| Course | LDR 306 Organizational Leadership: Building a Performance Culture (LDR/306) |
|---|---|
| Week | 2 |
| Paper type | Motivation analysis |
| Length | about 1,043 words, 4 double-spaced pages plus title page and references |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | University of Phoenix |
| Program | BS in Business |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for LDR 306 Week 2
Paid by the Tow, Driven by Something Else: Motivating Drivers and Dispatchers at a Colorado Towing Company
[Student Name]
University of Phoenix
LDR/306: Organizational Leadership: Building a Performance Culture
Week 2 Assignment
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
Summit Towing and Recovery, its pay plans and its survey results are composites written for a model paper.
Week 1 diagnosed the culture at Summit Towing and Recovery, a composite towing and roadside assistance company with 95 trucks around Denver, and found that it rewards speed while neglecting involvement, safety consistency and the onboarding of new drivers. Average motor club arrival times have risen to 49 minutes, and half of new drivers leave in their first year. The way people are paid is part of the culture. Drivers earn a 25 percent commission on the revenue of each call, plus a small hourly minimum. Dispatchers earn a flat hourly wage. This paper analyzes how these arrangements affect motivation and recommends changes.
Goal-Setting Theory
Locke and Latham (2002) summarized 35 years of studies in which people given a hard, precise target outperformed people told only to do their best. A clear target focuses attention, keeps people trying longer and pushes them to look for smarter ways of working. Their effects are stronger when people are committed, receive feedback on progress and have the ability to reach them. Summit's drivers have no explicit goals beyond taking calls, and dispatchers receive no feedback on average response times.
The Job Characteristics Model
Hackman and Oldham (1976) argued that a job motivates from the inside when it uses a range of skills, lets a person finish a whole piece of work, matters to others, allows freedom in how it is done and shows the worker how well it went. Those features make work feel meaningful, make people feel responsible and tell them how they are doing, which in turn raises motivation and satisfaction. They found support for the model across many jobs. Towing has high task significance, since drivers rescue stranded people, and real skill variety. But drivers have little autonomy, since dispatchers assign every call, and little feedback beyond their paycheck.
Financial Incentives
Jenkins et al. (1998) pooled the results of many studies of pay incentives. Money tied to output went with more output, but it showed no reliable link to better work. The finding fits Summit's commission: drivers are motivated to complete many calls, but nothing in the pay rewards a careful safety setup, a well-secured vehicle or a kind word to a frightened customer.
Rewards and Intrinsic Motivation
Deci et al. (1999) reviewed experiments on how rewards affect intrinsic motivation, the drive to do something because it is satisfying in itself. Tangible rewards that were expected and contingent on doing or completing an interesting task tended to reduce intrinsic motivation, while positive verbal feedback tended to increase it. For drivers who joined because they like helping people and handling heavy equipment, a pay system that turns every call into a commission may crowd out the satisfaction of the work itself.
Evidence From Summit
The engagement survey and pay data supported these concerns. Drivers rated their pay as fair but rated low on feeling that their work was recognized beyond money. Drivers in the top quarter by commission had the most customer complaints about rushed service and the most damage claims. Exit interviews from new drivers mentioned chasing calls without guidance and seeing veterans take the best routes. Dispatchers reported boredom and frustration, with no stake in response times and no say in scheduling.
The pay plan tells drivers that a fast, careless tow is worth exactly as much as a careful one.
Applying Equity Concerns
New drivers also perceived unfairness: veterans received more lucrative calls, such as long-distance tows, because dispatchers knew and trusted them. In equity terms, new drivers compared their effort and rewards with veterans' and felt shortchanged, which may contribute to early turnover.
Recommendation 1: Specific Team and Individual Goals
Each yard will set a monthly goal for average motor club arrival time, with a target of 40 minutes in six months, and post progress weekly. Individual drivers will have goals for customer ratings and safety checklist completion. Dispatchers will share the yard's response time goal, giving them a reason to route well.
Recommendation 2: Revise the Commission
The commission will fall from 25 to 21 percent of revenue, and a monthly quality bonus will be added, worth up to the difference, based on customer ratings, completed safety checklists recorded through the tow app and no damage claims. Dispatchers will receive a monthly bonus tied to yard response time and customer ratings.
Recommendation 3: Redesign the Job
Autonomy will increase by letting experienced drivers claim nearby calls through the app within limits set by dispatch. Feedback will improve through a weekly message showing each driver's ratings and response times. Task significance will be made visible by sharing customer thank-you messages at yard meetings.
Recommendation 4: Fair Call Distribution
A rotation rule will give new drivers a share of long-distance and higher-paying calls once they complete training, addressing equity concerns.
Dispatchers Deserve Their Own Analysis
Dispatchers' motivation problem differs from drivers'. Their work has high task significance, since a good routing decision gets a stranded family help sooner, but they never see the results of their choices. They rarely hear from customers and receive no information about response times. Giving each dispatcher a weekly summary of the calls they routed, with arrival times and ratings, would supply the feedback the job characteristics model calls for. Inviting dispatchers to help design evening schedules would add autonomy to a job that now feels mechanical.
Recognition Without Undermining
Following the research on intrinsic motivation, monthly recognition will emphasize specific praise for good service and safe work, such as a driver who stayed with a stranded family until a relative arrived, rather than only cash prizes for volume.
Measuring Results
Summit will track response times by yard, customer ratings, safety checklist completion, damage claims, first-year driver retention and repeat engagement survey scores after six months.
Conclusion
Research on goals, job design, incentives and intrinsic motivation shows that people work hardest and best when goals are clear, work feels meaningful and autonomous, feedback is frequent and rewards cover quality as well as quantity. Summit's commission rewards volume alone, and its dispatchers have no stake in results. Clear shared goals, a revised pay mix, more autonomy and fair call distribution can align motivation with the performance culture the company needs.
References
Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 627-668. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.627
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250-279. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7
Jenkins, G. D., Mitra, A., Gupta, N., & Shaw, J. D. (1998). Are financial incentives related to performance? A meta-analytic review of empirical research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83(5), 777-787. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.83.5.777
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.57.9.705
What the LDR 306 Week 2 instructions ask
Week 2 of LDR 306 commonly asks students to analyze employee motivation and recommend ways leaders can improve it. Expect to explain motivation theories, such as needs theories, expectancy theory, goal-setting theory, equity theory, self-determination theory and the job characteristics model, and to apply them to a group of employees. Some prompts ask students to evaluate a reward or incentive system. A strong paper chooses theories that fit the situation, uses evidence about the employees, considers both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation and recognizes that incentives can have side effects. Recommendations should be specific, realistic and measurable. Cite scholarly sources in APA format.
How this LDR 306 Week 2 example is built
Summit's drivers earn about a quarter of each tow's revenue as commission, which rewards volume and nothing else, while dispatchers' pay never changes no matter how well they route trucks. The paper examines what this pay design does to motivation. Goal-setting research shows that specific, challenging goals with feedback raise performance, and the job characteristics model explains why meaningful, varied work with autonomy and feedback motivates. A meta-analysis finds that financial incentives raise the quantity of performance more than its quality, and another shows that some rewards can undermine intrinsic motivation. Survey results and pay records support these patterns at Summit. The paper recommends team and quality goals, a revised commission with safety and rating components and job changes that restore meaning and autonomy.
LDR 306 Week 2 grading rubric: where the points go
Motivation papers are graded on whether the student chooses suitable theories and applies them carefully. Strong work explains each theory accurately, uses evidence about the employees, such as survey results or pay data, and distinguishes extrinsic from intrinsic motivation. Graders reward attention to unintended effects, such as incentives that encourage quantity at the expense of quality or safety. Proposals ought to grow out of the analysis and say how anyone would know whether drive and results actually rose. Separate treatment of different job groups also earns credit. A clear comparison between current and proposed practices helps readers see the change, and connection to the culture findings from the first week shows the course building on itself.
LDR 306 Week 2 help: mistakes to avoid
A common problem is applying a needs hierarchy to everyone and concluding that employees want recognition. Choose theories that predict behavior in the specific situation, such as goal-setting for measurable work. Another frequent issue is recommending more money without considering what the money rewards. Incentives shape behavior, sometimes in unwanted ways. Some papers ignore intrinsic motivation entirely, while others claim pay never motivates. Research supports a balanced view. Students also forget different groups: drivers and dispatchers face different jobs and need different approaches. Finally, define how you will know the changes worked, such as response times, ratings, safety incidents and retention.
Related LDR 306 sample papers
Other LDR 306 week samples
- LDR 306 Week 1: Performance Culture and Engagement
- LDR 306 Week 3: Behavioral Management and Feedback
- LDR 306 Week 4: Development and Empowerment
- LDR 306 Week 5: Performance Improvement Plan
More BS in Business sample papers
- LDR 300 Week 2: Effective Leadership Behavior
- LDR 305 Week 2: Leadership Attributes and Styles
- MGT 312 Week 2: Motivation and Individual Differences
- MGT 316 Week 2: Comparing Economic Systems
LDR 306 Week 2 questions, answered
What does LDR 306 Week 2 usually cover?
It usually covers employee motivation theories, such as goal-setting, expectancy, equity, self-determination and job characteristics, and how leaders can apply them to improve performance.
Where can I find a free LDR 306 Week 2 sample paper?
The Week 2 motivation analysis of tow drivers and dispatchers at a composite Colorado towing company appears in full above.
What is goal-setting theory?
It says people perform better when they chase a clear, demanding target instead of a vague hope, provided they accept the target, hear how they are doing and are capable of hitting it.
Do financial incentives improve performance?
Research finds that financial incentives tend to increase the quantity of performance but have little relationship with quality, so their design matters.
Can rewards reduce intrinsic motivation?
Some experiments show that expected, tangible rewards tied to doing an interesting task can reduce intrinsic motivation, while informational feedback and verbal recognition generally do not.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official University of Phoenix document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
Request this one custom, free · All LDR 306 week samples · All courses