Contemporary Theories
of Motivation
Gonzalo Campuzano
Enrique Flores
OUTLINE
Introduction
 Early Theories of Motivation (Overview)
 Goal Setting Theory


MBO Programs
Equity Theory
 Expectancy Theory
 Integrating Contemporary Theories of Motivation
 References
 Questions & Answers

55% of U.S. employees have
no enthusiasm for their job.
As cited in D. Jones, “Firms spend Billions to Fire Up Workers – With Little Luck”,
USA Today, May 10, 2001
INTRODUCTION
Motivation is the result of the interaction of the
individual and the situation.
 Individuals differ in their basic motivational drive.


i.e. Texbook Vs. Novel
The level of motivation varies both between
individuals and within individuals at different
times.
 Motivation: “The process that account for an
individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence
of effort toward attaining a goal.” [1]

EARLY THEORIES
OF MOTIVATION

1950’s:



Hierarchy of needs theory
Theories X and Y
The two-factor theory.
They represent a foundation from which
contemporary theories have grown.
 Practicing managers still regularly use this
theories and their terminology in explaining
employee motivation.
 Contemporary way of thinking

GOAL-SETTING THEORY
Goals tell an employee what needs to be done
and how much effort will need to be expended.
 In order to increase performance:





Set specific goals.
Difficult goals, when accepted, result in higher
performance than does easy goals.
Provide feedback.
An individual is committed to the goal when he
believes he can achieve the goal, and wants to
achieve it.
MBO PROGRAMS:
Putting Goal-Setting T. Into Practice

Converting overall organizational objectives into specific
objectives for organizational units and individual
members.

Four ingredients common to MBO programs:





Goal specification.
Participation in decision making.
An explicit time period.
Performance feedback.
Failures may come from:



Unrealistic expectations regarding results.
Lack of commitment by top management.
Cultural incompatibilities.

Fujitsu
EQUITY THEORY

Employees make comparison of their job inputs and
outcomes relative to those of others:

When employees perceive inequity, the can:






Change their inputs.
Change their outcomes.
Distort perceptions of self.
Distort perception of others.
Choose a different referent
Leave the field
EQUITY THEORY

Given payment by time:



Overrewarded employees will produce more than will
equitably paid employees.
Underrewarded employees will produce less or
poorer quality of output.
Given payment by quantity of production:


Overrewarded employees will produce fewer, but
higher-quality, units than will equitably paid
employees.
Underrewarded employees will produce a large
number of low-quality units in comparison with
equitably paid employees.
EQUITY THEORY:
Conclusions





Motivation is influenced significantly by others’ rewards
as well as by one’s own rewards.
Inequities created by overpayment do not seem to have
a very significant impact on behaviour.
Most research has focused on pay, but employees seem
to look for equity in the distribution of other rewards.
Historically, equity theory focused on distributive justice.
But increasingly equity is thought of from the standpoint
of organizational justice.
Managers should consider openly sharing information on
how allocation decisions are made, following consistent
and unbiased procedures.
EXPECTANCY THEORY

The strength of a tendency to act in a certain
way depends on the strength of an expectation
that the act will be followed by a given outcome
and on the attractiveness of that the outcome to
the individual.
1
Indivudual
Effort

2
Individual
Performance
3
Organizational
Rewards
Personal
Goals
The theory focuses on three relationships:



1. Effort-performance.
2. Performance-reward.
3. Rewards-personal goals.
EXPECTANCY THEORY
Giving maximum effort not always means being
recognized.
 Good performance appraisal not always leads to
organizational rewards.
 Rewards are not always found attractive by
employees:



Managers limited in the rewards they can distribute.
Managers incorrectly assume that all employees want
the same.
EXPECTANCY THEORY:
Conclusions

The key is the understanding of an individual’s
goal and the linkage between the three
relationships.

There is no universal principle for explaining
everyone’s motivations.
INTEGRATING CONTEMPORARY
THEORIES OF MOTIVATION


Many theories are complementary.
Its basic foundation is the expectancy model.
Job Design
High Achievement
Need
Equity Comparison/
Organizational Justice
O O
:
I A IB
Performance
Evaluation
Criteria
Ability
Opportunity
Indivudual Effort
Objective
Performance
Evaluation
System
Individual
Performance
Organizational
Rewards
Reinforcement
Goals Direct Behavior
Personal
Goals
Dominant
Needs
Job Design
High Achievement
Need
Equity Comparison/
Organizational Justice
O O
:
I A IB
Ability
Opportunity
Indivudual Effort
Objective
Performance
Evaluation
System
Performance
Evaluation
Criteria
Individual
Performance
Organizational
Rewards
Reinforcement
Goals Direct Behavior
Personal
Goals
Dominant
Needs
REFERENCES
Robbins and Judge, “Organizational Behavior”, 12th Edition, Pearson
Prentice Hall, 2007.
D. Jones, “Firms spend Billions to Fire Up Workers – With Little Luck”, USA
Today, May 10, 2001
[1] T.R. Mitchell, “Matching Motivational Strategies with Organizational
Contexts”, Research in Organizational Behavior, vol. 19, pp 60-62
P.C. Early, P. Wojnaroski, and W. Prest, “Task Planning and Energy
Expended: Explorations of How Goals Influence Performance”, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Feb 1987.
J. Greenberg and S. Ornstein, “High Status Job Title as Compensation for
Underpayment: A Test of Equity Theory”, Journal of Applied Psychology,
May 1983.
Questions & Answers