In the research conducted, motivation and flexibility play a key role in getting job performance and as a result in the financial success of the organization. But how strong should be motivation and how should you use flexibility in order to get higher productivity/performance at work? In the absence of flexible working procedures, the company can reach a critical situation. Therefore, the aim of the research is to show that flexibility helps increase job performance. Moreover, flexibility can become a consistent "non-financial motivation" for the employees of an organization. Analysing the relationship between the two concepts, motivation and flexibility, our study shows we can achieve the desired performance, according to objectives.
Keywords: Flexibilitymotivationproductivity and work performancestrategic managementhuman resources management
A less flexible company can meet critical issues with motivation and retention of employees who,
although well-paid decide to leave in mass. It is known that the granting of material and financial
incentives without more flexible internal procedures is not enough to motivate the employees of a
company. Therefore, the study has proposed and demonstrates that organizational procedures and
flexibility play a key role in eliminating routine and stress, resulting in increased productivity and, of
course, performance of the organization, all this without changing the set of (negotiated) financial
motivations for employees. Well designed and crafted, flexibility can become indirectly a non-financial
motivation with real benefits for both employees and the organization.
Literature on Flexibility
Different authors have paid particular interest to the study of dimension of organizational flexibility
(Nandakumar, Jharkharia & Abhilash, 2014; Sanchez, 2004; Volberda, Rutges, 1999), others have
studied the links between company size and flexibility (Kraatz & Zajac, 2001; Ebben & Johnson,
2005).The literature is still looking for patterns that show us undoubtedly the effect of applying
flexibility on organizations. Successful companies apply more or less consciously flexible procedures
and usually benefit from a suitable economic success and to achieve the desired performance.
Flexibility is a major dimension of business excellence and deals with a paradoxical view point such as
stability and dynamism, continuity and change, centralization and decentralization and so on. It needs
to be managed at the levels of people, process, technology and various business functions and it is
important to create people flexibility to initiate and manage flexibility in processes and technologies in
order to support flexible business requirements (Sushil, Kanika & Singh, 2016).Other authors focus on
the challenges of capacity building for flexible work organizations and demonstrates how business
enterprises practice reactive flexible capacity (in the form of adaptation and responsiveness) to cope
with changing and uncertain business environments (Bran, Militaru & Ionescu, 2015; Sushil, Connel &
Burgess, 2016).Flexibility can be thought of as an ability of the enterprise to quickly and efficiently
respond to market changes and to bring new products and services quickly to the market place using a
flexible information systems (Bran, 2015). Beyond this definition, a truly flexible enterprise should
proactively change the market through its ability to create new and innovative products and services
(Sushil, Stohr & Edward, 2014).A company’s competitiveness will depend, in order to grow
performance, using training of employees (Bran, Udrea & Ionescu, 2015) on their innovative ability
(radical change) which represents a balance between exploration and exploitation that is being efficient
in organizational routines (incremental change). Under these conditions, the organizations should
develop new dynamic processes that enable a fast reconfiguration of the resources base (Helfat et. al.,
2007; Eisenhardt & Martin, 2000). Flexibility is not a static condition, but it is a dynamic process.
Time is a very essential factor of organizational flexibility (Volberda, 1998).
Literature on Motivation
To try building a list of reasons why people engage in various actions is impossible, but we can try to
name a few: the desire to get something, comparison and social pressure, personal aspirations, desire for
success, routine, increase self-esteem, and so on. According to Goleman D., ”If people's emotions are
channelled to enthusiasm, performance is born; if people feel constrained and anxious, they will lose their
efficiency‟. As long as they not satisfied, they create an internal tension that stimulates the individual,
leading him to a conduct which seeks satisfaction of needs and the relieving of pressure (Zlate, 2004).
We can make a distinction between work programs that are based on organizational needs and those
that are based on employees' needs (Goudswaard, Oeji, Brugman & Jong, 2009). While company
oriented flexibility can be associated basically with economic growth through increased company
performance, employees oriented flexibility may be associated with social cohesion by improving the
balance between work and personal life in different stages of life. Without flexibility, keeping the same
set of motivations for employees, a company can get to lose its success. The causes are multiple.
Flexibility measures will take employees out of their routine and they will feel useful professionally
and gain the mental fulfillment they need. The rule is that motivations negotiated with employees be
attractive to them. Amplification of motivations will be offered by means of measures to increase
flexibility across the organization.
A successful company will continuously adapt and improve its working processes and procedures to
market demands. Creativity helps solve and identify problems by using the most appropriate methods
(Ionescu, 2013). Failure to adapt to market demands denotes stiffness and this "disease" can lead to
company failure - insolvency or bankruptcy. It often happens in a company for employees, although
they are well paid and enjoy a set of satisfactory financial motivations (bonuses, subscription to fitness
clubs, medical clinics, car service etc.) to leave the company. The reasons are linked to the working
environment and procedures. If the company procedures are incorrectly designed, unsuitable and
outdated, they generate stress and routine. That is why employees feel dissatisfied, have internal
conflicts sabotaging each other and prefer to work individually. When they cannot bear the working
atmosphere anymore, they leave the company. The organization has significant losses, especially in
staff turnover, overqualified and difficult to replace. All because of obsolete, unnecessary and stressful
working procedures (fig no.2).
There are common areas of health worker motivation that should be considered by managers and
policy makers, particularly the importance of non-financial motivators such as working environment
and skill development opportunities. But managers also need to focus on the importance of locally
assessing conditions and managing incentives to ensure health workers are motivated in their work
(Peters et. al., 2010).
"Change" versus "Flexibility"
The concept of flexibility is a term appearing in literature in the 70s. It's a relatively new term that
arouses enough controversy, as it is often equated with the notion of "change".
- What is the difference? Is “change” the forerunner of “flexibility”!
We say that an organization has become more flexible because it has made in time some significant
changes in its structure. In this case, flexibility is the effect of changes made in time. Usually, the
concept of flexibility is designed as having a positive effect on the organization. The specification is
important because in a negative way we can identify only the rigidity of the organization. Also, we can
add that change is a cause and flexibility an effect.
The Scope of Research
The scope of research is to show that, in terms of management, flexibility plays an important role in
the organization, eliminating rigidity, in order for it to develop harmoniously in economic terms.
The Objective of Research
The objective of the research is to prove that by implementing flexibility, we achieve superior
results in productivity and company performance compared to the period prior to the study.
Implementation of flexibility in the procedures of an organization department becomes an excellent
form of non-financial motivation.
Methodology and Hypothesis of Research
The steps of research were structured as follows:
a)Choosing an organization and identifying the need for flexibility in a department;
b)Analysis and identification of the rigid procedures of the department which block increasing of
work productivity and hence the overall performance;
c)Identify the set of motivations offered to employees, deciding to preserve or change them;
d)Application of appropriate statistical methods for identifying and establishing the pressing needs
that could help streamline outdated procedures of the studied department;
e)Employee involvement in flexibility process by choosing the best measures that could improve
procedures at work;
f)Implementation of flexibility by putting into practice the proposals of employees and improving
working procedure so that the resulting new procedure should lead to better results;
g)Measurement of productivity of the reference sample before and after implementation of flexibility
at the level of procedures;
h)Comparison of results and issuing conclusions.
Adding Flexibility to the Motivation for improving the Productivity and Performance
A company from the automotive industry whose major problem was the migration of staff was
chosen. Although employees were well paid, they left the organization after a period of time. High staff
turnover generated significant losses for the company. For the research, we selected a particular
department with major issues (low productivity and performance), which had 30 employees. To
identify the need for flexibility, the 30 employees were involved in the decision making. They were
questioned about what would help them to improve their performances and productivity in the
workplace. The company has held several brainstorming sessions, during which they collected several
proposals from among employees. Among them were selected a no. of 8 proposals deemed most
relevant and aimed an acute need for flexibility.However, the budget allowed the implementation of
only 4 of them, but they knew which ones are the best measures to be put into practice (according to
the annual budget planning).
The research was conducted over a period of 6 months, between September 1, 2015 - 01 March
The method of collecting information was through direct observation. Also, in researching the
phenomenon Likert Scale was used for questionnaires and non-parametric Wilcoxon test for data
analysis, suitable for testing ranks on dependent samples (two measurements on the same subjects).
Hypotheses of Research
Research hypotheses were structured in relation to the research objectives, as follows:
Implementation of Flexibility
Step I. Find the most representative proposals to resolve a problem
In solving the identified problems creativity plays an important role (Ionescu, 2013). To analyse the
preferences of 30 employees on flexibility measures of a department at the company,
proposals. Thus, it proposed a ranking with most important measures to be finally implemented (table.
results in descending order, the top four positions being highlighted in the text (table.
So, we have two situations:
1.36+1.23+1.16+1.10+1.06+1.03+0.90+0.76 = 8.6/8 = 1.08 (1)
1.36+1.23+1.16+1.10+1.06 = 4.85/4 =1.21 (2)
Step II. Use Wilcoxon signed-rank test
The company has implemented the flexibility measures (mentioned in Table
Evaluation was performed in two stages: before or after implementation of the package of measures aimed at increasing flexibility in the activity of the department.
Thus, the quarterly employee productivity was scored from 0 to 10 for each employee. In the experiment, the same level of motivation offered to employees was kept (Table
The next step was to calculate the difference between the two measurements (table.
Differences are classified in the absolute value increasing ranks after eliminating null differences
and each is assigned a rank based on actual number. The rank is calculated as the average rank values
that would be obtained if they were equal (ex. 1+2+…12/12=6,5).
We thus have table.
We then calculate the sum of ranks of positive differences [T+], (formula 3) and the sum of ranks for
negative differences [T-], (formula 4):
The results recorded on the representative sample of 30 employees before and after the
implementation of flexibility are shown in Tables
(the sum of the numbers in Table 6),
rankings), turns into variable
0,00005 which is lower than 0.5, which means that the null hypothesis is rejected and we conclude that
the implementation of flexibility measures had a positive impact on work productivity, and T+ being
significantly higher than T- we can say that the effect was impressive. The solution analysed and
presented in this article is practical and can be used in organizations.
By "set of motivations" (fig. no. 2) we understand keeping financial and material incentives
provided to the employees by the company: high salary, car and phone, performance bonuses and
health cards. In the present study we considered that these incentives are sufficient and it was not
necessary to change their amount. The research was focused on creating non-financial motivations
that result from improving department procedures. The 30 employees were involved in the decision
making on new procedures that would satisfy them (brainstorming and Likert Scale). Through job
performance in this research we understand work productivity and indirectly the performance of the
observed department and the organization as a whole. The statistical methods used were considered
sufficient for research, noting that other statistical tools can be useful to capture more accurately the
variety of situations in which flexibility can be used.
In our research we tested if flexibility, added to a current set of motivations, plays a key role in
achieving job productivity and performance and as a result the success of the organization. The
presented modelis inspired from practices of the market and it can be adapted and implemented in the
departments of a company by specialized personnel, as a practical method in managerial activities.
In the research we tested H0 and H1 (see Hypotheses of Research) to see which of them is to be rejected and which to be preserved. As a result, the
- Nandakumar, M. K., Jharkharia, S. N., Abhilash, S. (2014). Organizational Flexibility and Competitiveness. eBook ISBN 978-81-322-1668-1. India: Springer.
- Sanchez, R. (2004). Understanding competence-based management: Identifying and managing five modes of competence. Journal of Business Research 57(5): 518.
- Volberda, H.W., & Rutges, A. (1999). FARSYS: a knowledge-based system for managing strategic change. Decision Support Systems, 26: 99–123.
- Kraatz, M.S., Zajac, E.J. (2001). How organizational resources affect strategic change and performance in turbulent environments: Theory and evidence. Organization Science 12(5).
- Ebben, J.J., Johnson, A.C. (2005). Efficiency, flexibility, or both? Evidence linking strategy to performance in small firms. Strategic Management Journal 26(13).
- Sushil, B., Kanika, T., Singh, S. P. (2016). Managing Flexibility, People, Process, Technology and Business. eBook ISBN 978-81-322-2380-1. India: Springer.
- Bran, C., Militaru, G., & Ionescu, S. (2015, October). Cybermarketing, a key driver for the improvement of flexibility in the sales process of a company. In International Conference on Management and Industrial Engineering (No. 7, p. 91). Niculescu Publishing House.
- Sushil, Connell, J., Burgess, J. (2016). Flexible Work Organizations, The Challenges of Capacity Building in Asia. India: Springer.
- Bran, C. (2015, December). The Flexibilization of Information Systems. FAIMA Business & Management Journal, 3(4): 64.
- Sushil, Stohr, E.A., Edward A. (2014). The Flexible Enterprise. eBook ISBN 978-81-322-1560-8. India: Springer.
- Bran, C., Udrea, C. I., & Ionescu, S. (2015, October). The training of employees, a key driver for increasing organizational flexibility and profitability. In International Conference on Management and Industrial Engineering (No. 7, p. 103). Niculescu Publishing House.
- Helfat, C., Finkelstein, S., Mitchell, W., Peteraf, M., Singh, H., Teece, D. and Winter, S. (2007). Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations. Malden: Blackwell Publishing,.
- Eisenhardt, K.M., Martin, J.A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal 21(10/11).
- Volberda, H.W. (1998). Building the Flexible Firm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Zlate, M. (2004). Treaty of Organizational and Managerial Psychology. ISBN: 973-681-680-X, Iasi, Romania: Publisher Polirom.
- Goudswaard, A., Oeij, P., Brugman, T., Jong, T. de (2009). Good practice guide to internal flexibility policies in companies. Available on 12.04.2016 at web address http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/publication.
- Ionescu, S.C. (2013). The Architecture of Quality. ISBN: 978-606-515-441-4. Bucharest: Publisher Politehnica Press.
- Peters, D.H., Chakraborty, S., Mahapatra, P., Steinhardt, L. (2010). Job satisfaction and motivation of health workers in public and private sectors: cross-sectional analysis from two Indian states, Human Resources for Health. Online ISSN 1478-4491. BioMed Central.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
About this article
18 December 2019
Print ISBN (optional)
Communication, communication studies, social interaction, moral purpose of education, social purpose of education
Cite this article as:
Bran, C., & Udrea, C. -. I. (2019). The Influence of Motivation and Flexibility on Job Performance. In A. Sandu, T. Ciulei, & A. Frunza (Eds.), Logos Universality Mentality Education Novelty, vol 15. European Proceedings of Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 135-143). Future Academy. https://doi.org/10.15405/epsbs.2016.09.17