What is the Difference Between Expectancy Theory and Equity Theory?

🆚 Go to Comparative Table 🆚

Expectancy Theory and Equity Theory are two distinct motivational theories that attempt to explain human behavior and job satisfaction. The key differences between these two theories are:

  1. Focus: Expectancy Theory focuses on individuals' conscious expectations and their efforts to achieve rewards based on those expectations. In contrast, Equity Theory suggests that people derive job satisfaction by comparing their effort and rewards with others in the organization.
  2. Components: Expectancy Theory consists of three components: valence, expectancy, and instrumentality. Valence refers to the attractiveness of rewards, expectancy is the perceived relationship between effort and performance, and instrumentality is the perceived relationship between performance and rewards. On the other hand, Equity Theory is based on the comparison of an individual's inputs (effort, education, experience, etc.) and outcomes (pay, benefits, status, etc.) with those of their referents (coworkers, generalized others, or themselves over time).
  3. Motivation: According to Expectancy Theory, individuals are motivated to maximize their positive outcomes. They will be motivated to improve their overall job performance if they perceive a positive correlation between their effort, performance, and rewards. In contrast, Equity Theory posits that individuals seek to find balance between their inputs and outcomes. If an individual perceives inequity, they will be motivated to decrease the inequity by either decreasing their performance or seeking more rewards.
  4. Self-interest vs. Equity: Expectancy Theory emphasizes self-interest in the alignment of rewards with employees' wants. In contrast, Equity Theory considers both the equity or inequity within a group and the individual's self-interest.

In summary, Expectancy Theory focuses on individuals' efforts to achieve rewards based on their conscious expectations, while Equity Theory is concerned with the balance between individuals' inputs and outcomes. These theories differ in their components, motivational factors, and emphasis on self-interest versus equity.

Comparative Table: Expectancy Theory vs Equity Theory

Here is a table comparing Expectancy Theory and Equity Theory:

Aspect Expectancy Theory Equity Theory
Focus Self-interest and alignment of rewards with employee's wants. Balance between inputs and outcomes, and fairness within a group.
Variables 1. Expectancy: The belief that effort will lead to acceptable performance.
2. Instrumentality: The performance-reward linkage, or the degree to which the individual believes that performing at a high level will lead to a reward.
3. Valence: The value the individual places on the potential outcome or reward.
1. Effort-to-reward ratio: The comparison of an individual's effort with the rewards received.
2. Equity: The perceived fairness of the reward distribution within a group.
Motivation Individuals seek to maximize their positive outcomes. Individuals derive job satisfaction by comparing their effort and reward with others in the group.
Key Difference Expectancy Theory focuses on the cognitive (rational) process of individuals choosing between alternatives based on their expectations of likely outcomes. Equity Theory suggests that our satisfaction with outcomes depends not only on how we evaluate them in isolation but also on how we evaluate them in comparison with others.

Expectancy Theory, developed by Victor Vroom in 1964, emphasizes self-interest and the alignment of rewards with employee's wants. It focuses on three variables: expectancy, instrumentality, and valence. In contrast, Equity Theory, proposed by J. Stacy Adams, posits that individuals seek to find balance between their inputs (effort) and outcomes (rewards), and also consider the equity or inequity within a group. Equity Theory states that a person should be concerned about the way rewards are distributed, and an equitable distribution gives each person a reward that is proportional to their inputs.