Adams Equity Theory Pdf

10.01.2020admin

The Adam’s Equity Theory was proposed by John Stacey Adams, and is based on the following assumptions: Individuals make contributions (inputs) for which they expect certain rewards (outcomes). To validate the exchange, an individual compares his input and outcomes with those of others and try to rectify the inequality.
Adams used the term 'referent' others to describe the reference points or people with whom we compare our own situation, which is the pivotal part of the theory. Adams Equity Theory goes beyond - and is quite different from merely assessing effort and reward.
Stacey Adams equity theory; Stacey Adams equity theory. John Stacey Adams' equity theory helps explain why pay and conditions alone do not determine motivation. It also explains why giving one person a promotion or pay-rise can have a demotivating effect on others.
Inequity exists for an individual when he or she perceives an imbalance in the ratio between outcomes (reward for work) and inputs (efforts at work) as other workers outputs and incomes According to www.whatishumanresource.com (n.a), equity theory was first developed by John Stacey Adams, a workplace and behavioral psychologist, in 1963.

Adams Theory Of Equity
Exchange Theory
Adam's Equity Theory Diagram
Adams Equity Theory Pdf
Adams Theory Of Inequity

Equity theory focuses on determining whether the distribution of resources is fair to both relational partners. Equity is measured by comparing the ratio of contributions (or costs) and benefits (or rewards) for each person.^[1] Considered one of the justice theories, equity theory was first developed in the 1960s by J. Stacy Adams, a workplace and behavioral psychologist, who asserted that employees seek to maintain equity between the inputs that they bring to a job and the outcomes that they receive from it against the perceived inputs and outcomes of others (Adams, 1963). According to Equity Theory, in order to maximize individuals' rewards, we tend to create systems where resources can be fairly divided amongst members of a group. Inequalities in relationships will cause those within it to be unhappy to a degree proportional to the amount of inequality.^[2] The belief is that people value fair treatment which causes them to be motivated to keep the fairness maintained within the relationships of their co-workers and the organization. The structure of equity in the workplace is based on the ratio of inputs to outcomes. Inputs are the contributions made by the employee for the organization.

Applying Adams’ Equity Theory to employee engagement. Looking back over our series, Adams’ equity theory ties in closely with those of Maslow and Herzberg.However, Equity Theory takes a less straightforward and more fluid approach than previous models; the employee can be content with their situation one day, but feel defeated the next. Considered one of the justice theories, equity theory was first developed in the 1960s by J. Stacy Adams, a workplace and behavioral psychologist, who asserted that employees seek to maintain equity between the inputs that they bring to a job and the outcomes that they receive from it against the perceived inputs and outcomes of others (Adams.

Sended to space. And that last tank? Scorched earth dos download free.

1Background
- 1.2Inputs and outcomes
2In business
3Criticisms and related theories

Background[edit]

Equity theory focuses on determining whether the distribution of resources is fair to both relational partners. It proposes that individuals who perceive themselves as either under-rewarded or over-rewarded will experience distress, and that this distress leads to efforts to restore equity within the relationship. It focuses on determining whether the distribution of resources is fair to both relational partners. Equity is measured by comparing the ratios of contributions and benefits of each person within the relationship. Partners do not have to receive equal benefits (such as receiving the same amount of love, care, and financial security) or make equal contributions (such as investing the same amount of effort, time, and financial resources), as long as the ratio between these benefits and contributions is similar. Much like other prevalent theories of motivation, such as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, equity theory acknowledges that subtle and variable individual factors affect each person’s assessment and perception of their relationship with their relational partners (Guerrero et al., 2005). According to Adams (1965), anger is induced by underpayment inequity and guilt is induced with overpayment equity (Spector 2008). Payment whether hourly wage or salary, is the main concern and therefore the cause of equity or inequity in most cases.

In any position, an employee wants to feel that their contributions and work performance are being rewarded with their pay. If an employee feels underpaid then it will result in the employee feeling hostile towards the organization and perhaps their co-workers, which may result in the employee not performing well at work anymore. It is the subtle variables that also play an important role in the feeling of equity. Just the idea of recognition for the job performance and the mere act of thanking the employee will cause a feeling of satisfaction and therefore help the employee feel worthwhile and have better outcomes.

Definition of equity[edit]

Individuals compare their job inputs and outcomes with those of others and then respond to eliminate any perceived inequities.Referent Comparisons:

Inputs and outcomes[edit]

Inputs[edit]

Inputs are defined as each participant’s contributions to the relational exchange and are viewed as entitling him/her to rewards or costs. The inputs that a participant contributes to a relationship can be either assets – entitling him/her to rewards – or liabilities - entitling him/her to costs. The entitlement to rewards or costs ascribed to each input vary depending on the relational setting. In industrial settings, assets such as capital and manual labor are seen as 'relevant inputs' – inputs that legitimately entitle the contributor to rewards. In social settings, assets such as physical beauty and kindness are generally seen as assets entitling the possessor to social rewards. Individual traits such as boorishness and cruelty are seen as liabilities entitling the possessor to costs (Walster, Traupmann & Walster, 1978). Inputs typically include any of the following:

education
experience
Effort
Hard Work
Commitment
Ability
Adaptability
Determination
Personal sacrifice
Trust in superiors
Support from co-workers and colleagues
Skill

Outcomes[edit]

Adams Theory Of Equity

Outputs are defined as the positive and negative consequences that an individual perceives a participant has incurred as a consequence of his/her relationship with another. When the ratio of inputs to outputs is close, then the employee should have much satisfaction with their job. Outputs can be both tangible and intangible.^[3] Typical outputs include any of the following:

Expenses
Recognition
Sense of achievement
Praise
Thanks
Stimuli

Propositions[edit]

Equity theory consists of four propositions:

The permit is valid for one year. Please note that these tests are available only in English and translation is not permitted. Class 3 drivers license. Driving as a Class 3 LearnerOnce you pass the Class 3 Knowledge Test, we will stamp your permit and you can use the permit (with your Driver’s License) to operate vehicles which require a Class 3 Driver’s License as a learner (with a supervising driver).

self-inside: Individuals seek to maximize their outcomes (where outcomes are defined as rewards minus costs).^[4]
self-outside: Groups can maximize collective rewards by developing accepted systems for equitably apportioning rewards and costs among members. Systems of equity will evolve within groups, and members will attempt to induce other members to accept and adhere to these systems. The only way groups can induce members to equitably behave is by making it more profitable to behave equitably than inequitably. Thus, groups will generally reward members who treat others equitably and generally punish (increase the cost for) members who treat others inequitably.
others-inside: When individuals find themselves participating in inequitable relationships, they become distressed. The more inequitable the relationship, the more distress individuals feel. According to equity theory, both the person who gets 'too much' and the person who gets 'too little' feel distressed. The person who gets too much may feel guilt or shame. The person who gets too little may feel angry or humiliated.
other-outside: Individuals who perceive that they are in an inequitable relationship attempt to eliminate their distress by restoring equity. The greater the inequity, the more distress people feel and the more they try to restore equity. (Walster, Traupmann and Walster, 1978)

Exchange Theory

In business[edit]

Equity theory has been widely applied to business settings by industrial psychologists to describe the relationship between an employee's motivation and his or her perception of equitable or inequitable treatment. In a business setting, the relevant dyadic relationship is that between employee and employer. As in marriage and other contractual dyadic relationships, equity theory assumes that employees seek to maintain an equitable ratio between the inputs they bring to the relationship and the outcomes they receive from it (Adams, 1965). Equity theory in business, however, introduces the concept of social comparison, whereby employees evaluate their own input/output ratios based on their comparison with the input/outcome ratios of other employees (Carrell and Dittrich, 1978). Inputs in this context include the employee’s time, expertise, qualifications, experience, intangible personal qualities such as drive and ambition, and interpersonal skills. Outcomes include monetary compensation, perquisites ('perks'), benefits, and flexible work arrangements. Employees who perceive inequity will seek to reduce it, either by distorting inputs and/or outcomes in their own minds ('cognitive distortion'), directly altering inputs and/or outcomes, or leaving the organization (Carrell and Dittrich, 1978). These perceptions of inequity are perceptions of organizational justice, or more specifically, injustice. Subsequently, the theory has wide-reaching implications for employee morale, efficiency, productivity, and turnover.

Assumptions of equity theory applied to business[edit]

Adam's Equity Theory Diagram

The three primary assumptions applied to most business applications of equity theory can be summarized as follows:

Employees expect a fair return for what they contribute to their jobs, a concept referred to as the 'equity norm'.
Employees determine what their equitable return should be after comparing their inputs and outcomes with those of their coworkers. This concept is referred to as 'social comparison'.
Employees who perceive themselves as being in an inequitable situation will seek to reduce the inequity either by distorting inputs and/or outcomes in their own minds ('cognitive distortion'), by directly altering inputs and/or outputs, or by leaving the organization. (Carrell and Dittrich, 1978)

Implications for managers[edit]

Equity theory has several implications for business managers:

People measure the totals of their inputs and outcomes. This means a working mother may accept lower monetary compensation in return for more flexible working hours.
Different employees ascribe personal values to inputs and outcomes. Thus, two employees of equal experience and qualification performing the same work for the same pay may have quite different perceptions of the fairness of the deal.
Employees are able to adjust for purchasing power and local market conditions. Thus a teacher from Alberta may accept lower compensation than his colleague in Toronto if his cost of living is different, while a teacher in a remote African village may accept a totally different pay structure.
Although it may be acceptable for more senior staff to receive higher compensation, there are limits to the balance of the scales of equity and employees can find excessive executive pay demotivating.
Staff perceptions of inputs and outcomes of themselves and others may be incorrect, and perceptions need to be managed effectively.
An employee who believes he is overcompensated may increase his effort. However he may also adjust the values that he ascribes to his own personal inputs. It may be that he or she internalizes a sense of superiority and actually decrease his efforts.

Criticisms and related theories[edit]

Criticism has been directed toward both the assumptions and practical application of equity theory. Scholars have questioned the simplicity of the model, arguing that a number of demographic and psychological variables affect people's perceptions of fairness and interactions with others. Furthermore, much of the research supporting the basic propositions of equity theory has been conducted in laboratory settings, and thus has questionable applicability to real-world situations (Huseman, Hatfield & Miles, 1987). Critics have also argued that people might perceive equity/inequity not only in terms of the specific inputs and outcomes of a relationship, but also in terms of the overarching system that determines those inputs and outputs. Thus, in a business setting, one might feel that his or her compensation is equitable to other employees', but one might view the entire compensation system as unfair (Carrell and Dittrich, 1978).

Researchers have offered numerous magnifying and competing perspectives:

Equity sensitivity construct[edit]

The Equity Sensitivity Construct proposes that individuals have different preferences for equity and thus react in different ways to perceived equity and inequity. Preferences can be expressed on a continuum from preferences for extreme under-benefit to preferences for extreme over-benefit. Three archetypal classes are as follows:

Benevolents, those who prefer their own input/outcome ratios to be less than those of their relational partner. In other words, the benevolent prefers to be under-benefitted.
Equity Sensitives, those who prefer their own input/outcome ratios to be equal to those of their relational partner.
Entitleds, those who prefer their own input/outcome ratios to exceed those of their relational partner. In other words, the entitled prefers to be over-benefitted. (Huseman, Hatfield & Miles, 1987)

Fairness model[edit]

The Fairness Model proposes an alternative measure of equity/inequity to the relational partner or 'comparison person' of standard equity theory. According to the Fairness Model, an individual judges the overall 'fairness' of a relationship by comparing their inputs and outcomes with an internally derived standard. The Fairness Model thus allows for the perceived equity/inequity of the overarching system to be incorporated into individuals' evaluations of their relationships (Carrell and Dittrich, 1978).

Game theory[edit]

Behavioral economics has recently started to apply game theory to the study of equity theory. For instance, Gill and Stone (2010) analyze how considerations of equity influence behavior in strategic settings in which people compete and develop the implications for optimal labor contracts.

References[edit]

^Guerrero, Laura K; Peter A. Andersen & Walid A. Afifi. (2014). Close Encounters: Communication in Relationships, 4th Edition. Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications Inc. p. 263. ISBN978-1-4522-1710-9.
^Adams, J.S. (1965). 'Inequality in social exchange'. Advanced Experimental Psychology. 62: 335–343.
^Cook, ed. by Mark; Wilson, Glenn (1979). Love and attraction : an internat. conference(PDF) (1. ed.). Oxford [u. a.]: Pergamon Pr. pp. 309–323. ISBN008022234X. Retrieved 3 June 2012.CS1 maint: extra text: authors list (link)
^E.g. ultimatum games show, that the maximation of outcomes is only one of several objectives for an individual. In order to foster rules desired by an individual, the individual may be willing to sacrifice maximum outcomes. (Bala)

Literature[edit]