recognition program - employees can recognize
their fellow peers and money is put onto a debit card for the employee they are recognizing.
Although the amount is small, this is a great way for employees to show appreciation and
recognize each other for their contributions and hard work.
Rewards do not necessarily have to come in monetary form to be effective Intel has
rented out entire theaters and theme parks for their employees and their families to show
appreciation. Rewards that simply show gratitude without any monetary rewards attached to it
are said to be just as desirable and effective in increasing motivation as tangible rewards (Issac,
Zerbe, and Pitt, 2001).
When attempting to increase valence, management must recognize each individual is
different with different needs and goals. Some value promotions, bonuses, and raises, and others
value intrinsic rewards such as challenges and joy they get from their work (Hye Jung, Sun
Young, & Jin Nam, 2015). What motivates one individual does not have the same effect on the
next person, therefore it is important that management get to know members of their team to be
able to effectively motivate.

IV.

Motivation Theories in Practice at Intel: Job Characteristics Model

The core job characteristics are: Skill variety, Task identity, Task significance,
Autonomy, and Feedback (Bauer & Erdogan, 2015). According to the textbook, the two most
important elements in determining the motivating potential of a job are Autonomy and Feedback.
These two elements are emphasized within the Intel Corporation. These job characteristics then
advance to the three critical psychological states of increased responsibility, meaningfulness, and
knowledge of results. Thereafter, motivation, performance, and satisfaction are the work-related
outcomes shared by Intel employees.
The most influential job characteristics at Intel are expressed by our interviewees to be
autonomy and feedback. When interviewing Intels employee, Katherine Conrad, a Data Analyst
Intern, she expressed that autonomy at Intel is often represented by the flexibility and freedom of
employees have; stating, Typically, they dont seem to care a whole lot about how often you
work or how long your breaks are as long as you get all of your stuff done...I can work from
home and I can skip lunch to leave early or just design my schedule however I want to.
Furthermore, the job characteristic of feedback is conveyed as an essential and consistent
influence on employee responsibility and motivation at Intel. For example, in an interview with
Professor Dave Nickel, a former Intel Employee for 15 years in various departments with the
Finance sector, describes Intels rigorous yearly performance review process, You are informed
by management about how you compare to your peers. A development plan is created to
determine how to improve your performance. There are many smart employees in the
organization, so you need to work hard and distinguish yourself.

V.

Psychological States: Meaningfulness, Responsibility, Knowledge of Results

Fluctuations in engagement levels give us indications of psychological states. Gallup
institution gives examples of three different levels of engagement engagement, not engaged, and
the disengaged. Engaged: Employees who are engaged are passionate and put forth the effort at
work. They are the organizations most desirable employees who consistently show innovation
and commitment. Not engaged: They are work zombies who act as if they were working but are
actually not. Their body is there but their mind is absent. They contribute very little effort and
energy. The disengaged: These employees are the biggest liability for an organization. They are
the unhappiest people who intend to spread their unhappiness to others and cause for decreased
employee contribution and satisfaction (Gallup 2013).
Psychological need satisfaction has intrinsic and extrinsic motivational potential that
pushes employees to meet their goals. Employees can become more committed to their
companies because they feel fulfilment from it (Bhuvanaiah 2015). Employees would get a
sense of fulfilment when they are tasked with meaningful work, when there is an opportunity for
elective activities of interest, when there is an opportunity to grow as an individual, and when

there is a feeling of competence from goal achievement which ultimately enhances employee
engagement. However, it is important to understand that people and their needs differ. some
activities that motivate one individual may not motivate a different individual (Bhuvanaiah
2015). Certain job factors such as workload, role ambiguity and work pressure demand higher
effort from employees and lead to physical and mental exhaustion. These are found to contribute
to lack of engagement levels. Interestingly, job resources such as proper feedback, support, and
autonomy are found to reduce the effect of job demands and also drive engagement through a
motivational process (Bhuvanaiah 2015).

VI.

Outcomes: Motivation Increase, Performance, Employee Satisfaction

An outdated paradigm of rewards and punishments with strict management control is
being modernized with a newer paradigm of internalized commitment or intrinsic motivation
(Thomas & Velthouse, 1990). Intel is combining strong intrinsic motivational factors with
extrinsic rewards. According to Chase Logreco, a Technical Assistance / Chief of Staff with Intel
for 12 years, working for Intel is outstanding in Oregon. The overall average salary for
employees in the state of Oregon is $45,000 per year. Comparing this with Intels average salary
of $72,000 per year for its employees shows us their high commitment and value for the
companys employees. Chase Logreco shared some of his motivational factors for working with
Intel as being job diversity from its rotation program, job security, and his excitement for future
prospects with the company. According to Mr. Logreco, Intel is forecasting that a total of 50
billion electronic devices will be connected globally by the year 2020. The other thing can
increase the motivation are training and the breaking. When you are first hired as an employee
of Intel company, after NEO ( new employee orientation) new recruits are paired up in a buddy
system to learn their various duties. You can joined with a BGU(Business Group Unit) that will
teach you all the tools you will need to be successful at your job. The other thing can create
employee's motivation is break and welfare benefits. There is a lot of expected travel/ flight time
for employees. There are also family days where Intel company rents out entire theatres for early
showing of movies. In the past they have even rented out the entire Disneyland Park for Intel
employees and their families to enjoy. They have plenty of events with free food and booze.
( This paragraph is also redundant - a lot of what is said here was said in what I wrote in the
expectancy theory part. According to the heading, this paragraph should be about the outcomes
from Intels use of the Job Characteristic motivation theory. In other words, how is Intel
benefiting from their motivation practices - what kind of outcome is Intel seeing in their
employees?)

VII.

Motivation through Job Design- Job Rotation

Job rotation is the transfer of an employee from the one position to a different position.
The job rotation gives employees opportunities to work in various departments. The job rotation
is a good way to strengthen employees by increasing their skill level. The increase in employee
skill levels raises the organizations overall skill level. In addition, when an employee is rotated
to another department, it not only benefits the employee being rotated, it also benefits other
employees from the cross-pollination of knowledge. Through the job rotation, the employees
sense of urgency is enhanced. The employees will gain more knowledge of the different aspects
of the business and the different department policies. This action will improve the
comprehensive quality and the ability to work, as well as continuously develop the employee.
The Intel company understands the value of job rotation. According to professor Dave Nickel,
employees are promoted or reassigned to other departments every 2-4 years on average. Intel as
a company has a specific job rotation program which reassigns employees every 2-3 years. This
gives the employees and the company new perspectives and maximizes innovation. The
implementation of the job rotation program keeps employee interested and engaged in their
work, as well as maintaining a level of motivation to maximize performance.
According to Professor Dave Nickel, he stated that during his time as an Intel employee,
most of his motivation came from job rotation. His initial motivation as a new employee came
from desiring a good paying job. However, over time, motivation changed to the diversity that
the job and Intel offered from its rotation program. He has had 4 different jobs over the past 12
years. He can know and learn different things in different departments.

VIII.

Recommendations
Intel has done an outstanding job of harnessing the lessons learned in these theories of
motivation. Their use of skill variety, task identity, and task significance have led to employees
experiencing increased meaningfulness at work. Their policy of autonomy has allowed workers
to take increased responsibility for the outcomes of their work. Intels policy of consistent
feedback gives employees critical knowledge of their successes and areas needing improvement.
Intel should continue these practices to maintain motivation and to strengthen their greatest asset
as a company - the people. The outcomes of Intels use of these core job characteristics from the
Job Characteristic Model has ultimately led to high intrinsic motivation for employees, high
levels of work effectiveness, and a large degree of overall job satisfaction.
To further enhance the level of motivation within the organization, Intel should identify
what is causing some employees to feel promotions are too hard to attain. As stated above, when
employees feel rewards are not obtainable, this leads to a decrease in motivation. If Intel
employees are feeling this way due to ambiguity on how to get promoted, Intel should create a
way to clearly communicate the organization's promotion process and what is expected from the

employees. These guidelines should be organized in a timeline fashion per department with
employee expectations for each desired role clearly defined. These perceptions could also be due
to employees not getting honest feedback during performance reviews. For example, an
employee who is performing on a mediocre level may be getting feedback that they are doing
well. This could be due to a variety of reasons, possibly due to managers with high affiliation
needs or tendency to avoid conflict. In order to decrease such behavior, Intel should reward
managers who are able to effectively develop and strengthen their subordinates into individuals
who are able to take on leadership roles within the company. In detail, this reward system will
track the progress of department managers level of employees engaged in leadership roles
within their department teams. Thus, this implementation will aim to increase management
motivation to increase employee leaders, as well as decreasing the level of unattainability for
employee promotional goals. One quality of a great manager/leader is one who can successfully
develop others into great leaders, therefore development of employees should also be an
important part of the organization's performance evaluation of their management.

IX.

Conclusion
According to the Annual Review of Psychology, the study of all aspects of an employees
motivation has allowed for an increase in prediction, understanding, and influencing workplace
motivation (Latham & Pinder, 2005). Furthermore, although many theories exist on the subject
of workplace motivation, few have had the same groundbreaking impact of Locke & Lathams
goal-setting theory, Vrooms expectancy theory, or Maslows need theory.
Intel, as a company has established themselves as a great example of how a tech company
can motivate their employees intrinsically and extrinsically. While, mastering meeting employee
satisfaction levels and high expectations. The continuation in implementing the Expectancy
theory, in addition of the Job Characteristics model will result favorable outcomes for the tech
giant.With minor improvements of recommended implementations stated above will take Intel to
a new level in regards to motivation.

X.

Appendix

Interview Questions
Extrinsic / Intrinsic Motivational Factors
1. How often are employees promoted or reassigned to other departments?
2. Do lower echelon employees directly contribute to the evolution of the companys policies?
3. Are there any perceived glass ceilings in the corporate structure?
4. How well does the company treat its employees?
5. How stressful is the workplace environment?
6. How are employees given recognition?
7. Are there opportunities for employee growth and advancement - (What does this timeline look
like?)
8. Are Intels employees given increased responsibility on tasks? Does their daily work vary,
(creating interest)?
9. What motivates ( motivated for past employees) you as an Intel employee? Has the level of
motivation evolved or changed with time at Intel?
10. How does Intel create a motivating environment for its employees?
11. Are there bonuses? if so how often? (quarterly, semi-annually, christmas, etc..)
12. What does a typical shift look like? (hours, lengths of breaks, how many breaks?)
13. Does the company offer opportunities to further education? if so, how?
14. are there any amenities at work? (GYM, Sleeping rooms, showers, TVs, etc..)
15. Do you feel proud to say you work for your company? explain.
16. Do you feel Intel had/have strong incentives(rewards) for employees to maximize their
performance? What were those incentives? What are other efforts Intel has made to create a high
performing environment, whether that be through positive or negative consequences?

17. From your experience, are performance driven rewards (promotions, bonuses, etc.) applied
consistently or do you feel politics or other non-performance factors have a greater influence
than level of performance itself?
18. Do you feel that your hard work gets acknowledged or do you feel it goes unnoticed most of
the time from management? In other words, do you receive mostly critiques about what you
should have done better/improve on than positive feedback and encouragement from what you
did do well?
19. How is your performance evaluated what aspects are employees evaluated on? Do you feel
your evaluation is fair and consistent?
20. What do you enjoy most about your job?

Works Cited
Bauer, T., & Erdogan, B. (2015). Organizational Behavior Version 2.0. Washington: Flat World
Knowledge, Inc.
Cho, Y. J., & Perry, J. L. (2012). Intrinsic Motivation and Employee Attitudes: Role of
Managerial Trustworthiness, Goal Directedness, and Extrinsic Reward Expectancy.
Review of Public Personnel Administration, 32(4), 382-406. Retrieved February 2016,
from http://rop.sagepub.com
Eckhardt, A., Laumer, S., Maier, C., & T, &. W. (2016). The effect of personality of IT
personnel's job-related attitudes: establishing a dispositional model of turnover intention
across IT job types. Journal Of Information Technology (Palgrave Macmillan), 31(1), \

48-66. Retrieved February 2016, from doi:10.1057/jit.2014.27

Fishbach, A., & Wilhelm, H. (2015). Nudging Self-Control: A Smartphone Intervention of
Temptation Anticipation and Goal Resolution Improves Everyday Goal Progress.
Motivation Science, 1(3), 137-150. Retrieved March 2016, from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/mot0000022
Hye Jung, Y., Sun Young, S., & Jin Nam, C. (2015). Mechanisms Underlying Creative
Performance: Employee Perceptions of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Rewards For Creativity.
Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 43(7), 1161-1179. Retrieved
February 2016, from doi:10.2224/sbp.2015.43.7.1161
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. Retrieved
February 2016
Latham, G. P., & Pinder, C. C. (2005, February). Work Motivation Theory and Research at the
Dawn of the Twenty-First Century. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 485-516.
Retrieved February 2016
LZROIU, G. (2015). WORK MOTIVATION AND ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR.
Contemporary Readings In Law & Social Justice, 7(2), 66-75. Retrieved February 2016
Lin, H.-F. (2007). Effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on employee knowledge sharing
intentions. Journal of Information Science, 1-15. Retrieved March 2016
Thomas, K. W., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognitive Elements of Empowerment: An
"Interpretive" Model of Intrinsic Task Motivation. Academy of Management Review,
15(4), 666-681. Retrieved February 2016
CAMPION, M. A., CHERASKIN, L., & STEVENS, M. J. (1994). CAREER-RELATED

ANTECEDENTS AND OUTCOMES OF JOB ROTATION. Academy Of Management

Journal, 37(6), 1518-1542. doi:10.2307/256797
Bhuvanaiah, T., & Raya, R. P. (2015). Mechanism of Improved Performance: Intrinsic
Motivation and Employee Engagement. SCMS Journal Of Indian Management, 12(4),
92-97.
Gallup. (2013). Worldwide, 13% of Employees Are Engaged at Work.Gallup Institution,
Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/poll/165269/worldwideemployees-engagedwork.aspx