MOTIVATION CONCEPTS

Learning Objectives: Motivation After studying this topic, you should be able to: Describe the three elements of motivation. Identify Early theories of motivation and evaluate their applicability today. Understand contemporary theories of motivation. Explain to what degree motivation theories are culture-bound. (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

Defining Motivation The result of the interaction between the individual and the situation. The processes that account for an individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence of effort toward attaining a goal – specifically, an organizational goal. Three key elements: Intensity –How hard Direction- How much effort Persistence –How long It is easy to see that some individuals are more motivated than others. However, the reasons for that motivation are more difficult to determine. When defining motivation it is important to look at the interaction between the individual and the situation. There are three key elements that help us define motivation. The first is intensity or how hard the person tries to accomplish the task. The second element is direction and that is the effort that is channeled toward organizational goals. The final element is persistency or how long a person can maintain the effort. Intensity – how hard a person tries Direction – effort that is channeled toward, and consistent with, organizational goals Persistence – how long a person can maintain effort (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

Early Theories of Motivation These early theories may not have strong backing by research, but they do form the basis for contemporary theories and are still used by practicing managers. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory (To be discussed in detail) McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y (To be discussed in detail) (To be discussed in detail) Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory McClelland’s Theory of Needs There are number of theories of motivation that help us gain a better understanding of the concept. Some of the earlier theories are not entirely valid anymore but they are still used by many managers. (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: Important as Widely Accepted by Managers! There is a hierarchy of five needs. As each need is substantially satisfied, the next need becomes dominant. Assumptions Individuals cannot move to the next higher level until all needs at the current (lower) level are satisfied Must move in hierarchical order Self-Actualization Esteem Social Safety Physiological Higher Order Internal Lower Order External The most Important Theory: The first theory was developed by Abraham Maslow in the 1950’s. His theory states that with every individual there is a hierarchy of five needs. As each need is met or satisfied, the next need becomes dominant. His theory posits that individuals are stuck in their existing need level until it is satisfied and then they can move on to the next level. For example, until their safety needs are met, they will not be able to move on to the social level. (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs A Hierarchy of Work Motivation

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Today’s managers must… Identify and accept employee needs Recognize that needs differ among employees Offer satisfaction for currently unmet needs Realize that giving more of the same reward may have diminishing impact on motivation

McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y 1

2. McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y Two distinct views of human beings: Theory X (basically negative) and Theory Y (positive). Managers used a set of assumptions based on their view The assumptions molded their behavior toward employees No empirical evidence to support this theory, still used by managers. Theory X Workers have little ambition Dislike work Avoid responsibility Theory Y Workers are self-directed Enjoy work Accept responsibility Douglas McGregor added to the motivation work done in the 1950’s and developed the theory called Theory X, Theory Y. He believed that there are two distinct views of human beings that managers hold. The Theory X view is basically negative and believes that workers have little ambition, dislike work, and avoid responsibility. The Theory Y view is in contrast to X and believes that workers tend to be self-directed, enjoy work, and accept responsibility. Managers will modify their behavior toward employees based on what view they hold about them. (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

3. Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory Key Point: Satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not opposites but separate constructs Hygiene Factors Work Conditions Salary Company Policies Motivators Achievement Responsibility Growth Extrinsic and Related to Dissatisfaction Intrinsic and Related to Satisfaction Herzberg’s Two-Factor theory is another one of the earlier developed theories. This theory sets forth that satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not opposites but two separate ideas. There are a set of factors that when present will help to avoid dissatisfaction in workers. This group is called the hygiene factors and includes such things as salary, working conditions, and company policies. There is another set of factors that when present will help to cause satisfaction in workers. This group is called motivators and includes things such as growth, responsibility, and achievement. These sets are distinct and the presence of hygiene factors does not cause satisfaction, it just helps avoid dissatisfaction. (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

Herzberg’s Two-Factor Model Motivational Factors Work itself, achievement, possibility of growth Advancement, recognition Maintenance Factors Relations with supervisors, peers, subordinates Quality of supervision Company policy and administration Job security Working conditions, pay

Criticisms of the Two-Factor Theory Herzberg says that hygiene factors must be met to remove dissatisfaction. If motivators are given, then satisfaction can occur. Reliability of raters questioned Bias or errors of observation Herzberg assumed, but didn’t research, a strong relationship between satisfaction and productivity There are a number of criticisms of the two-factor theory. There are some questions about the study itself. First, the participants had a self-serving bias. When things are going well, they will take credit themselves. When things are not going well, they tend to blame it on the environment or others. The second criticism is that the raters will incorporate their own biases in their observations. Finally, Herzberg’s look at satisfaction had some errors in it as there was no attempt to measure overall satisfaction and he assumed a relationship between satisfaction and productivity. (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

Comparison Between Models All models suggest that managers discover which need dominates before administering a reward

Contemporary Theories of Motivation Self-Determination Theory Goal-Setting Theory(To be discussed in detail) – Management by Objectives (MBO) Self-Efficacy Theory – Also known as Social Learning Theory Reinforcement Theory Equity Theory Expectancy Theory(To be discussed in detail) There are a number of contemporary theories of motivation that have utilized the older theories to provide us with a deeper understanding of motivation in the workplace. (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

1. Self-Determination Theory People prefer to feel they have control over their actions. Therefore, if you require people to do something, it will reduce motivation. On the other hand, a freely chosen activity will improve motivation. Major Implications for Work Rewards Intrinsic and extrinsic rewards are not independent Extrinsic rewards may decrease intrinsic rewards Goal setting is more effective in improving motivation Verbal rewards increase intrinsic motivation; tangible rewards reduce it The self-determination theory states that people prefer to have control over their actions. So when they are required to do something they previously freely chose, it will diminish their motivation. This theory sets forth that in the workplace, intrinsic and extrinsic rewards are not independent of one another. In fact, the presence of extrinsic rewards may decrease the intrinsic rewards. In addition to extrinsic rewards, managers need to realize the importance of using goal setting and verbal rewards as a method to increase motivation. (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

2. Locke’s Goal-Setting Theory: Widely Accepted Basic Premise: That specific and difficult goals, with self-generated feedback, lead to higher performance Difficult Goals: Focus and direct attention Energize the person to work harder Difficulty increases persistence Force people to be more effective and efficient Relationship between goals and performance depends on: Goal commitment (Commit publically to perform better!) Task characteristics (simple, well-learned) Culture (Proven to be successful in western cultures) Edwin Locke developed what is called the goal-setting theory. The idea behind this theory is that goals that are specific and effectively difficult can lead to higher performance if they include self-generated feedback. A difficult goal will help the individual to focus and direct attention as well as energize them to work harder. The difficulty of the goal will increase persistence and force people to be more effective and efficient. The relationship between goals and performance depends on how committed the individual is to the goal as well as how specific the tasks are. Most of the research has been done in the United States so the applicability of this theory to other cultures is suspect. (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

How to use Goal Setting to Motivate Goals must be: SMART S: Specific M: Measurable A: Actionable R: Realistic T: Time Bound Example: You want to score 80% in your exams Corporate goals are broken down into smaller, more specific goals at each level of organization.

Implementation of Goal-Setting: Management by Objectives MBO is a systematic way to utilize goal-setting. Four common ingredients to MBO programs: Goal specificity Participative decision making Explicit time period Performance feedback An implementation of the goal-setting theory is Management by Objectives, better known as MBO. MBO is a systematic way to utilize goal-setting theory, in which goals are set jointly by managers and employees. The goals must be tangible, verifiable, and measurable in order to be effective. The manager helps to break down the organizational goals into smaller more specific goals for the employee. In order for MBO to be effective, the goals must be specific, the employees must participate in the goal setting, there must be a defined time period, and feedback must be incorporated into the process. See E X H I B I T 7-3 (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

Vroom’s Expectancy Theory: Widely Accepted! 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 the outcome to the individual. Expectancy of performance success Instrumentality of success in getting reward Valuation of the reward in employee’s eyes The most commonly used and widely accepted theory of motivation is Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory. This theory argues that the strength of a tendency to act in a certain way is dependent on the strength of the expectation that they will receive a given outcome and that the outcome is desired. 3 pieces: Expectancy, Instrumentality and Valence Employees are willing to work harder if they believe that their actions will get them an outcome they desire. For example, employees are willing to work long and hard hours if they know that they will be rewarded through promotion, recognition, or pay in response to their hard work. See E X H I B I T 7-7 (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

Vroom’s Expectancy Theory: Widely Accepted! 3 pieces: Expectancy, Instrumentality and Valence Expectancy Will I be able to do it? Right Resources, Right Skills Instrumentality Will I get the promised reward? Is the Reward Process transparent Can I trust the people who will evaluate me? Valence Importance of the reward in employee’s eyes Which reward do you value? The most commonly used and widely accepted theory of motivation is Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory. This theory argues that the strength of a tendency to act in a certain way is dependent on the strength of the expectation that they will receive a given outcome and that the outcome is desired. 3 pieces:Expectancy is the belief that increased effort will lead to increased performance i.e. if I work harder then this will be better. This is affected by such things as: Having the right resources available (e.g. raw materials, time) Having the right skills to do the job Having the necessary support to get the job done (e.g. supervisor support, or correct information on the job) Instrumentality is the belief that if you perform well that a valued outcome will be received. The degree to which a first level outcome will lead to the second level outcome. i.e. if I do a good job, there is something in it for me. This is affected by such things as: Clear understanding of the relationship between performance and outcomes – e.g. the rules of the reward 'game' Trust in the people who will take the decisions on who gets what outcome Transparency of the process that decides who gets what outcome Valence is the importance that the individual places upon the expected outcome. For the valence to be positive, the person must prefer attaining the outcome to not attaining it. For example, if someone is mainly motivated by money, he or she might not value offers of additional time off. The three elements are important behind choosing one element over another because they are clearly defined: effort-performance expectancy (E>P expectancy) and performance-outcome expectancy. Employees are willing to work harder if they believe that their actions will get them an outcome they desire. For example, employees are willing to work long and hard hours if they know that they will be rewarded through promotion, recognition, or pay in response to their hard work. (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

Equity Theory Individuals compare their job inputs (i.e. effort, experience, education, competence) and outcomes (i.e. salary levels, raises, recognition) with those of others and then respond to eliminate any inequities. Referent Comparisons: Self-inside Self-outside Other-inside Other-outside

Equity Theory (cont’d)

Equity Theory (cont’d) Choices for dealing with inequity: Change inputs (eg. don’t exert as much effort.) Change outcomes (eg. increase output but of lower quality.) Distort/change perceptions of self (eg. “I realized that I worked harder than everyone else.”) Distort/change perceptions of others (eg. “His job isn’t as desirable as I thought it was.”) Choose a different referent person (eg. “I may not make as much as uncle, but I’m doing a lot better than my Dad did.”) Leave the field (quit the job)

Model of Organizational Justice

Global Implications Motivation theories are often culture-bound. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory Order of needs is not universal McClelland’s three needs theory nAch presupposes a willingness to accept risk and performance concerns – not universal traits Desire for interesting work seems to be universal. There is some evidence that the intrinsic factors of Herzberg’s two-factor theory may be universal Unfortunately, in the area of motivation theory, the vast majority of research has been done in the United Sates and is culturally bound. There does seem to be a universal acceptance that a desire for interesting work is common across the globe, but there is no research to support this. (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.

Summary and Managerial Implications Need Theories (Maslow, Alderfer, McClelland, Herzberg) Well known, but not very good predictors of behavior Goal-Setting Theory While limited in scope, good predictor Reinforcement Theory (Taught in Learning) Powerful predictor in many work areas Equity Theory Best known for research in organizational justice Expectancy Theory Good predictor of performance variables but shares many of the assumptions as rational decision making There are a number of theories that can increase our understanding as managers about motivation in the workplace. It is important to utilize these theories when designing workplace programs and procedures. (c) 2008 Prentice-Hall, All rights reserved.