MOTIVATION
Definition:
According to Kanfer (1990), “Motivation is anything that provides direction,
intensity, and persistence to behavior.” Other researchers define motivation as a
behavior probability; it is the likelihood an individual will initiate and continue
exhibiting certain behavior (Miller & Rollnick, 1991).
MOTIVATION APPROACHES
Categories
Theory of Approach
Major Themes or Characteristics
Need
Maslow’s hierarchy of need
Alderfer’s ERG theory
Herzberg’s two-factor theory
Satisfy needs to change behavior.
Multiple needs can be satisfied simultaneously.
Hygiene factors results in dissatisfaction;
motivators results in satisfaction.
Individuals differences
Achievement orientation
Intrinsic motivation
Personality trait.
People are more motivated to do some activities than others.
Cognitive
Goal setting
Expectancy theory
Set goals to change behavior.
Motivate others by clarifying links between behaviors,
performance and rewards.
Motivate others by clarifying links between behaviors,
performance, evaluations, rewards, and personal needs.
ProMES
Situational
Job characteristics model
Operant approach
Modify task or job to increase motivation.
Change rewards and punishments to change behavior.
MASLOW’S HIERARCHY OF NEEDS
According to Maslow (1954), people are motivated by five basic needs. They
include the need to survive physiologically, the need for security, the need for
affiliation with others (i.e. belongingness), the need for self-esteem, and the need
for self-actualization. According to Maslow, any person’s behavior can be
understood primarily as the efforts directed to satisfy one particular level of need in
the hierarchy. Which level happens to be motivating a person’s behavior at any
time depends on whether or not lower needs in the hierarchy have been satisfied.
According to Maslow, lower-level needs must be satisfied before the next higher
level becomes salient in motivating behavior.
Selfactualiza
tion
Esteem needs
Belongingness need
B
Security needs
Physiological needs
ALDERFER’S ERG THEORY
Alderfer’s (1969) existence-relatedness-growth (ERG) theory is similar to
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. In terms of the ERG theory, existence needs
basically correspond to Maslow’s physiological and security needs; relatedness
needs are like Maslow’s social and esteem needs; and growth needs are similar to
the needs for self-actualization. Beyond those similarities, however, are two
important differences.
1. Alderfer reported that people sometimes try to satisfy more than one need at a
time. For example, even though a follower’s existence needs may not be
entirely satisfied, he/she may still be motivated to grow as a person.
2. Alderfer also claimed that frustration of a higher-level need can lead to
efforts to satisfy a lower-level need. In other word, a follower who is
continually frustrated in achieving some need might regress and exert effort to
satisfy a lower need that has already been satisfied. He called this the
frustration regression hypothesis.
HERZBERG’S TWO-FACTOR THEORY
Herzberg labeled the factors that led to satisfaction at work as motivators, and he
labeled the factors that led to dissatisfaction at work as hygiene factors. According
to the two-factor theory, efforts directed toward improving hygiene factors will not
increase followers’ motivation. For example, no matter how much leaders improve
working conditions, pay, or sick-leave policies, followers will not exert any
additional effort or persist any longer at a task.
Given limited resources on the leader’s part, the key to increasing followers’ effort
levels according to the two-factor theory is to just adequately satisfy the hygiene
factors while maximizing the motivators for a particular job.
Motivators and Hygiene Factors of the two-Factor Theory
Hygiene Factors
Motivators
Supervision
Working Conditions
Co-workers
Policies/procedures
Job security
Achievement
Recognition
The work itself
Responsibilities
Advancement and growth
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERNCES IN MOTIVATION
Unlike the three needs theories, that claimed all people share some fundamental
needs, the individual differences approach to motivation assumes that people vary
substantially in their achievement orientation or intrinsic motivation.
Achievement Orientation
Atkinson (1957) proposed that an individual’s tendency to exert effort toward task
accomplishment depended partly on the strength of his or her motive to achieve
success. This he labeled as, Achievement Orientation. McClelland (1975) later
developed Atkinson’s ideas and said that individuals with a strong achievement
orientation strived to accomplish socially acceptable endeavors and activities.
These individuals also preferred tasks that provided immediate and ample feedback
and were moderately difficult. Additionally, individuals with a strong need to
achieve felt satisfied when they successfully solved work problems or accomplished
job tasks. Individuals with a relatively low need to achieve generally preferred
easier tasks and did not feel satisfied by solving problems or accomplishing
assigned tasks.
Intrinsic Motivation
The term Intrinsic Motivation is used to describe behavior seemingly motivated for
its own sake, for personal satisfaction and increased feelings of competence or
control one gets from doing it. In other word, some people are motivated to persist
in certain behaviors for the simple reason that they like to do them. The key for
leaders is to identify the activities their followers like to perform (within reason),
and increase their job opportunities to do them.
GOAL SETTING
Goal setting is one of the easiest formal systems of motivation to use with
followers. From a leader’s perspective, it involves helping followers see how a goal
might be attained by following a systematic plan to achieve it. According to Locke
and Latham (1990), goals are the most powerful determinants of task behaviors.
Goals serve to direct attention, mobilize efforts, help people develop strategies for
goal achievement, and help people continue exerting effort until the goal is reached.
Goals should be accompanied by feedback.
EXPECTANCY THEORY
Expectancy theory when applied in work settings involves two fundamental
assumptions:
1. Motivated performance is the result of conscious choice.
2. People will do what they believe will provide them with the highest rewards.
Thus, expectancy theory is a highly rational approach to understanding motivation.
It assumes that people act in ways that maximize their expectations of attaining
valued outcomes, and that reliable predictions of behavior are possible if the factors
that influence those expectations can be quantified.
Expectancy theory maintains that leadership practitioners will be able to motivate
followers if they understand the process followers use to determine whether certain
behaviors will lead to valued rewards.
ProMES
Productivity Measurement and Enhancement Systems (ProMES) is a cognitive
theory of motivation that can be used with individuals, groups, and organizations.
Like expectancy theory, ProMES takes a very rational approach to motivation, and
focuses on the decision-making process followers use when choosing to perform
specific behaviors. In this process followers are more motivated when they see
clear links between:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
the behaviors they exhibit,
the products and services they produce,
the evaluations they receive,
the rewards they earn, and
their personal needs.
To motivate followers, leaders set goals and provide feedback on followers’
behaviors, they clarify and provide feedback on how these behaviors are creating
valued products and services for the team or organization, and they describe how
these products and services are in turn related to followers performance evaluations,
rewards, and personal needs.
ProMES is a very data-driven metrics-based theory of motivation. Workers must be
given regular feedback on the products and services they are producing, and how
they are doing with respect to performance evaluations and rewards.
To implement a ProMES program, leaders and followers work together to develop
measures of productivity, evaluation, and reward for their work group.
JOB CHARACTERISTICS MODEL
According to the Job Characteristics Model, jobs or tasks having certain kinds of
characteristics provide inherently greater motivation and job satisfaction than
others. According to Hackman and Oldham (1980), followers will work harder and
be more satisfied if their tasks are meaningful, provide ample feedback, allow
considerable latitude in deciding how to accomplish them, and require use of a
variety of skills.
THE OPERANT APPROACH
The operant approach is a popular method which uses rewards and punishments to change direction,
intensity, or persistent behavior of followers. A reward is any consequence that increases the likelihood
that a particular behavior will be repeated. In contrast, punishment is the administration of an aversive
stimulus or withdrawal of something desirable, each of which decreases the likelihood of a particular
behavior being repeated. Rewards and punishment can be administered on a contingency or noncontingency basis. Contingency rewards and punishments are administered as consequences of a
particular behavior, while non-contingency rewards and punishments are not linked to any particular
behavior.
Six requirements when using the operant system to improve followers’ motivation and performance:
1. Leaders should clearly specify what behaviors are important (i.e., what do they want the followers to
do, how often they should do it, and the level of performance required).
2. Leaders should determine if those behaviors are currently being punished, rewarded, or ignored.
3. Leaders should find out what followers actually find rewarding and punishing. Not all followers are
the same, what may be rewarding to some followers may be considered punishing for other
followers.
4. Leaders should minimize inequities by being objective and consistent with measures used to
administer rewards and punishments. Some followers may perceive that their efforts were
equivalent or better than others doing the same type of work, yet they are rewarded less or punished
more.
5. Leaders should not limit themselves to administering organizationally sanctioned rewards and
punishments. Sometimes leaders are limited with the amount of financial rewards they can give
followers for good performance. However, research shows that social recognition and performance
feedback can increase productivity. Non-financial rewards such as, A thank you note,
complimentary words or change of duties could go a long way in increasing the follower’s
motivation and performance.
6. Leaders should administer rewards and punishments in a contingent manner whenever possible.
Non-contingency consequences should be used sparingly since the have relatively little impact