When people join an organization, they bring with them certain drives and needs that affect their on-the-job performance. Sometimes these are immediately apparent, but often they not only are difficult to determine and satisfy but also vary greatly from one person to another. Understanding how needs create tensions which stimulate effort to perform and how effective performance brings the satisfaction of rewards is useful for managers. Several approaches to understanding internal drives and needs within employees are examined in the chapter. Each model makes a contribution to our understanding of motivation. All the models share some similarities. In general, they encourage managers not only to consider lower-order, maintenance, and extrinsic factors but to use higher-order, motivational, and intrinsic factors as well.
Behavior modification focuses on the external environment by stating that a number of employee behaviors can be affected by manipulating their consequences. The alternative consequences include positive and negative reinforcement punishment, and extinction. Reinforcement can be applied according to either continuous or partial schedules. A blending of internal and external approaches is obtained through consideration of goal setting. Managers are encouraged to use cues—such as goals that are accepted, challenging, and specific—to stimulate desired employee behavior. In this way, goal setting, combined with the reinforcement of performance feedback, provides a balanced approach to motivation. . : .
Additional approaches to motivation presented in this chapter are the expectancy and equity models. The- expectancy model states that motivation is a product of how much one wants something-and the probabilities that effort will lead to task accomplishment and reward. The formula is valence X expectancy X instrumentality = motivation. Valence is the strength of a person’s preference for an outcome. Expectancy is the strength of belief that one’s effort will be successful in accomplishing a task. Instrumentality is the strength of belief that successful performance will be followed by a reward.
The expectancy and equity motivational models relate specifically to the employee’s intellectual processes. The equity model has a double comparison in it a match between an employee’s perceived inputs and outcomes, coupled with a comparison with some referent person’s rewards for her or his input level. In addition, employees use the procedural justice model to assess the fairness of how rewards are distributed. Managers are encouraged to combine the perspectives of several models to create a complete motivational environment for their employees.
Motivation is the set of internal & external forces that cause an employee to choose a course of action and engage in certain behavior.
A Model of Motivation :
Although a few spontaneous human activities occur without motivation, nearly all conscious behavior is motivated or caused. Growing hair requires no motivation, but getting a haircut does. Eventually, anyone will fall asleep without motivation (although parents with young children may doubt this), but going to bed is a conscious act requiring motivation manager’s job is to identify employees’ drives and needs and to channel their behavior, to motivate them, toward task performance. The role of motivation in performance is summarized in the model of motivation in Figure 5.1. Internal needs and drives create tensions that are affected by one’s environment. For example, the need for food produces a tension of hunger. The hungry person then
Needs and drive
Goals and incentive
FIGURE 5.1 A Model of Mitivation
examines the surroundings to see which foods (external incentives) are available to satisfy that hunger. Since environment affects one’s appetite for particular kinds of food a South Seas native may want roast fish, whereas a Colorado rancher may prefer grilled steak. Both persons are ready to achieve their goals, but they will seek different foods to satisfy their needs. This is an example of both individual differences and cultural influences in action. As we saw in the formulas in Chapter 1, potential performance (P) is a product of ability (A) and motivation (M). Results occur when motivated employs are provided with the opportunity (such as the proper training) to perform and the resources (such as the proper tools) to do so. The presence of goals and the awareness of incentives to satisfy one’s needs are also powerful motivational factors leading to the release of effort.
When an employee is productive and the organization takes note of it, rewards will be distributed. If those rewards are appropriate in nature, timing, and distribution, the employee’s original needs and drives are satisfied. At that time, new needs may emerge and the cycle will begin again. It should be apparent, therefore, that an important starting point lies in understanding employee needs. Several traditional approaches to classifying drives and needs are presented first; these models attempt to help managers understand how employees’ internal needs affect their subsequent behaviors. These historical approaches are logically followed by a discussion of a systematic way of modifying employee behavior thought the use of rewards that satisfy those needs.
Achievement motivation is a drive some people have to pursue and attain goals. An individual with this drive wishes to achieve objectives and advance up the ladder of success. Accomplishment is seen as important primarily for its own sake, not just for the rewards that accompany. A number of characteristic define achievement-oriented employees. They work harder when they perceive that they will receive personal credit for their efforts, when the risk of failure is only moderate, and when they receive specific feedback about their past performance,.
People with a high drive for achievement take responsibility for their actions and results, control their destiny, seek regular feedback, and enjoy being part of a winning achievement through individual or collective effort. As managers, they tend to export that their employees will also be oriented toward achievement. These high expectations sometime make it difficult for achievement-oriented managers to delegate effectively and for “average” employees to satisfy their manager’s demands.
Affiliation Motivation :
Affiliation motivation is a drive to relate to people on a social basis. Comparisons of achievement-motivation employees with affiliation-motivation employees illustrate how the two patterns influence behavior. Achievement-oriented people work harder when their supervisors provide detailed evaluations of their work behavior. But people with affiliation motives work better when they are compli9mentions of their work behavior. But people with affiliation motives work better when they are complimented for their favorable attitudes and cooperation. Achievement-motivated people select assistants who are technically capable, with little regard for personal feelings about them; those who are affiliation-motivated tend to select friends and likable people to surround them.
They receive inner satisfactions from being with friends, and they want the job freedom to develop those relationships. Managers with strong needs for affiliation may have difficulty being effective managers. -Although a high concern for positive social relationships usually results in a cooperative work environment where employees genuinely enjoy working together, managerial overemphasis on the social dimension may interfere with the vital process of getting things done-. Affiliation-oriented managers may have difficulty assigning challenging tasks, directing work activities, and monitoring work effectiveness.
Power motivation is a drive to influence people, take control, and change situations. Power-motivated people wish to create an impact on their organizations and are willing to take risks to do so. Once this power is obtained, it may be used either constructively or destructively. Power-motivated people make excellent managers if their drives are for institutional power instead of personal power. Institutional power is the need to influence others’ behavior for the good of the whole organization. People with this need seek power through legitimate means, rise to leadership positions through successful performance, and therefore are accepted by others. However, if an employee’s drives are toward personal power, that person tends to lose the trust and respect of employees and colleagues and be an unsuccessful organizational leader.
Managerial Application of the Drives
Knowledge of the differences among the three motivational drives requires managers to think contingently and to understand the work attitudes of each employee. They can then deal with employees differently according to the strongest motivational drive that they identify in each employee. In this way, the supervisor communicates with each employee according to that particular person’s needs. As one employee said, “My supervisor talks to me in my language.” Although various tests can be used to identify the strength of employee drives, direct observation of employees’ behavior is one of the best methods for determining what they will respond to.
When a machine malfunctions, people recognize that it needs something. Managers try to find the causes of the breakdown in an analytical manner based on their knowledge of the operations and needs of the machine.
Types of Needs
Needs may be classified in various ways. A simple classification is (1) basic physical needs, called primary needs, and (2) social and psychological needs, called secondary needs. The physical needs include food, water, sex, sleep, sir, and reasonably comfortable temperature. These needs arise from the basic requirements of life and are important for survival of the human race. They are, therefore, virtually universal, but they vary in intensity from one person to another. For example, a child needs much more sleep than an older person., .
Needs also are conditioned by social practice. If it is customary to eat three meals a day, then a person tends to become hungry for three, even though two might be adequate. If a coffee hour is introduced in the morning, then that becomes a habit of appetite satisfaction as well as a social need.
Secondary needs are more vague because they represent needs of the mind and spirit rather than of the physical body. Many of these needs are developed as people mature. Examples are needs that pertain to self-esteem, sense of duty, competitiveness, self-assertion, and lo giving, belonging, and receiving affection. The secondary needs are those that complicate the motivational efforts of managers. Nearly any action that management takes will affect secondary needs; (here/ore, managerial planning should consider the effect of any proposed action on the secondary needs of employees, Here are seven key conclusions about secondary needs. They:
0 Are strongly conditioned by experience
1 Vary in type and intensity among people
2 Are subject to change across time within any individual
3 Cannot usually be isolated, but rather work in combination and influence one another.
4 Are often hidden from conscious recognition
5 Are vague feelings as opposed to specific physical needs
6 Influence behavior in powerful ways
Whereas the three motivational drives identified earlier were not grouped in any particular pattern, the three major theories of human/needs -presented in the following sections attempt to classify those needs. At least implicitly, the theories of Maslow, Hertzberg, and Alerter build on the distinction between primary and secondary needs. Also, there are some similarities as well as important differences among the three, approaches. Despite their limitations, all three approaches to human needs help create an important basis for the more advanced motivational models to be discussed later.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
According to A. H. Maslow, human needs are not of equal strength, and they emerge in a definite sequence. In particular, as the primary needs become reasonably well satisfied, a person places more emphasis on the secondary needs. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs focuses attention on five levels.This hierarchy is briefly presented and then interpreted in the following sections. Lower-Order Needs First-level needs involve basic survival and include physiological needs for food, air, water, and sleep. The second need level that tends to dominate is bodily safety (such as freedom from a dangerous work environment) and economic security (such as a no-layoff guarantee or a comfortable retirement plan). These two need levels together are typically called lower-order needs, and they are similar to the primary no discussed earlier.
Higher-Order Needs There are three levels of higher-order needs. The third level ia the hierarchy concerns love, belonging, and social involvement at work (friendships and compatible associates). The needs at the fourth level encompass those for esteem and status, including one’s feelings of self-worth and of competence. The feeling of competence, which derives from the assurance of others, provides status. The fifth-level need is self-actualization, which means becoming all that one is capable of becoming, using one’s skills to the fullest, and stretching talents to the maximum.
Interpreting the Hierarchy of Needs Maslow’s need-hierarchy model essentially says that people have needs they wish to satisfy and that gratified needs are not as strongly motivating as unmet needs, Employees are more enthusiastically motivated by what they are currently seeking than by receiving more of what they already have. A fully satisfied need will not be a strong motivator. Interpreted in this way, the Maslow hierarchy of needs has had a powerful impact on contemporary managers, offering some useful ideas for helping managers think about motivating their employees. As a result of widespread familiarity with the model, today’s managers need to: ‘
Identify and accept employee needs
7 Recognize that needs may differ among employees 8 Offer satisfaction for the particular needs currently unmet 9 Realize that giving more of the same reward (especially one which satisfies lower-order needs) may have a diminishing impact on motivation. The Maslow model also has many limitations, and it has been sharply criticized. As a philosophical framework, it has been difficult to study and has not been fully verified. From a practical perspective, it is not easy to provide opportunities for self-actualization to all employees. In addition, research has not supported the presence of all five need levels as unique, nor has the five-step progression from lowest to highest need levels been established. There is, however, some evidence that unless the two lower-order needs (physiological and security) are basically satisfied, employees will not be greatly concerned with higher-order needs. The evidence for a more limited number of need levels is consistent with each of the two models discussed next.
Hertzberg’s Two-Factor Model
On the basis of research with engineers and accountants, Frederick Hertzberg, in the 1950s, developed a two-factor model of motivation. He asked his subjects to think of a time when they felt especially good about their jobs and a time when they felt especially bad about their jobs. He also asked them to describe the conditions that led to those feelings. Hertzberg found that employees named different types of conditions that produced good and bad feelings.
That is, if a feeling of achievement led to a good feeling, the lack of achievement was rarely given as cause for bad feelings. Instead, some other factor, such as company policy, was more frequently given as a cause of bad feelings.
Maintenance and Motivational Factors Hertzberg concluded that two separate sets of factors influenced motivation. Prior to that time, people had assumed that motivation and lack of motivation were merely opposites of one factor on a continuum. Hertzberg upset the traditional view by stating that certain job factors, such as job security and working conditions, dissatisfy employees primarily when the conditions are absent. However, their presence generally brings employees only to a neutral state. The factors are not strongly motivating. These potent dissatisfies are called hygiene factors, or maintenance factors, because they must not be ignored, They are necessary for building a foundation on which to create a reasonable level of motivation in employees. Other job conditions operate primarily to build this motivation, but their absence rarely is strongly dissatisfying. These conditions are known as motivational factors, motivators, or satisfiers.
For many years managers had been wondering why their custodial policies and wide array of fringe benefits were not increasing employee motivation. The idea of separate motivational and maintenance factors helped answer their question, because fringe benefits and personnel policies were primarily maintenance factors, according to Hertzberg. Job Content &Context: Motivational factors such as achievement and responsibility are related, for the most part, directly to the job itself, the employee’s performance, and the personal recognition and growth that employees experience. Motivators mostly are job-centered; they relate to job content. On the other hand, maintenance factors are mainly related to job context, because they are more related to the environment surrounding the job.
This difference between job content and job context is a significant of is. It shirrs that employees are motivated primarily by what they do for themselves. When they take responsibility or gain recognition through their own behavior, they are strongly motivated. Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivators The difference between job content and job context is similar to the difference between intrinsic and extrinsic motivators in psychology. Intrinsic motivators are internal rewards that a person feels when performing a job, so there is a direct and often immediate connection between work and rewards. An employee in this situation is self-motivated, Extrinsic motivators are external rewards that occur apart from the nature of work, providing no direct satisfaction at the defter the work is performed Examples are retirement plans, health insurance, and vacations. Although employees value these items, fey are not effective motivators.
Interpreting the Two-Factor Model Harrier’s model provides a useful distinction between maintenance factors, which are necessary but not sufficient, and motivational factors, which have the potential for improving employee effort. The two-factor model ‘ broadened managers’ perspectives by showing the potentially powerful role of intrinsic rewards that evolve from the work itself. (This conclusion ties in with a number of other important behavioral developments, such as job enrichment, empowerment, self-leadership, and quality of work life, which are. discussed in later chapters.) Nevertheless, managers should now be aware that they cannot neglect a wide rare. go of facers that create at least a neutral work environment. In addition, unless hygiene factors are reasonably adder; their absence will serve as significant distractions to workers. The Hertzberg model, like Maslow’s, has been widely criticized.
It is not universe applicable, because it was based on and applies best to managerial, professional, an; upper-level white-collar employees. The model also appears to reduce the motivation* importance of pay, status, and relations with others, since these are maintenance facto; This aspect of the model is counterintuitive to many managers and difficult for them k , accept.
Since there is no absolute distinction between the effects of the two major factors the model outlines only general tendencies,” maintenance factors may be motivators to some people, and motivators may be maintenance factors to others. Finally, the model also seems to be method-bound, meaning that only Hertzberg’s approach (asking for self-reports of favorable and unfavorable job experiences) produces the two-factor model. In short, there may be an appearance of two factors when in reality there is only one factor.
Alderfer’s E-R-G Mode:
Building upon earlier need models (primarily Maslow’s) and seeking to overcome some their weaknesses, Clayton Alderfer proposed a modified need hierarchy—the E-R-G model—with just three levels three levels. He suggested that employees are initially interested in satisfying their existence needs, which combine physiological and security factors. Pay, physical working conditions, job security, and fringe benefits can all address these needs. Relatedness needs are at the next level, and these involve being understood and accepted by people above, below, and around the employee at work and away Growth needs are in the third category; these involve the desire for both self-esteem at self-actualization.
The impending conversation between the president and the marketing manager could be structured around Alderfer’s E-R-G model. The president may first wish to identify which level or levels seem to be satisfied. For example, a large disparity between their salaries could lead the marketing manager to be frustrated with his existence needs, despite a respectable salary-and-bonus package. Or his immersion in his work through long hours and heavy travel as the stores prepared to open could have left his relatedness needs unsatisfied. Finally, assuming he has mastered his present job assignments, he may be experiencing the need to develop his no marketing capabilities and grow into new areas.
In addition to condensing Maslow’s five need levels into three that are more consistent with research, the E-R-G model differs in other ways. For example, the E-R-G model does not assume as rigorous a progression from level to level. Instead, it accepts the likelihood that all three levels might be active at any time—or even that just one of the higher levels might be active. It also suggests that a person frustrated at either of the two higher levels may return to concentrate on a lower level and then progress again. Finally, whereas the first two levels are somewhat limited in their requirements for satisfaction, the growth needs not only are unlimited but are actually further awakened each time some satisfaction is attained.
Comparison of the Maslow, Hertzberg, and Alderfer Modes
The similarities among the three models of human needs are quite apparent,but there are important contrasts, too. Maslow and Alderfer focus on the internal needs of the employee, whereas Herzberg also identifies and differentiates the conditions (job content or job context) that could be provided for need satisfaction. Popular interpretations of the Masiow and Herzberg models suggest that in modern societies many workers have already satisfied their lower-order needs, so they are now motivated mainly by higher-order needs and motivators.
Alderfer suggests that the failure to satisfy related-ness or growth needs will cause renewed interest in existence needs. Finally, all three models indicate that before a manager tries to administer a reward, he or she would find it useful to discover which need or needs dominate a particular employee at the time. In this way, all need models provide a foundation for the understanding and application of behavior modification.
The models of motivation that have been discussed up to this point are known as content theories of motivation because they focus on the content (nature) of items that may motivate a person. They relate to the person’s inner self and how that person’s internal state of needs determines behavior. The major difficulty with content models of motivation is that the needs people have are not subject to observation by managers or to precise measurement for monitoring purposes. It is difficult, for example, to measure an employee’s esteem needs or to assess how they change over time.
Further, simply knowing about an employee’s-needs does not directly suggest to managers what they should do with that information. As a result, there has been considerable interest in motivational models that rely more heavily on intended results, careful measurement, and systematic application of incentives. Organizational behavior modification, or OB Mod, is the application in organizations of the principles of behavior modification, which evolved from the work of B. F. Skinner. OB Mod and the next several models are process theories of motivation, since they provide perspectives on the dynamics by which employees can be motivated.