MOTIVATION

1. Definition:

We define motivation as the processes that account for an individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence of
effort toward attaining a goal. While general motivation is concerned with effort toward any goal, we will
narrow the focus to organizational goals. Levels of motivation can vary from moment to moment and can also
be meaningful individual differences (see the chapter on personality and individual differences). In other
words, motivation can take form as both a personality trait and a temporary state. Intensity describes how
hard a person tries. This is the element most of us focus on when we talk about motivation. However, high
intensity is unlikely to lead to favorable job performance outcomes unless the effort is channeled in a direction
that benefits the organization. Effort directed toward and consistent with the organization’s goals is the kind
of effort organizations should be seeking to improve. Finally, motivation has a persistence dimension. This
measures how long a person can maintain effort. Motivated individuals work intensely on an appropriate task
long enough to achieve their goals.

2. Theories of Motivation:

 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs:

The best-known theory of motivation is Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, which
hypothesizes that within every human being there is a hierarchy of five needs humans are
motivated to meet. A sixth need has been proposed for a highest level—intrinsic values—which
is said to have originated from Maslow, but it has not gained widespread acceptance. The original
five needs are:
1. Physiological. Hunger, thirst, shelter, and other bodily needs.
2. Safety. Security and protection from physical and emotional harm.
3. Social-belongingness (originally love). Affection, love, belongingness, acceptance, and
friendship.
4. Esteem. Internal factors such as self-respect, autonomy, and achievement as well as external
factors such as status, recognition, and attention.
5. Self-actualization. Drive to become what we can become; includes growth, achieving our
potential, and self-fulfillment.

According to many interpretations of Maslow’s work, as each need becomes well satisfied, the
next one becomes dominant. This has led to the popularized depiction of the hierarchy as a
pyramid or a ladder. Maslow himself, however, merely outlined the need categories and
suggested that some may take precedence depending upon the situation. We depict the hierarchy
as a pyramid because this is its best-known presentation, but it is important to recognize that
Maslow did not depict the hierarchy of needs in this way. Maslow’s theory has broadly received
long-standing recognition, particularly among practicing managers. Perhaps the broad
recognition is because it is intuitively logical and easy to understand, especially in its ladder or
pyramid form. Unfortunately, however, most research does not support its validity, and it has not
been frequently researched since the 1960s.11 Nonetheless, it is thus important to be aware of
the prevailing public acceptance of the hierarchy when discussing motivation but also to recognize
that psychological needs paint an incomplete portrait of motivation in the workplace.
  Alderfer’s ERG Theory:

Alderfer's ERG theory, developed as a simplified version of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, proposes that
human motivation is driven by three core needs: Existence (E), Relatedness (R), and Growth (G), which
can be satisfied simultaneously, unlike Maslow's hierarchical approach.

Existence Needs: These are related to basic survival and material well-being, encompassing physiological
needs and security needs, like food, shelter, and job security.

Relatedness Needs: These focus on social relationships and belonging, encompassing social needs and
interpersonal connections.

Growth Needs: These relate to self-improvement, creativity, and personal development, encompassing
esteem needs and self-actualization.

ERG theory suggests that individuals can be motivated by multiple needs simultaneously, and the priority
of these needs can change depending on individual circumstances and experiences. A unique aspect of
ERG theory is the "frustration-regression" principle, which suggests that if a person experiences a lack of
satisfaction in a higher-level need (e.g., growth), they may regress to focusing on lower-level needs (e.g.,
existence).

 McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y:

In 1960, Douglas McGregor formulated Theory X and Theory Y suggesting two aspects of human behaviour
at work, or in other words, two different views of individuals (employees):

1. one of which is negative, called as Theory X and

2. the other is positive, so called as Theory Y

According to McGregor, the perception of managers on the nature of individuals is based on various
assumptions.

Assumptions of Theory X

 An average employee intrinsically does not like work and tries to escape it whenever possible.
 Since the employee does not want to work, he must be persuaded, compelled, or warned with
punishment so as to achieve organizational goals. A close supervision is required on part of
managers. The managers adopt a more dictatorial style.
 Many employees rank job security on top, and they have little or no aspiration/ ambition.
 Employees generally dislike responsibilities.
 Employees resist change.
 An average employee needs formal direction.

Assumptions of Theory Y

 Employees can perceive their job as relaxing and normal. They exercise their physical and mental
efforts in an inherent manner in their jobs.
 Employees may not require only threat, external control and coercion to work, but they can use
self-direction and self-control if they are dedicated and sincere to achieve the organizational
objectives.
  If the job is rewarding and satisfying, then it will result in employees’ loyalty and commitment to
organization.
 An average employee can learn to admit and recognize the responsibility. In fact, he can even
learn to obtain responsibility.
 The employees have skills and capabilities. Their logical capabilities should be fully utilized.
 In other words, the creativity, resourcefulness and innovative potentiality of the employees can
be utilized to solve organizational problems.

Thus, we can say that Theory X presents a pessimistic view of employees’ nature and behaviour
at work, while Theory Y presents an optimistic view of the employees’ nature and behaviour at
work.

If we correlate it with Maslow’s theory, we can say that Theory X is based on the assumption that
the employees emphasize on the physiological needs and the safety needs; while Theory X is
based on the assumption that the social needs, esteem needs and the self-actualization needs
dominate the employees.

 Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory:

Believing an individual’s relationship to work is basic and that the attitude toward work can determine
success or failure, psychologist Frederick Herzberg asked people to describe, in detail, situations in which
they felt exceptionally good or bad about their jobs. The responses differed significantly and led Hertzberg
to his two-factor theory. Two-factor theory is inherently tied to job satisfaction and expresses motivation
in terms of intrinsic and extrinsic factors that impact job satisfaction.

Under two-factor theory, the factors that lead to job satisfaction are separate and distinct from those that
lead to job dissatisfaction. Intrinsic factors such as advancement, recognition, responsibility, and
achievement seem related to job satisfaction. Respondents who felt good about their work tended to
attribute these factors to their situations, while dissatisfied respondents tended to cite extrinsic factors,
such as supervision, pay, company policies, and work conditions. Conditions such as quality of
supervision, pay, company policies, physical work conditions, relationships with others, and job security
are hygiene factors. When they are adequate, people will not be dissatisfied; neither will they be satisfied.
If we want to motivate people on their jobs, we should emphasize factors associated with the work itself
or with outcomes directly derived from it, such as promotional opportunities, personal growth
opportunities, recognition, responsibility, and achievement. These are the characteristics people find
intrinsically rewarding. The two-factor theory has not been well supported in research. Criticisms center
on Herzberg’s original methodology and his assumptions, such as how the participants may be biased in
thinking back to times when they felt good or bad about their jobs. Furthermore, if hygiene and
motivational factors are equally important to a person, both should be capable of motivating. Regardless
of the criticisms, Herzberg’s theory has been quite influential and has been used in many studies. Most
managers worldwide are familiar with its recommendations.

 McClelland’s Three Needs Theory:

McClelland’s theory of needs, unlike Maslow’s hierarchy, suggests that needs are more like motivating
factors than prerequisites for survival.15 In McClelland and colleagues’ theory, there are three primary
needs:

• Need for achievement (nAch) is the need to excel or achieve to a set of standards.

• Need for power (nPow) is the need to make others behave in a way they would not have otherwise.

• Need for affiliation (nAff) is the need to establish friendly and close interpersonal relationships

McClelland and subsequent researchers focused most of their attention on nAch. In general, high
achievers perform best when they perceive their probability of success as 0.5—that is, a fifty-fifty chance.
Similarly, they dislike low odds (high probability of success) because then there is no challenge to their
skills. Based on prior nAch research, we can predict some relationships between nAch and job
performance. First, when employees have a high level of nAch, they tend to exhibit more positive moods
and be more interested in the task at hand.17 Second, employees high on nAch tend to perform very well
in high-stakes conditions on the job, like work walkthroughs or sales encounters.

The other needs within the theory have also been empirically supported.

First, the nPow concept has research support, but it may be more familiar to people in broad terms than
in relation to the original definition. Second, the nAff concept is also well established and accepted in
research. Additional research suggests that our individual differences may affect whether we can satisfy
these needs. Furthermore, some evidence suggests that women may be more likely to have more nAff
needs then men.

The degree to which we have each of the three needs is difficult to measure, and therefore the theory is
difficult to put into practice. A behavior may be directed at satisfying many different needs, and many
different behaviors may be directed at satisfying one given need, making needs difficult to isolate and
examine. Therefore, the concepts are helpful, but they are not often used objectively.

 Locke’s Goal-Setting Theory:

Research on goal-setting theory, proposed by Edwin Locke and Gary Latham, reveals the impressive
effects of goals on performance. Under this theory, intentions to work toward a goal are considered a
major source of work motivation. According to the theory and decades of evidence supporting it, goals
do fourthings: (1) They direct attention, (2) they mobilize effort, (3) they encourage persistence, and (4)
they facilitate the development of strategy.

Goal Origins: Research shows that self-set goals can lead to greater employee enthusiasm, whereas
supervisor-set goals may lead to heightened anxiety and perceptions of uncertainty and threat.
Ultimately, these differences can have very real consequences for employee emotional exhaustion and
OCBs.

Goal Characteristics: Evidence strongly suggests that specific goals increase performance and that difficult
goals, when accepted, result in higher performance than do easy goals.
Although goal setting has a direct impact on performance in organizations, a number of factors can either
help or hurt goal-setting efforts. These include (1) goal commitment, (2) task characteristics, (3) feedback,
(4) goal orientation, and (5) goal conflict.

Goal Commitment: Goal commitment is most likely to occur when employees expect that their efforts
will pay off in goal attainment, when accomplishing the goal is attractive to them, and when they actively
participate in goal setting.

Task Characteristics: Goals seem to affect performance more strongly when tasks are simple rather than
complex. Also, goal setting is more effective when the tasks are independent rather than interdependent.
However, on interdependent tasks, group-centered goals that emphasize the person’s contribution to the
dyad or group are better than goals focused on the person’s own performance.

Feedback: Feedback, in general, leads to higher performance.90 People do better when they get feedback
on how well they are progressing toward their goals because it helps identify discrepancies between what
they have done and what they should do next. That is, feedback guides behavior.

Goal Orientation: Goal orientation suggests that people systematically differ in the extent they are
motivated to prove themselves through good performance (i.e., performance-prove) and avoiding poor
performance (i.e., performance-avoid) and the extent to which they are motivated to master the task.

Goal Conflict: hundreds of studies suggest that goal conflict has a nefarious effect on employee stress and
anxiety and can even linger and affect your performance on tasks that are completely unrelated.

 Skinner Reinforcement Theory:

Reinforcement theory argues that reinforcement conditions [Link] theory is

behaviorist, meaning that it portrays behavior as caused by the context or environment. You need not be
concerned, behaviorists would argue, with internal cognitive events (such as the psychological aspects of
autonomy, regulatory focus, or job engagement or the process-based theories to come). Instead, what
controls behavior are reinforcers—any consequences that, when they immediately follow responses,
increase the probability that the behavior will be repeated. For example, when you are given a
compliment for doing something at work, you might be more likely to do it again.

Operant conditioning suggests that people learn to behave in a certain way to either get something they
want or avoid something they do not want. Reinforcement strengthens a behavior and increases the
likelihood it will be repeated. Operant conditioning was part of B. F. Skinner’s broader concept of
behaviorism, which argues that behavior follows stimuli in a relatively unthinking manner. Skinner’s form
of radical behaviorism rejects feelings, thoughts, and other states of mind as causes of behavior. In short,
people learn to associate stimulus and response, but their conscious awareness of this association is
irrelevant. For instance, a commissioned salesperson wanting to earn a sizable income finds doing so is
contingent on generating high sales, so the salesperson sells as much as possible. Skinner demonstrated
that people will likely engage in desired behaviors if they are positively reinforced for doing so; rewards
are most effective if they immediately follow the desired response; and behavior that is not rewarded or
is punished is less likely to be repeated.

 Adam’s Equity Theory:

According to equity theory, employees compare what they get from their job (their “outcomes,” such as
pay, promotions, recognition, or a bigger office) to what they put into it (their “inputs,” such as effort,
experience, and education). They take the ratio of their outcomes (O) to their inputs (I) and compare it to
the ratio of others, usually someone similar like a coworker or someone doing the same job. If we believe
our ratio is equal to those with whom we compare ourselves, a state of equity exists, and we perceive our
situation as fair. If there are “inequities,” then we perceive the situation as unfair.

Based on equity theory, employees who perceive inequity will make one of six choices:

1. Change inputs (exert less effort if underpaid or more if overpaid).

2. Change outcomes (individuals paid on a piece-rate basis can increase their pay by producing a higher
quantity of units of lower quality).

3. Distort perceptions of self (“I used to think I worked at a moderate pace, but now I realize I work a lot
harder than everyone else”).

4. Distort perceptions of others (“Aisha’s job isn’t as desirable as I thought”).

5. Choose a different referent (“I may not make as much as my sibling, but I am doing a lot better than
they did at my age”).

6. Leave the field (quit the job).

Equity theory has support from some researchers, but not from all. As some examples, it seems that some
employees are more sensitive to equity, with some feeling more entitled and others feeling more
benevolent. Also, if someone feels like they are being overpaid on the job, would you expect them to give
back part of their salary? Although equity theory’s propositions have not all held up, the hypothesis serves
as an important precursor to the study of organizational justice or, more simply, fairness in the workplace.
Organizational justice is concerned more broadly with how employees feel authorities and decision
makers at work treat them.

 Vroom’s Expectancy Theory:

One of the most widely accepted explanations of motivation is Victor Vroom’s expectancy theory.
Although it has critics, most evidence supports the theory.69 Expectancy theory argues that the strength
of our tendency to act a certain way depends on the strength of our expectation of a given outcome and
its attractiveness. In practical terms, employees will be motivated to exert a high level of effort when they
believe that it will lead to a good performance appraisal, that a good appraisal will lead to organizational
rewards such as salary increases and/or intrinsic rewards, and that these rewards will satisfy their personal
goals. Therefore, the theory focuses on three relationship that in many ways, establish a common
language to describe the motivational process:

1. Expectancy: the effort–performance relationship. The degree to which the individual believes exerting
a given amount of effort will lead to performance.
2. Instrumentality: the performance–reward relationship. The degree to which the individual believes
performing at a particular level will lead to the attainment of a desired outcome.

3. Valence: the rewards–personal goals relationship. The degree to which organizational rewards satisfy
an individual’s personal goals or needs and the attractiveness of those potential rewards for the individual