I consider this taxonomy of employees rather simple which does not reflect the complexity of the rational, emotional, and spiritual knowledge spectrum. In my view, all employees should be participants in a rewarding system. However, the rewarding or motivational system depends on the type of work, organizational culture, legislation, education of human resources, religion (in some countries) and other organizational factors. There is no fit-for-all solutions. Rewards can be based on money or other materialistic advantages, or on emotional and spiritual values. Human resource managers should identify these influencing factors and design a differentiate rewarding system for different types of employees and jobs.

Thank you for your valuable answer, I do agree with you. The aim was not to propose a classification.

It is regarded to the Attitude Theory involving as follows:

You should have a note on the philosophical aspects which mentioned in the above.

Flip Kotler says that there are 3 impressive factors as:

I think the question is closely related to the theory of expectations

Therefore, the HR Manager will deal on the basis of the expectations of the subordinates and not on the basis of his prediction to the type of behavior that these subordinates will produce

Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory helps the manager to understand what motivates an employee. By understanding what needs must be met in order for an employee to achieve the highest-level of motivation, managers are then able to get the most out of production. Theory X, Y and Z all play a role in how a company should manage successfully. Theory X and Theory Y were both written by Douglas McGregor, a social psychologist who is believed to be a key element in the area of management theory. In Mc.Gregor's book The Human Side of Enterprise (1960), Mc.Gregor describes Theory X and Theory Y based upon Maslow's hierarchy of needs, where McGregor grouped the hierarchy into a lower order (Theory X) needs and a higher order (Theory Y) needs. Mc.Gregor suggested that management could use either set of needs to motivate employees, but better results could be gained by the use of Theory Y, rather than Theory X (Heil, Bennis, & Stephens, 2000).

With Theories X, Y, and Z, implications for the modern organization include new challenges and opportunities. As we learn from these theories and work to implement the ideas in them, we must be aware of the modern issues of working with people from different cultures and overseeing movements of jobs to countries with low-cost labor. Also, we must embrace diversity as the U.S. demographics change and understand that our new managers must recognize and respond to the different culture changes that will surely ensue with their growing diverse working population.

These theories have proven with many Fortune 500 companies and others that when applied, do improve quality and productivity and also help to strengthen company labor issues. In addition to the changing work demographic, new problems and issues have risen since the X, Y and Z theories were formed. Some issues include fewer skilled laborers, early retirements, and older workers. Other opportunities that have been implied while companies use Theory Y and Z include an improvement of people skills, empowering their employees, stimulating change, helping employees balance work with life conflicts, and improving ethical behavior.

Expectancy theory (or expectancy theory of motivation) proposes an individual will behave or act in a certain way because they are motivated to select a specific behavior over other behaviors due to what they expect the result of that selected behavior will be. In essence, the motivation of the behavior selection is determined by the desirability of the outcome. However, at the core of the theory is the cognitive process of how an individual processes the different motivational elements. This is done before making the ultimate choice. The outcome is not the sole determining factor in making the decision of how to behave.

Expectancy theory is about the mental processes regarding choice, or choosing. It explains the processes that an individual undergoes to make choices. In the study of organizational behavior, expectancy theory is a motivation theory first proposed by Victor Vroom of the Yale School of Management.

"This theory emphasizes the needs for organizations to relate rewards directly to performance and to ensure that the rewards provided are those rewards deserved and wanted by the recipients."

Victor H. Vroom (1964) defines motivation as a process governing choices among alternative forms of voluntary activities, a process controlled by the individual. The individual makes choices based on estimates of how well the expected results of a given behavior are going to match up with or eventually lead to the desired results. Motivation is a product of the individual's expectancy that a certain effort will lead to the intended performance, the instrumentality of this performance to achieving a certain result, and the desirability of this result for the individual, known as valence.

The expectancy theory of motivation explains the behavioral process of why individuals choose one behavioral option over the other. This theory explains that individuals can be motivated towards goals if they believe that; there is a positive correlation between efforts and performance, the outcome of a favorable performance will result in a desirable reward, a reward from a performance will satisfy an important need, and/or the outcome satisfies their need enough to make the effort worthwhile. Vroom introduced three variables within the expectancy theory which are valence (V), expectancy (E) and instrumentality (I). The three elements are important behind choosing one element over another because they are clearly defined: effort-performance expectancy (E>P expectancy), performance-outcome expectancy (P>O expectancy).

Expectancy theory has three components: expectancy, instrumentality, and valence.