Labor Motivation and its Endogenous Level

  • Authors

    • V. N. Scherbakov
    • A. V. Dubrovsky
    • I. V. Makarova
    • A. I. Zotova
    • E. E. Nakhratova
    2018-12-03
    https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.38.24600
  • Development, Economic activity, Economic growth, Efficiency, Endogenous level, Motivation, Policy.
  • The article reveals key problems of motivational mechanisms that ensure economic growth, considering factor influences, including the endogenous level of a person. Efficiency of production and economic activity is considered from the viewpoint of revealing of the internal nature of person’s motivational interests. The article reveals general framework of labor motivation as a science of effective management of structurally connected technical and technological as well as organizational and economic structures, where the necessity for self-regulation of labor activity to build dynamic multilevel relations is justified. The endogenous level of motivational interests is considered through the prism of the integrity of personal development, where the supreme goal is not only political and economic interests, but also moral ones. Justifying the fundamental approaches to the labor management in terms of efficiency (optimality), very important is taking into account the potential opportunities, since from the perspective of optimal use of labor resources, development of economic potential is the determinative element in the achievement of the performance measure (economic value and benefit). The development of value orientations and performance indicators is exactly the way that allows reflecting the limitations of existing methodological approaches to the mobilization of labor resources in the mechanism of economic management. Considering a new approach to labor motivation from the perspective of organizational and economic science, the main mechanism, as a rule, is the principle of the maximum viability of a one or another labor process regulation system. An alternative to this approach can be only the socio-economic system that meets the principles of optimal construction of economic interests and evaluation of each element in the overall results of production activities. Bringing such an optimum control action is almost impossible without the regulatory role of the state, because the socio-psychological motives of behavior are the driving force of decisions made, and therefore cannot reveal the effectiveness of labor potential and its motivational component, which would contribute to the confirmation of the principles of rational labor construction. The basic principle of labor motivation from the standpoint of optimization should be the labor theory of value and utility as the basis of value and labor economic motivations, revealing the economic nature of costs and the function of economic value and utility at the endogenous level of social and labor relations.

     

     


     
  • References

    1. [1] Nakhratova EE, Ilina IY, Zotova AI, Urzha OA & Starostenkov NV (2017), Analysis of the relevance of educational programs for applicants and the labor market. European Research Studies Journal 20(3), 649-659.

      [2] Evstratova T, Shalashnikova V, Starostenkov N, Nakhratova E, Zotova A & Ziroyan M (2016), Practical aspects of volunteer movement development in Moscow. Research Journal of Pharmaceutical, Biological and Chemical Sciences 7(3), 2073-2081.

      [3] Strielkowski W & Höschle F (2015), Evidence for economic convergence in the EU: The analysis of past EU enlargements. Technological and Economic Development of Economy 22(4), 617-630.

      [4] Nakhratova EE, Ilina IYu, Zotova AI, Stepanov MS & Dusenko SV (2017), Modern peculiarities of SWOT analysis when taking management decisions by Russian top managers. International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research 15(7), 187-194.

      [5] Rogach OV, Frolova EV & Ryabova TM (2017), Academic competition: Rating race. European Journal of Contemporary Education 6(2), 297-307.

      [6] Kryukova EM, Makeeva DR, Atamanova MA & Shadskaja IG (2013), Financial mechanism of housing and utilities infrastructure. Life Science Journal, 10(4), 790-794.

      [7] Zaernzhuk VM, Kryukova EM, Bokareva EV & Chernikova LI (2014), Study of theoretical approaches to banking financial intermediation and directions of its development in Russia and abroad. World Applied Sciences Journal 30(12), 1746-1748.

      [8] Apanasyuk LA, Egorova EN, Kryukova EM, Mosalev AI & Mukhomorova IV (2017), Socio-ecological education as a factor of economic development. SGEM International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conference on Social Sciences and Arts 1-3, 971-978.

      [9] Shcherbakov VN, Kireev SV, Litvinenko IL, Zelinskaya MV & Fateva SV (2017). Economic clusters: Concepts and characteristic features. International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research 15, 123-132.

      [10] Rogach OV, Frolova EV, Demina SV & Ryabova TM (2018), Gamification use for government authority employee training. Espacios 39(22), 31-41.

      [11] Shkurkin D, Ryazantsev S, Gusakov N, Andronova I & Bolgova V (2016), The Republic of Kazakhstan in the system of international regional integration associations. International Review of Management and Marketing 6(6), 174-179.

      [12] Steiner M (1998), Clusters and regional specialization. London: Pion.

      [13] Frolova EV, Ryabova TM & Rogach OV (2017), Bureaucrat image in Russia. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics 8, 3(25), 52-59.

      [14] Roelandt T & Den Hertog P (1999), Boosting innovation. Paris: OECD Publications, 9-23.

      [15] Simonin PV, Bogacheva TV, Sopilko NYu, Kutlyeva GM, Vetrova EA & Povorina EV (2017), Institutional traps of wages and income inequality. Journal of Applied Economic Sciences 12(8), (54), 2202-2217.

      [16] Porter M (1998), On competition. Boston, MA: Harvard Businesss School Pub, 1998.

      [17] Gumerov AV, Mukhomorova IV, Sadykova RR, Fatikhova LE, Chikisheva NM, Simonova LM & Alenina EE (2015), The program client voice as a tool of business structure innovations. Journal of Sustainable Development 8(3), 263-270.

      [18] Latham W (1976), Locational behavior in manufacturing industries. Boston, MA: Springer US.

      [19] Le Heron R & Harrington J (2005), New economic spaces: New economic geographies. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Pub Co.

      [20] Groen A, New technology-based firms in the new millennium. UK: Bingley, Emerald, 2012.

      [21] Shcherbakov VN, Korsakov MN, Shichiyakh RA, Kireev VS & Bondarchuk NV (2017), Research project management as the main tool of innovative management. International Journal of Applied Business and Economic Research 15(3), 1-11.

      [22] Hong S, Oxley L, McCann P & Le T (2016), Why firm size matters: Investigating the drivers of innovation and economic performance in New Zealand using the business operations survey. Applied Economics 48(55), 5379-5395.

      [23] Crouch C (2001), Local production systems in Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 161-211.

      [24] Bogoviz AV, Ragulina YV & Kutukova ES (2016), Economic zones as a factor of increased economic competitiveness of the region. International Journal of Economics and Financial Issues 6(8), special issue, 1-6.

      [25] Centonze A (2010), Transitional cluster development: A case study from the New York wine industry. Economic Development Quarterly 24(3), 251-260.

      [26] Bolnokin V, Storozhev V, Vasilenko S, Kobersy I, Shkurkin D & Evtushenko V (2016), Model for optimization elements system. International Journal of Applied Engineering Research 11(4), 2879-2884.

      [27] Gladkaya EA, Egorova EN & Torsunova ER (2017), Using economic and mathematical methods during formation of construction cluster. Contributions to Economics, 243-250.

  • Downloads

  • How to Cite

    N. Scherbakov, V., V. Dubrovsky, A., V. Makarova, I., I. Zotova, A., & E. Nakhratova, E. (2018). Labor Motivation and its Endogenous Level. International Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7(4.38), 442-446. https://doi.org/10.14419/ijet.v7i4.38.24600