Motivating Self and Others Chapter 4 Motivating Self and Others

What is Motivation? Motivation Intensity: how hard a person tries The processes that account for an individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence of effort toward attaining a goal Intensity: how hard a person tries Direction: where effort is channeled Persistence: how long effort is maintained Most people view motivation as a personal trait – you either have it or your don’t – this is not true

Theory X and Theory Y Theory X Theory Y The assumption that employees dislike work, will attempt to avoid it, and must be coerced, controlled, or threatened with punishment if they are to perform. Theory Y The assumption that employees like work, are creative, seek responsibility, and can exercise self-direction and self-control. Material pertinent to this discussion is found on page 103. Theory Y suggests that: 1) Employees inherently dislike work and, whenever possible, will attempt to avoid it. 2) Since employees dislike work, they must be coerced, controlled, or threatened with punishment to achieve goals. 3) Employees will avoid responsibilities and seek formal direction whenever possible. 4) Most workers place security above all other factors associated with work and will display little ambition. 1) Employees can view work as being as natural as rest or play. 2) People will exercise self-direction and self-control if they are committed to the objectives. 3) The average person can learn to accept, even seek, responsibility. 4) The ability to make innovative decisions is widely dispersed throughout the population and is not necessarily the sole province of those in management positions. We know in reality that neither is 100% true

Motivators Intrinsic Extrinsic A person’s internal desire to do something, due to such things as interest, challenge, and personal satisfaction. Extrinsic Motivation that comes from outside the person, such as pay, bonuses, and other tangible rewards. Are individuals intrinsicly or extrinsicly motivated? Theory X – says that people are mostly motivated by extrinsic things Theory Y say intrinsic Depends on the individual and on the situation

Needs Theories of Motivation Basic idea: Individuals have needs that, when unsatisfied, will result in motivation Maslow’s hierarchy of needs Herzberg’s two factor theory (motivation-hygiene theory) Alderfer’s ERG theory McClelland’s theory of needs Main theories of motivation fall under NEEDS theories or PROCESS theories Needs theories talk about the needs that must be met in order to motivate people Process theories talk about actual ways in which we and others are motivated The early needs theories, developed in the 1950s, are heavily attacked and now questionable in terms of validity. However, these are probably the best known explanations for employee motivation, and they do represent the foundation from which contemporary theories have grown. Also, practising managers use these theories in explaining employee motivation Less Important

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Physiological Safety Social Esteem Self- actualization As each one of these needs becomes satisfied – the next is more important to fulfil. The theory says that once one need is satisfied – it no longer motivates. Therefore, if you want to motivate someone you need to understand what level of the hierarchy that person is currently on and focus on satisfying needs at or above that level. Forms the foundation of our thinking, but has never really been validated

Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene Theory Hygiene factors - necessary, but not sufficient, for healthy adjustment Extrinsic factors; context of work Company policy and administration Unhappy relationship with employee's supervisor Poor interpersonal relations with one's peers Poor working conditions Motivation-Hygiene Theory was proposed by psychologist Frederick Herzberg after investigating the question, "What do people want from their jobs?" Found that certain things – achievement, growth etc were related to job satisfaction Other things – company policy and working conditions, led to dissatisfaction. He believe that the opposite of satisfaction is not dissatisfaction. Removing dissatisfying characteristics from a job, don’t necessarily make it satisfying You can deal with hygiene factors – this will remove dissatisfaction, but will not necessarily bring satisfaction – may bring peace, but not satisfaction These needs must be met so employee is not dissatisfied – but they do not necessarily lead to satisfaction

Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene Theory Motivators - the sources of satisfaction Intrinsic factors; content of work Achievement Recognition Challenging, varied or interesting work Responsibility Advancement Material pertinent to this discussion is found on pages 105-106.

Contrasting Views of Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction Traditional view Satisfaction Dissatisfaction Herzberg's view Intrinsic Motivators Material pertinent to this illustration is found on pages 105-106. Herzberg’s data suggest that the opposite of satisfaction is not dissatisfaction, as was traditionally believed. Removing dissatisfying characteristics from a job does not necessarily make the job satisfying. Herzberg proposed the existence of a dual continuum: The opposite of "Satisfaction" is "No Satisfaction" and the opposite of Dissatisfaction" is "No Dissatisfaction." Traditional view saw the continuum as Satisfaction to Dissatisfaction. Herzberg saw it otherwise. 1) People could have no dissatisfaction, but still not be satisfied 2) Conditions that eliminate dissatisfaction do not bring about satisfaction 3) Satisfaction is created after all dissatisfaction is eliminated. No Satisfaction Satisfaction Extrinsic Hygiene Factors No dissatisfaction Dissatisfaction

Alderfer’s ERG Theory Existence Relatedness Growth Concerned with providing basic material existence requirements Relatedness Desire for maintaining important interpersonal relationships Growth Intrinsic desire for personal development This is supplemental material. It is referred to in exhibits on pages 106-107. – just go through this quickly – no need to know these two theories in great depth ERG Theory is the reworking of Maslow's needs hierarchy by Clayton Alderfer of Yale, to align it more closely with empirical research. He argues that there are three groups of core needs, Existence, Relatedness, and Growth. Besides substituting three needs for five, the ERG theory differs from Maslow’s in that it demonstrates that more than one need may be operative at the same time and if the gratification of a higher-level need is stifled, the desire to satisfy a lower-level need increases. As well, this is an example of OB humour: an “erg” is used in physics and is a measure of energy or work.

McClelland’s Theory of Needs Need for Achievement The drive to excel, to achieve in relation to a set of standards, to strive to succeed Need for Power The need to make others behave in a way that they would not have behaved otherwise Need for Affiliation The desire for friendly and close interpersonal relationships This is supplemental material. It is referred to in exhibits on pages 106-107. David McClelland proposes three needs as being important in organizational settings for understanding motivation. These are need for achievement (nAch), to achieve in relation to set of standards, need for power (nPow), the need to make others behave in a way that they would not have behaved otherwise, and need for affiliation (nAff), the desire for friendly and close interpersonal relationships.

Summarizing the Various Needs Theories Relatedness Existence Growth Alderfer Factors Motivators Herzberg Self-Actualization Esteem Affiliation Security Physiological Maslow Need for Achievement Need for Power Need for Affiliation McClelland Hygiene Material pertinent to this illustration is found on page 106.

Summary: Hierarchy of Needs Maslow: Argues that lower-order needs must be satisfied before one progresses to higher-order needs. Herzberg: Hygiene factors must be met if person is not to be dissatisfied. They will not lead to satisfaction, however. Motivators lead to satisfaction. Material pertinent to this discussion is found on page 107.

Summary: Impact of Theory Maslow: Enjoys wide recognition among practising managers. Most managers are familiar with it. Herzberg: The popularity of giving workers greater responsibility for planning and controlling their work can be attributed to his findings. Shows that more than one need may operate at the same time Material pertinent to this discussion is found on page 107.

Process Theories of Motivation Look at the actual process of motivation Expectancy theory Goal-setting theory The needs theories we just discussed identify he different needs that could be used to motivate individuals. Process theories focus on the broader picture of how someone can set about motivating another individual.

Expectancy Theory An employee will be motivated to exert a high level of effort when he/she believes: That effort will lead to good performance That performance will lead to organizational rewards The rewards will satisfy the employee’s personal goals Material pertinent to this discussion is found on pages 108-110. This theory concerns an attractiveness, performance-reward and effort-performance linkage. The likelihood a person will act in a certain way depends on the strength of his or her expectation that the act will be followed by a given outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the individual.  

Expectancy Relationships The theory focuses on three relationships: Effort-performance relationship The perceived probability that exerting a given amount of effort will lead to performance. Performance-reward relationship The degree to which the individual believes that performing at a particular level will lead to a desired outcome. Rewards-personal goals relationship The degree to which organizational rewards satisfy an individual’s personal goals or needs and are attractive to the individual. Material pertinent to this discussion is found on pages 108-110.

How Does Expectancy Theory Work? My professor offers me $1 million if I memorize the textbook by tomorrow morning. Expectancy Instrumentality Valence Effort Performance Link Performance Rewards Link Rewards Personal Goals Link No matter how much effort My professor does not look There are a lot of wonderful things I put in, probably not possible like someone who has $1 million I could do with $1 million to memorize the text in 24 hours Material pertinent to this illustration is found on pages 108-110. This is a good exhibit to use in class. Ask students questions like: -What if I asked you to write a paper? -A book? -To change the oil in your car? -To build a car? Have them relate their responses in terms of expectancy theory. E=0 I=0 V=1 Conclusion: Though I value the reward, I will not be motivated to do this task.

Steps to Increasing Motivation, Using Expectancy Theory Improving Expectancy Improving Instrumentality Improving Valence Improve the ability of the Make sure that the reward is Increase the individual ’ s belief that meaningful to the individual individual to perform performance will lead to reward Material pertinent to this illustration is found on pages 108-110.

Steps to Increasing Motivation, Using Expectancy Theory Improving Expectancy Improve the ability of the individual to perform • Make sure employees have skills for the task Provide training Assign reasonable tasks and goals Improving Instrumentality Improving Valence Increase the individual ’ s belief that performance will lead to reward Observe and recognize performance Deliver rewards as promised Indicate to employees how previous good performance led to greater rewards Make sure that the reward is meaningful to the individual Ask employees what rewards they value Give rewards that are valued Material pertinent to this illustration is found on pages 108-110.

Goal-Setting Theory The theory that specific and difficult goals lead to higher performance. Goals tell an employee what needs to be done and how much effort will need to be expended. Specific goals increase performance Difficult goals, when accepted, result in higher performance than do easy goals Feedback leads to higher performance than does nonfeedback. Specific hard goals produce a higher level of output than does the generalized goal of “do your best.” The specificity of the goal itself acts as an internal stimulus. Material pertinent to this discussion is found on page 110. This theory is based on the idea that specific and difficult goals lead to higher performance. The work of Edwin Locke (1960s) proposes that intentions to work toward a goal are a major source of work motivation.

Management by Objectives A program that encompasses Specific goals Participative decision-making Explicit time period Performance feedback Material pertinent to this discussion is found on page 110-111. Management by objectives emphasizes participatively set goals that are tangible, verifiable, and measurable. The idea was originally proposed by Peter Drucker more than forty years ago as a means of using goals to motivate people rather than to control them. Its appeal lies in its emphasis on converting overall organizational objectives into specific objectives for organizational units and individual members. The model conceptualizes a "cascading" of objectives down through the organization. For the individual employee, MBO provides specific personal performance objectives. MBO is a popular technique found in business, health care, educational, government, and non-profit organizations. Failures often are the result of unrealistic expectations regarding results, lack of top management commitment, and an inability or unwillingness by management to allocate rewards based on goal accomplishment.

Summary so far … What is motivation? Needs theory of motivation Maslow’s Hierarchy Motivation-Hygiene Theory Process Theories of Motivation Expectancy Theory Goal-setting Theory Management by Objectives

For next class Read Stella McCarthy Case and be prepared to discuss in class on Wednesday