The question of what exactly motivates people in an organizational enviornment, like a job, has spawned a number of different theories. Theories of this sort attempt to explain one ingredient in the determination of individual performance. In 1964, V.H. Vroom entertained the notion that people choose particular courses of action based on their perceptions, attitudes, skills, knowledge, experience, personality, abilities and belief structure. This choice, Vroom states, is a consequence of a desire to avoid pain and maximize pleasure. Expectancy theory consists of 3 key components:

Expectancy – Employees must believe their effort can and will get them to a desired performance goal. Instrumentality – Employees must believe that they will actually get a valued reward if a performance goal is met. Valance - The value of a reward according to the individual. Put simply, it's got to be worth it to each employee to put the effort in to meet a performance goal (Institute for Manufacturing, N.D.). Expectancy theory places its emphasis on an individuals perception of their environment and their interactions that arise as a consequence of their personal expectations, assuming individuals are rational people whose aforementioned beliefs, attitudes and perceptions influence their behavior. And rather than attempting to explain the “what” it is that motivates people, expectancy theory seeks an explanation of the process people go through to motivate themselves to achieve the end or value they desire. In short, expectancy theory states the desire to satisfy a need or obtain a reward must be strong enough to make the effort worthwhile to increase performance. Expressed as an equation, Motivational Force (MF) = Expectancy x Instrumentality x Valance (Scholl, N.D.).

In this sceanario, it is obvious that Supervisor A's