Importance and Theory of Motivation

 

Traditional Theory of Motivation: Maslow’s

Maslow’s Need Hierarchy Theory

It is probably safe to say that the most well-known theory of motivation is Maslow’s need hierarchy theory Maslow’s theory is based on the human needs. Drawing chiefly on his clinical experience, he classified all human needs into a hierarchical manner from the lower to the higher order.

In essence, he believed that once a given level of need is satisfied, it no longer serves to motivate man. Then, the next higher level of need has to be activated in order to motivate the man. Maslow identified five levels in his need hierarchy as shown in figure.

1. Physiological Needs

These needs are basic to human life and, hence, include food, clothing, shelter, air, water and necessities of life. These needs relate to the survival and maintenance of human life. They exert tremendous influence on human behaviour. These needs are to be met first at least partly before higher level needs emerge. Once physiological needs are satisfied, they no longer motivate the man.

2. Safety Needs

After satisfying the physiological needs, the next needs felt are called safety and security needs. These needs find expression in such desires as economic security and protection from physical dangers. Meeting these needs requires more money and, hence, the individual is prompted to work more. Like physiological needs, these become inactive once they are satisfied.

3. Social Needs

Man is a social being. He is, therefore, interested in social interaction, companionship, belongingness, etc. It is this socialising and belongingness why individuals prefer to work in groups and especially older people go to work.

4. Esteem Needs

These needs refer to self-esteem and self-respect. They include such needs which indicate self-confidence, achievement, competence, knowledge and independence. The fulfillment of esteem needs leads to self-confidence, strength and capability of being useful in the organisation. However, inability to fulfill these needs results in feeling like inferiority, weakness and helplessness.

5. Self-Actualisation Needs

This level represents the culmination of all the lower, intermediate, and higher needs of human beings. In other words, the final step under the need hierarchy model is the need for self-actualization. This refers to fulfillment.

The term self-actualization was coined by Kurt Goldstein and means to become actualized in what one is potentially good at. In effect, self- actualization is the person’s motivation to transform perception of self into reality.

According to Maslow, the human needs follow a definite sequence of domination. The second need does not arise until the first is reasonably satisfied, and the third need does not emerge until the first two needs have been reasonably satisfied and it goes on. The other side of the need hierarchy is that human needs are unlimited. However, Maslow’s need hierarchy-theory is not without its detractors.

The main criticisms of the theory include the following:

(i)  The needs may or may not follow a definite hierarchical order. So to say, there may be overlapping in need hierarchy. For example, even if safety need is not satisfied, the social need may emerge.

(ii) The need priority model may not apply at all times in all places.

(iii) Researches show that man’s behaviour at any time is mostly guided by multiplicity of behaviour. Hence, Maslow’s preposition that one need is satisfied at one time is also of doubtful validity.

(iv) In case of some people, the level of motivation may be permanently lower. For example, a person suffering from chronic unemployment may remain satisfied for the rest of his life if only he/she can get enough food.

Notwithstanding, Maslow’s need hierarchy theory has received wide recognition, particularly among practicing managers. This can be attributed to the theory’s intuitive logic and easy to understand. One researcher came to the conclusion that theories that are intuitively strong die hard’.

Herzberg’s Motivation Hygiene Theory

The psychologist Frederick Herzberg extended the work of Maslow and propsed a new motivation theory popularly known as Herzberg’s Motivation Hygiene (Two-Factor) Theory. Herzberg conducted a widely reported motivational study on 200 accountants and engineers employed by firms in and around Western Pennsylvania.

He asked these people to describe two important incidents at their jobs:

(i) When did you feel particularly good about your job, and

(ii) When did you feel exceptionally bad about your job? He used the critical incident method of obtaining data.

The responses when analysed were found quite interesting and fairly consistent. The replies respondents gave when they felt good about their jobs were significantly different from the replies given when they felt bad. Reported good feelings were generally associated with job satisfaction, whereas bad feeling with job dissatisfaction. Herzberg labelled the job satisfiers motivators, and he called job dissatisfies hygiene or maintenance factors. Taken together, the motivators and hygiene factors have become known as Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation

Herzberg’s motivational and hygiene factors have been shown in the Fig.

According to Herzberg, the opposite of satisfaction is not dissatisfaction. The underlying reason, he says, is that removal of dissatisfying characteristics from a job does not necessarily make the job satisfying. He believes in the existence of a dual continuum. The opposite of ‘satisfaction’ is ‘no satisfaction’ and the opposite of ‘dissatisfaction’ is ‘no dissatisatisfaction’.

According to Herzberg, today’s motivators are tomorrow’s hygiene because the latter stop influencing the behaviour of persons when they get them. Accordingly, one’s hygiene may be the motivator of another.

However, Herzberg’s model is labeled with the following criticism also:

1. People generally tend to take credit themselves when things go well. They blame failure on the external environment.
2. The theory basically explains job satisfaction, not motivation.
3. Even job satisfaction is not measured on an overall basis. It is not unlikely that a person may dislike part of his/ her job, still thinks the job acceptable.
4. This theory neglects situational variable to motivate an individual.

Because of its ubiquitous nature, salary commonly shows up as a motivator as well as hygine.

Regardless of criticism, Herzberg’s ‘two-factor motivation theory’ has been widely read and a few managers seem untaminar with his recommendations. The main use of his recommendations lies in planning and controlling of employees work.

Contemporary Theories of Motivation: Self-Determination Theory, Self-Efficacy Theory, Vroom’s Expectancy Theory

Early motivation theories were based on the assumptions and sometime these theories were not supported by strong evidence. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is a good example of this approach. Therefore, alternative theories of motivation have been put forward over time.

1. Self-determination Theory

Self-determination theory suggests that people are motivated to grow and change by three innate and universal psychological needs.

This theory suggests that people are able to become self-determined when their needs for competence, connection, and autonomy are fulfilled.

The concept of intrinsic motivation, or engaging in activities for the inherent rewards of the behavior itself, plays an important role in self-determination theory.

Self-determination theory grew out of the work of psychologists Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, who first introduced their ideas in their 1985 book Self-Determination and Intrinsic Motivation in Human Behavior. They developed a theory of motivation which suggested that people tend to be driven by a need to grow and gain fulfillment.

Two key assumptions of the theory

(i) The need for growth drives behavior

The first assumption of self-determination theory is that people are actively directed toward growth. Gaining mastery over challenges and taking in new experiences are essential for developing a cohesive sense of self.

(ii) Autonomous motivation is important

While people are often motivated to act by external rewards such as money, prizes, and acclaim (known as extrinsic motivation), self-determination theory focuses primarily on internal sources of motivation such as a need to gain knowledge or independence (known as intrinsic motivation).

According to self-determination theory, people need to feel the following in order to achieve psychological growth:

• Competence: People need to gain mastery of tasks and learn different skills. When people feel that they have the skills needed for success, they are more likely to take actions that will help them achieve their goals.
• Connection or Relatedness: People need to experience a sense of belonging and attachment to other people.
• Autonomy: People need to feel in control of their own behaviors and goals. This sense of being able to take direct action that will result in real change plays a major part in helping people feel self-determined.

Imagine a person who fails to complete an important project at work. If this person is high in self-determination, they will admit their fault, believe that they can do something to fix the problem and take action to correct the mistake.

If that same person was low in self-determination, they might instead look for other things that they can blame. They might make excuses, assign blame, or refuse to admit that their own role. Most importantly, perhaps, is that this person won’t feel motivated to fix the mistake. Instead, they might feel helpless to control the situation and believe that nothing that they do will have any real effect.

2. Self-efficacy Theory

(i) Experience

Experience refers to your past experience of completing similar tasks. This is the most important factor in self-efficacy.

If you performed a similar task well in the past, then you are more likely to be confident that you can complete similar tasks well in the future.

(ii) Vicarious Experience

You can develop self-efficacy vicariously by watching other people perform a task.

If you watch someone similar to you perform a task and succeed at that task then your self-efficacy will increase. Conversely, if you watch someone similar to you perform a task and fail then this can have a negative effect on your self-efficacy.

(iii) Social Persuasion

You can increase your self-efficacy if others give you encouragement that you can perform a task. Likewise, your self-efficacy will decrease if you receive discouraging or disparaging remarks about your ability to perform a task.

(iv) Physiological Feedback

When confronted with a task you experience a sensation from your body. How you interpret these signals will impact you self-efficacy.

For example, if you are due to perform a presentation to a large crowd of people you might experience butterflies in your stomach.

3. Vroom’s expectancy Theory

Vroom’s Expectancy Theory was proposed by Victor. H. Vroom, who believed that people are motivated to perform activities to achieve some goal to the extent they expect that certain actions on their part would help them to achieve the goal.

Vroom’s Expectancy Theory is based on the assumption that an individual’s behavior results from the choices made by him with respect to the alternative course of action, which is related to the psychological events occurring simultaneously with the behavior. This means an individual selects a certain behavior over the other behaviors with an expectation of getting results, the one desired for.

Thus, Vroom’s Expectancy Theory has its roots in the cognitive concept, i.e. how an individual processes the different elements of motivation. This theory is built around the concept of valence, instrumentality, and Expectancy and, therefore, is often called as VIE theory.

The algebraic representation of Vroom’s Expectancy theory is:

Motivation (force) = ∑Valence x Expectancy

(i) Valence

It refers to the value that an individual places on a particular outcome or a strength of an individual’s preference for the expected rewards of the outcome. To have a positive valence, one should prefer attaining the outcome to not attaining it. For example, if an employee gets motivated by promotions, then he might not value offers of increased incentives. The valence is zero if an individual prefers not attaining outcomes to attaining it. In the above example, an employee agrees with the increased incentives.

(ii) Instrumentality

Another major input into the valence is the instrumentality of first level outcome in obtaining the second level outcome, i.e. a degree to which the first level leads to the second level outcome. For example, suppose an employee desires promotion and he feel that superior performance is a key factor to achieve the goal. Thus, his first level outcomes are superior, average and poor performance and the second level outcome is the promotion.

Hence, the first level outcome of high performance acquires the positive valence so as to have the expected relationship with the second level outcome of the promotion. Thus, an employee will be motivated to perform efficiently with a desire to get promoted.

(iii) Expectancy

Expectancy, another factor that determines the motivation, refers to the probability that a particular action will lead to the desired outcome. The expectancy is different from the instrumentality in the sense; it relates efforts to the first level outcome, whereas the instrumentality relates to first and second-level outcomes to each other. Thus, expectancy is the probability that a particular action will lead to a particular first-level outcome.