Introduction
Motivation is the psychological process that directs people’s choices regarding the type and intensity of their behavior. A common misconception among managers is that motivation is merely the desire to work hard. Consequently, managers often think that only productive workers possess motivation. In contrast, psychologists define motivation as a general process that influences virtually all behavior. Thus, psychologists believe that all workers are motivated. Some workers are motivated to work hard; other workers are motivated to stay home.
A basic principle that underlies most modern theories of motivation is that motivated behavior is performed to obtain pleasurable outcomes. Based on this principle, motivational theorists have defined two types of motivation: intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. A behavior is intrinsically motivated if the valued or pleasurable outcome associated with the behavior is in the behavior itself. The intrinsically motivated employee works because the work itself is enjoyable. A behavior is extrinsically motivated if the valued outcome associated with the behavior is performed only as a means to obtain the outcome. The extrinsically motivated worker works not because the work is pleasurable but because working leads to a pleasurable outcome external to the job, such as money, status, security, or friendship.
Expectancy Theory
The most popular and widely accepted theory of work motivation is the expectancy theory. Originally proposed by Victor Vroom, this model has been elaborated on by a large number of researchers. The expectancy theory describes the decision-making process that people experience when they choose which behavior to perform. It suggests that a person’s motivation to perform some behavior is a function of three components: expectancy, instrumentality, and valence.
“Expectancy” refers to a person’s beliefs about his or her ability to perform a behavior. “Instrumentality” refers to a person’s beliefs about the likelihood that a number of outcomes will occur if the behavior is performed. “Valence” refers to how positively or negatively a person values these outcomes. The expectancy theory suggests that when people are deciding which of a number of behaviors they will perform, they consider the three components associated with each behavior and choose the behavior that is most likely to lead to positive outcomes.
For example, a worker is given an opportunity to receive a bonus for completing a project early. The employee’s motivation to work on the project is a function of the worker’s beliefs about her ability to get the project done early (expectancy), her beliefs about the likelihood that she will actually receive a bonus for completing the project early (instrumentality), and the degree to which she values the bonus (valence). To the extent that the worker values the bonus, is certain that the bonus will be awarded if the project is completed early, and is certain that she is capable of completing the project, the worker will be motivated to complete the project early. Whether the worker attempts to complete the project, however, is influenced by her competing motivation to perform other behaviors. While the worker may be motivated to complete the project, she may also feel that other activities, such as going on vacation or calling in sick, are more likely to lead to equally or more pleasurable outcomes than the bonus.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
The expectancy theory is considered a cognitive model. The theory proposes that behavior is guided by choices based on beliefs and values. The theory describes the process of decision making. “Needs models” are another type of motivation model. Needs models complement the process-oriented cognitive models by suggesting the categories of outcomes that people typically value. Needs models also provide insight into how the values of outcomes change.
The most widely known needs model is the hierarchy of needs
theory, proposed by Abraham Maslow. Maslow suggested that all people have five categories of needs, which are arranged in a hierarchy. From lowest level to highest level, these needs include physiological needs, safety needs, social needs, esteem needs, and self-actualization needs. Maslow argued that a person’s first concern is to fulfill the lowest level of unsatisfied need. When a need is not satisfied, opportunities to fill the need gain value. As the need is met, opportunities to fill the satisfied need lose value, and opportunities to satisfy the next higher level of need gain value. For example, once a worker has enough air, water, and food, thus satisfying his or her physiological needs, the worker will become less concerned about these needs and will value opportunities to fill safety needs. The process of unsatisfied needs gaining value and satisfied needs losing value continues up the hierarchy through safety, social, and esteem needs. When all the lower-level needs are reasonably well satisfied, people will most highly value opportunities for self-actualization. Self-actualization can be thought of as the process of developing one’s physical and mental skills to the limit of one’s potential.
Maslow’s theory helps define the distinction between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Extrinsic motivation usually involves performing a job as a way to meet physiological, safety, and social needs. Intrinsic motivation typically occurs when a job offers opportunities to meet higher-level needs. That is, the work itself becomes enjoyable when performance of the job leads to greater self-esteem and self-actualization.
Role of a Supervisor
The supervisor’s job is to increase a subordinate’s motivation to be productive. The supervisor does this by defining productivity and establishing a contingency between productive behavior and the attainment of an outcome the worker values. That valued outcome can be either in the job itself, involving intrinsic motivation, or external to the job, involving extrinsic motivation. The expectancy theory offers a number of guidelines for helping supervisors establish productivity-outcome contingencies.
First, a supervisor must make certain that the employee believes she or he can be productive. That is, the supervisor must heighten the employee’s expectancy beliefs. For example, the supervisor must clearly explain to the employee what behaviors or levels of performance constitute productivity. The supervisor may then need to provide training, giving the employee the skills necessary to meet the performance criteria. Additionally, the supervisor may need to coach the employee, convincing the employee that he or she has the potential to be productive.
Next, a supervisor must make certain that the employee believes that productive performance will lead to positive outcomes. (The supervisor must strengthen the employee’s instrumentality beliefs.) In doing this, the supervisor must clearly explain the potential benefits of productive behavior, including any organizational policies regarding compensation and promotion. Finally, a supervisor must make certain that the employee values the outcome associated with productive behavior—that is, the supervisor must heighten the valence of productive performance. If the supervisor wants to increase intrinsic motivation, the supervisor must make certain that the employee can find the job itself enjoyable. If the supervisor wants to increase extrinsic motivation, he or she must offer a performance reward that the employee enjoys.
Enhancing Employee Motivation
The expectancy theory provides useful theoretical guidelines for shaping employee motivation. Over the years, researchers have developed a number of specific techniques for increasing employee motivation to be productive. Two of the most useful techniques involve goal setting and job enrichment.
Goal setting involves assigning specific objectives for employee performance. For example, goal setting might be applied to the job of a computer disk-drive assembler in the following way. The assembler would meet with his or her supervisor. Using information about the worker’s past performance, the supervisor and assembler would set a challenging goal regarding the number of disk drives to be assembled per week. The supervisor and assembler would then negotiate rewards for completing the goal on time. Each day, the supervisor would give the worker feedback by posting a running total of the number of disk drives assembled. At the end of the week, the worker’s production would be reviewed and appropriate rewards would be given.
Edwin Locke and Gary Latham have studied goal setting extensively. They found that goals will lead to greater productivity if the goals are specific, difficult, and set with time deadlines. Further, goal setting programs will be more effective if the employee receives frequent feedback, allowing the employee to monitor his or her progress toward goal attainment. Additionally, goal setting will increase productivity if the employee is highly committed to the goal; giving employees the opportunity to participate in setting goals is one way to increase goal commitment. Finally, the effects of goal setting may be improved by establishing rewards for meeting goals on time. Other popular motivational techniques that involve goal setting include management by objectives (MBO) and organizational behavior modification (often called OBMod).
Job enrichment, a technique designed specifically to increase intrinsic motivation, was introduced by Frederick Herzberg. Herzberg argued that people will find a job enjoyable if the job provides opportunities to learn, to be responsible, and to experience a sense of achievement. For example, job enrichment might also be applied to the assembler’s job. To enrich the job of the disk-drive assembler, the supervisor might change the job so that the assembler assembles a whole computer rather than only the disk drives. This would require greater knowledge and skills. The assembler could be given greater responsibility and be made accountable for the quality of each of the computers he or she assembles. Additional responsibility could be given to the assembler by providing the assembler a budget and requiring the assembler to order all the parts needed for assembly. Finally, the assembler might be given the opportunity to schedule his or her own hours.
Herzberg, like Maslow, argued that people have an innate need to grow psychologically and to develop their skills. Herzberg enriched the jobs of mechanics, secretaries, janitors, managers, and assembly-line workers. He found that giving workers challenging and interesting work, personal accountability for success and failures, control over organizational resources, and opportunities to self-schedule increased production quantity, improved production quality, and heightened job satisfaction.
Theoretical Evolution
Modern work motivation theories span three eras. The first period was the scientific management era, which began around the beginning of the twentieth century, when Frederick Winslow Taylor
applied scientific methodology to the study of worker efficiency. Taylor assumed that workers were basically lazy and incapable of self-direction. He proposed that the best way to motivate workers was to simplify the worker’s job as much as possible, to determine empirically the most efficient movements the worker needed to perform the job, and to make pay contingent on job performance. Taylor applied the principles of scientific management
to steelworkers and was able to increase productivity dramatically. The result of scientific management was that managers treated employees as if they were simply part of the production machinery. By making jobs specialized and repetitive, the manager could structure and fine-tune a worker’s performance. Job routinization, coupled with the assumption that employees were naturally uninterested in work, led managers to use extrinsic motivation techniques.
The next period of work motivation theory was the human relations era. This period began in the 1930s, with a classic study by Elton Mayo, Fritz Roethlisberger, and William Dickson at the Hawthorne Western Electric Plant, near Chicago, Illinois. These researchers conducted numerous experiments and interviews that led them to question the fundamental assumptions of scientific management. The researchers found that workers were strongly influenced by social norms and that peers could have as much influence on productivity as rules and incentives. They also found that workers expressed a strong desire to have their opinions heard and to make decisions regarding their jobs. The outcome of the human relations era was that managers began to show greater concern for employees’ opinions and social needs. Managers assumed that the best way to motivate employees was to alleviate employee morale problems and to improve social relations on the job.
It was not until the human potential movement
that managers and psychologists began to emphasize intrinsic motivation. This period began in the 1960s with a growing concern over job satisfaction. Attracted to the work of Maslow and Herzberg, managers began to recognize employees’ needs for psychological growth. Managers thus assumed that the best way to motivate workers was to give workers more opportunities to learn and to experience responsibility.
Beginning in the 1970s, motivational theorists and researchers became less concerned about finding the one best way to motivate employees. Instead, they took a more eclectic approach, elaborating on and integrating established motivation theories. For example, researchers have become interested in the degree to which extrinsic motivational strategies, such as performance bonuses, interfere with or supplement intrinsic motivation.
As work roles become more central to people’s identity, as world economic competition increases, and as telecommunications and the Internet change the dynamics of work and the workplace, work motivation should remain a popular area of research. Managers will continue to find motivation theories useful in improving job satisfaction and increasing worker productivity.
Bibliography
Bakker, Arnold B., and Michael P. Leiter. Work Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research. New York: Psychology, 2010. Print.
Deckers, Lambert. Motivation: Biological, Psychological, and Environmental. 4th ed. Boston: Pearson, 2013. Print.
Doyle, Christine E. Work and Organizational Psychology: An Introduction with Attitude. New York: Psychology, 2003. Print.
Fowler, Susan. Why Motivating People Doesn't Work . . . and What Does: The Science of Leading, Energizing, and Engaging. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2014. Print.
Gagné, Marylène. The Oxford Handbook of Work Engagement, Motivation, and Self-Determination Theory. New York: Oxford UP, 2014. Print.
Hodson, Christine. Psychology and Work. New York: Routledge, 2001. Print.
Maslow, Abraham H. Toward a Psychology of Being. 3d ed. New York: Wiley, 1999. Print.
Pinder, Craig C. Work Motivation in Organizational Behavior. 2d ed. New York: Psychology, 2008. Print.
Schultz, Duane P., and Sydney Ellen Schultz. Psychology and Work Today: An Introduction to Industrial and Organizational Psychology. 10th ed. New York: Pearson, 2009. Print.
Sinnott, Jan D. POsitive Psychology: Advances in Understanding Adult Motivation. New York: Springer, 2013. Print.
Smither, Robert D., ed. The Psychology of Work and Human Performance. Reading: Addison, 1998. Print.
Taylor, Frederick Winslow. The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Cosimo, 2006. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment