BASIC MOTIVATION CONCEPTS
|
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After studying this chapter, students should be able to:
1. Outline the motivation
process.
2. Describe Maslow’s need
hierarchy.
3. Contrast Theory X and
Theory Y.
4. Differentiate motivators from hygiene factors.
5. List the
characteristics that high achievers prefer in a job.
6. Summarize the types of
goals that increase performance.
7. State the impact of
under-rewarding employees.
8. Clarify the key
relationships in expectancy theory.
9. Explain how the
contemporary theories of motivation complement each other.
CHAPTER OVERVIEW
The theories we have discussed in this chapter address different outcome
variables. Some, for instance, are directed at explaining turnover, while
others emphasize productivity. The theories also differ in their predictive
strength. In this section, we 1) review the key motivation theories to
determine their relevance in explaining our dependent variables, and 2) assess
the predictive power of each.
Need theories. We introduced four theories that focused on needs.
These were Maslow’s hierarchy, two-factor, ERG, and McClelland’s needs
theories. The strongest of these is probably the last, particularly regarding
the relationship between achievement and productivity. If the other three have
any value at all, that value relates to explaining and predicting job
satisfaction.
Goal-setting theory. There is little dispute that clear and difficult goals
lead to higher levels of employee productivity. This evidence leads us to
conclude that goal-setting theory provides one of the more powerful
explanations of this dependent variable. The theory, however, does not address
absenteeism, turnover, or satisfaction.
Reinforcement theory. This theory has an impressive record for predicting
factors like quality and quantity of work, persistence of effort, absenteeism,
tardiness, and accident rates. It does not offer much insight into employee
satisfaction or the decision to quit.
Equity theory. Equity theory deals with all four dependent variables.
However, it is strongest when predicting absence and turnover behaviors and
weakest when predicting differences in employee productivity.
Expectancy theory. Our final theory focused on performance variables. It
has proved to offer a relatively powerful explanation of employee productivity,
absenteeism, and turnover, but expectancy theory assumes that employees have
few constraints on their decision discretion. It makes many of the same
assumptions that the rational model makes about individual decision-making (see
Chapter 5). This acts to restrict its applicability.
For major decisions, such as accepting or resigning from a job,
expectancy theory works well because people do not rush into decisions of this
nature. They are more prone to take the time to carefully consider the costs
and benefits of all the alternatives. However, expectancy theory is not a very
good explanation for more typical types of work behavior, especially for
individuals in lower-level jobs, because such jobs come with considerable
limitations imposed by work methods, supervisors, and company policies. We
would conclude, therefore, that expectancy theory’s power in explaining
employee productivity increases where the jobs being performed are more complex
and higher in the organization (where discretion is greater).
A Guide through the Maze. Exhibit 6-10 summarizes what we know about the
power of the more well known motivation theories to explain and predict our
four dependent variables. While based on a wealth of research, it also includes
some subjective judgments. However, it does provide a reasonable guide through
the motivation theory maze.
WEB EXERCISES
At the end of each chapter of this
instructor’s manual you will find suggested exercises and ideas for researching
the WWW on OB topics. The exercises “Exploring
OB Topics on the Web” are set up so that you can simply photocopy the pages,
distribute them to your class, and make assignments accordingly. You may want to assign the exercises as an
out-of-class activity or as lab activities with your class. Within the lecture notes the graphic
will note that there is a WWW activity to
support this material.
The chapter opens with the story of EMC data storage,
which is among employers that are having employees walk on 1500 degree
coals. While there is no proof that
walking on coals increases accomplishment by snuffing out fear, the anecdotal
evidence from some of the senior employees suggests that does motivate
employees at EMC to tackle the difficult jobs.
CHAPTER OUTLINE
A.
What is Motivation?
|
Notes:
|
1. Many people incorrectly view motivation as
a personal trait—that is, some have it and others do not. Motivation is the result of the interaction
of the individual and the situation.
2. Definition: Motivation
is “the processes that account for an individual’s intensity, direction, and
persistence of effort toward attaining a goal.”
3. We will narrow the focus to organizational
goals in order to reflect our singular interest in work-related behavior.
4. The three key elements of our definition
are intensity, direction, and persistence:
·
Intensity is concerned with how hard a person tries. This
is the element most of us focus on when we talk about motivation.
·
Direction is the orientation that benefits the
organization.
·
Persistence is a measure of how long a person can maintain
his/her effort. Motivated individuals stay with a task long enough to achieve
their goal.
|
|
B.
Early Theories of Motivation
|
|
1. In the 1950s three specific theories were
formulated and are the best known:
hierarch of needs theory, Theories X and Y, and the two-factor theory.
2. These early theories are important to
understand because they represent a foundation from which contemporary
theories have grown. Practicing managers still regularly use these theories and
their terminology in explaining employee motivation.
|
|
C.
Hierarchy of Needs Theory
|
Notes:
|
1. Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is the
most well-known theory of motivation.
He hypothesized that within every human being there exists a hierarchy
of five needs: (See Exhibit 6-1).
·
Physiological: Includes hunger, thirst, shelter, sex, and
other bodily needs
·
Safety: Includes security and protection from
physical and emotional harm
·
Social: Includes affection, belongingness,
acceptance, and friendship
·
Esteem: Includes internal esteem factors such as
self-respect, autonomy, and achievement; and external esteem factors such as
status, recognition, and attention
·
Self-actualization: The drive to
become what one is capable of becoming; includes growth, achieving one’s
potential, and self-fulfillment
2. As a need becomes substantially satisfied,
the next need becomes dominant. No need is ever fully gratified; a
substantially satisfied need no longer motivates.
3. Maslow separated the five
needs into higher and lower orders.
·
Physiological and safety needs are described as
lower-order.
·
Social, esteem, and self-actualization are as
higher-order needs
·
Higher-order needs are satisfied internally.
·
Lower-order needs are predominantly satisfied
externally.
4. Maslow’s need theory has received wide
recognition, particularly among practicing managers. Research does not
generally validate the theory.
5. Maslow provided no empirical
substantiation, and several studies that sought to validate the theory found
no support for it.
|
|
Instructor Note:
At this point in the lecture you
may want to introduce the TEAM EXERCISE:
What Do
People Want from Their Jobs? found in the text. The purpose of the exercise is to help
students better understand the importance of Herzberg’s model. It illustrates the difference between what motivates
individuals versus what causes only satisfaction.
D.
Theory X and Theory Y
|
Notes:
|
1. Douglas McGregor concluded that a
manager’s view of the nature of human beings is based on a certain grouping
of assumptions and he or she tends to mold his or her behavior toward
employees according to these assumptions.
2. Theory X assumptions are
basically negative.
·
Employees inherently dislike work and, whenever
possible, will attempt to avoid it.
·
Since
employees dislike work, they must be coerced, controlled, or threatened with
punishment.
·
Employees will avoid responsibilities and seek formal
direction whenever possible.
·
Most workers place security above all other factors
and will display little ambition.
|
D. Theory X and Theory Y (cont.)
|
Notes:
|
3. Theory Y assumptions are
basically positive.
·
Employees can view work as being as natural as rest or
play.
·
People will exercise self-direction and self-control
if they are committed to the objectives.
·
The average person can learn to accept, even seek,
responsibility.
·
The ability to make innovative decisions is widely
dispersed throughout the population.
4. What are the implications for
managers? This is best explained by
using Maslow’s framework:
·
Theory X assumes that lower-order needs dominate
individuals.
·
Theory Y assumes that higher-order needs dominate
individuals.
·
McGregor himself held to the belief that Theory Y
assumptions were more valid than Theory X.
·
There is no evidence to confirm that either set of
assumptions is valid.
·
Either Theory X or Theory Y assumptions may be
appropriate in a particular situation.
|
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the MYTH OR
SCIENCE?: “People Are
Inherently Lazy” found in the text and at the end of these chapter
notes. The discussion of the material
will provide students the opportunity to identify Theory X or Theory Y theories
in practice.
MYTH OR SCIENCE? – “People Are
Inherently Lazy”
This statement is false on two levels. All people are not inherently lazy, and
“laziness” is more a function of the situation than an inherent individual
characteristic. If this statement is meant to imply that all people are
inherently lazy, the evidence strongly indicated the contrary. Many people today suffer from the opposite
affliction—they are overly busy, overworked, and suffer from over-exertion.
Whether externally motivated or internally-driven, a good portion of the labor
force is anything but lazy.
Managers frequently draw that conclusion by
watching a few of their employees who may be lazy at work, but these same
employees are often quite industrious off the job. People’s need structures
differ. As accompanying Exhibit 6-2
illustrates, evidence indicates that work needs differ by gender, age income
level, job type, and level in the organization.
Unfortunately, work often ranks low in its ability
to satisfy individual needs. Very few people are perpetually lazy. They merely
differ in terms of the activities they most enjoy doing.
Class Exercise:
Before reviewing this situation, discuss with students the task of
working on team projects.
What constitutes working hard on a team project?
What motivates them to work hard?
Why would a team member not work hard? Not carry his/her fair share?
How could they make the team project as important to the other team
members as it is to them?
E.
Two-Factor Theory
|
Notes:
|
1. The Two-Factor Theory is
sometimes also called motivation-hygiene theory.
2. Proposed by psychologist Frederick
Herzberg when he investigated the question, “What do people want from their
jobs?” He asked people to describe, in detail, situations in which they felt
exceptionally good or bad about their jobs. These responses were then
tabulated and categorized.
3. From the categorized
responses, Herzberg concluded:
·
Intrinsic factors, such as advancement, recognition,
responsibility, and achievement seem to be related to job satisfaction.
·
Dissatisfied respondents tended to cite extrinsic
factors, such as supervision, pay, company policies, and working conditions.
·
The opposite of satisfaction is not dissatisfaction.
·
Removing dissatisfying characteristics from a job does
not necessarily make the job satisfying.
4. Job satisfaction factors are separate and
distinct from job dissatisfaction factors. Managers who eliminate job
dissatisfaction factors may not necessarily bring about motivation.
5. When hygiene factors are adequate, people
will not be dissatisfied; neither will they be satisfied. To motivate people,
emphasize factors intrinsically rewarding that are associated with the work
itself or to outcomes directly derived from it.
6. Criticisms of the theory:
·
The procedure that Herzberg used is limited by its methodology.
·
The reliability of Herzberg’s methodology is
questioned.
·
No overall measure of satisfaction was utilized.
·
Herzberg assumed a relationship between satisfaction
and productivity, but the research methodology he used looked only at
satisfaction, not at productivity.
7. Regardless of criticisms, Herzberg’s
theory has been widely read, and few managers are unfamiliar with his
recommendations.
·
The popularity of vertically expanding jobs to allow
workers greater responsibility can probably be attributed to Herzberg’s
findings.
·
Contemporary Theories of Motivation
|
Contemporary Theories of Motivation
|
Notes:
|
The following theories are considered contemporary not because they
necessarily were developed recently, but because they represent the current
state of the art in explaining employee motivation.
|
|
A.
ERG Theory
|
|
1. Clayton Alderfer reworked Maslow’s need
hierarchy to align it with the empirical
research. His revised need hierarchy is labeled ERG theory.
2. Alderfer argues that there are three
groups of core needs: existence, relatedness, and growth.
|
A. ERG Theory (cont.)
|
Notes:
|
3. The
existence group
·
Provides our basic material existence requirements
·
They include Maslow’s physiological and safety needs.
4.
Relatedness
·
The desire we have for maintaining important
interpersonal relationships
·
These social and status desires require interaction
with others.
·
They align with Maslow’s social need and the external
component.
5.
Growth needs
·
An intrinsic desire for personal development
·
These include the intrinsic component from Maslow’s
esteem category and the characteristics included under self-actualization.
6. In addition to collapsing Maslow’s five
into three, Alderfer’s ERG theory also differs from Maslow’s in that:
·
More than one need may be operative at the same time.
·
If the gratification of a higher-level need is
stifled, the desire to satisfy a lower-level need increases.
·
ERG theory does not assume that there exists a rigid
hierarchy. A person can be working on growth even though existence or
relatedness needs are unsatisfied, or all three need categories could be
operating at the same time.
7. ERG theory also contains a
frustration-regression dimension.
·
Maslow argued that an individual would stay at a certain
need level until that need was satisfied.
ERG argues that multiple needs can be operating as motivators at the
same time.
·
ERG theory notes that when a higher-order need level
is frustrated, the individual’s desire to increase a lower-level need takes
place.
8. ERG theory is more consistent with our
knowledge of individual differences among people.
·
Variables such as education, family background, and
cultural environment can alter the importance or driving force that a group
of needs holds for a particular individual.
·
The evidence demonstrating that people in other
cultures rank the need categories differently would be consistent with ERG
theory.
|
B.
McClelland’s Theory of Needs
|
|
1. The theory focuses on three
needs: achievement, power, and affiliation.
·
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
|
B. McClelland’s Theory of Needs (cont.)
|
Notes:
|
2. Some people have a compelling drive to
succeed. They are striving for personal achievement rather than the rewards
of success per se. This drive is the achievement need (nAch).
3. McClelland found that high achievers
differentiate themselves from others by their desire to do things better.
·
They seek personal responsibility for finding
solutions to problems.
·
They want to receive rapid feedback on their
performance so they can tell easily whether they are improving or not.
·
They can set moderately challenging goals. High
achievers are not gamblers; they dislike succeeding by chance.
·
High achievers perform best when they perceive their
probability of success as 50-50.
·
They like to set goals that require stretching
themselves a little.
4. The need for power (nPow) is the desire to
have impact, to be influential, and to control others.
·
Individuals high in nPow enjoy being “in charge.”
·
Strive for influence over others
·
Prefer to be placed into competitive and
status-oriented situations
·
Tend to be more concerned with prestige and gaining
influence over others than with effective performance
5. The third need isolated by
McClelland is affiliation (nAfl).
·
This need has received the least attention from
researchers.
·
Individuals with a high affiliation motive strive for
friendship.
·
Prefer cooperative situations rather than competitive
ones
·
Desire relationships involving a high degree of mutual
understanding
6. Relying on an extensive amount of
research, some reasonably well-supported predictions can be made based on the
relationship between achievement need and job performance.
·
First, as shown in Exhibit 6-4, individuals with a
high need to achieve prefer job situations with personal responsibility,
feedback, and an intermediate degree of risk. When these characteristics are
prevalent, high achievers will be strongly motivated.
·
Second, a high need to achieve does not necessarily
lead to being a good manager, especially in large organizations. People with
a high achievement need are interested in how well they do personally and not
in influencing others to do well.
·
Third, the needs for affiliation and power tend to be
closely related to managerial success. The best managers are high in their
need for power and low in their need for affiliation.
·
Finally, employees have been successfully trained to
stimulate their achievement need. Trainers have been effective in teaching
individuals to think in terms of accomplishments, winning, and success, and
then helping them to learn how to act in a high achievement way by preferring
situations where they have personal responsibility, feedback, and moderate
risks.
|
C.
Cognitive Evaluation Theory
|
Notes:
|
1. In the late 1960s, one researcher proposed
that the introduction of extrinsic rewards, such as pay, for work effort that
had been previously intrinsically rewarding due to the pleasure associated
with the content of the work itself, would tend to decrease the overall level
of motivation.
2. This has come to be called the cognitive
evaluation theory. Well researched and supported theorists have assumed
that intrinsic motivations, such as achievement, etc., are independent of
extrinsic motivators such as high pay, promotions, etc.
3. Cognitive evaluation theory suggests
otherwise. When extrinsic rewards are used by organizations as payoffs for
superior performance, the intrinsic rewards, which are derived from
individuals doing what they like, are reduced.
4. The popular explanation is that the
individual experiences a loss of control over his or her own behavior so that
the previous intrinsic motivation diminishes.
5. Furthermore, the elimination of extrinsic
rewards can produce a shift—from an external to an internal explanation—in an
individual’s perception of causation of why he or she works on a task.
6. If the cognitive evaluation theory is
valid, it should have major implications for managerial practices.
·
If pay or other extrinsic rewards are to be effective
motivators, they should be made contingent on an individual’s performance.
·
Cognitive evaluation theorists would argue that this
will tend only to decrease the internal satisfaction that the individual
receives from doing the job.
·
If correct, it would make sense to make an
individual’s pay non-contingent on performance in order to avoid decreasing
intrinsic motivation.
7. While supported in a number of studies,
cognitive evaluation theory has also met with attacks, specifically on the
methodology used and in the interpretation of the findings.
10. Further research is
needed to clarify some of the current ambiguity. The evidence does lead us to conclude that
the interdependence of extrinsic and intrinsic rewards is a real phenomenon.
11. Its impact on
employee motivation at work may be considerably less than originally thought.
·
First, many of the studies testing the theory were
done with students.
·
Second, evidence indicates that very high intrinsic
motivation levels are strongly resistant to the detrimental impacts of
extrinsic rewards.
·
The theory may have limited applicability to work
organizations because most low-level jobs are not inherently satisfying
enough to foster high intrinsic interest, and many managerial and professional
positions offer intrinsic rewards.
|
D.
Goal-Setting Theory
|
Notes:
|
1. In the late 1960s, Edwin Locke proposed
that intentions to work toward a goal are a major source of work motivation.
2. Goals tell an employee what needs to be
done and how much effort is needed. The evidence strongly supports the value
of goals.
3. Specific hard goals produce a higher level
of output than do the generalized goals.
4. If factors like ability and acceptance of
the goals are held constant, we can also state that the more difficult the
goal, the higher the level of performance.
5. People will do better when they get
feedback on how well they are progressing toward their goals. Self-generated
feedback is more powerful a motivator than externally generated feedback.
The
evidence is mixed regarding the superiority of participative over assigned
goals. If employees have the opportunity to participate in the setting of
their own goals, will they try harder?
A major advantage of
participation may be in increasing acceptance.
If people
participate in goal setting, they are more likely to accept even a difficult
goal than if they are arbitrarily assigned it by their boss.
7. There are contingencies in goal-setting
theory. In addition to feedback, four other factors influence the
goals-performance relationship.
Goal commitment: Goal-setting theory presupposes that an
individual is committed to the goal.
Adequate
self-efficacy: Self-efficacy refers to an
individual’s belief that he or she is capable of performing a task. The higher your self-efficacy, the more
confidence you have in your ability to succeed in a task.
Task characteristics: Individual goal setting does not work
equally well on all tasks. Goals seem to have a more substantial effect on
performance when tasks are simple, well-learned, and independent.
National culture: Goal-setting theory is culture bound and it
is well adapted to North American cultures.
8. Intentions, as articulated in terms of
hard and specific goals, are a potent motivating force. However, there is no evidence that such
goals are associated with increased job satisfaction.
|
E.
Reinforcement Theory
|
|
1.
In contrast to Goal-Setting theory, which is a
cognitive approach, Reinforcement theory is behavioristic approach. It argues
that reinforcement conditions behavior.
·
Reinforcement theorists see behavior as being
environmentally caused.
·
Reinforcement theory ignores the inner state of the
individual and concentrates solely on what happens to a person when he or she
takes some action.
2. The two theories are clearly at odds
philosophically. Reinforcement is undoubtedly an important influence on
behavior, but few scholars are prepared to argue that it is the only
influence.
|
F.
Flow and Intrinsic Motivation Theory
|
Notes:
|
1. A state of absolute concentration that
occurs when doing a favorite activity.
You lose yourself in the task and often lose track of time. Athletes call this being “in the zone.”
2. A key element of the flow experience is
that its motivation is unrelated to end goals.
·
When a person experiences the flow he or she is
completely intrinsically motivated.
·
There is extreme concentration during the
activity. It is when the individual
looks back on the experience he or she is flooded with feelings of gratitude
for the experience.
·
It is the desire to repeat the experience that
creates continued motivation.
3. Conditions likely to produce
a flow state:
·
Task is challenging and require high level of
skill
·
They were goal directed and received feedback on
how they were doing.
·
Task demanded total concentration and creativity.
·
More often to occur at work than home (flow is not
associated with leisure.
4. A Model of Intrinsic Motivation, as
described by Ken Thomas, is an extension of the flow concept. He identifies the key elements that create
intrinsic motivation as:
·
Choice: The
ability to select task activities that make sense to you and perform them as
you think appropriate.
·
Competence: The
accomplishment you feel in skillfully performing task activities you have
chosen.
·
Meaningfulness: The
opportunity to pursue a worthy task purpose, that matters in the larger
scheme of things.
·
Progress:
Feeling you are making significant advancement in achieving the task’s
purpose.
5. Studies with managerial staff demonstrate
that these four components are significantly related to improved job
satisfaction and increased performance.
|
G.
Equity Theory
|
|
1. What role does equity play in
motivation? An employee with several
years experience can be frustrated to find out that a recent college grad
hired at a salary level higher than he or she is currently earnings, causing
motivation levels to drop. Why?
2.
Employees make comparisons of their job inputs and
outcomes relative to those of others. (See Exhibit 6-7).
·
If we perceive our ratio to be equal to that of the
relevant others with whom we compare ourselves, a state of equity is said to
exist. We perceive our situation as fair.
·
When we see the ratio as unequal, we experience equity
tension.
|
G. Equity Theory (cont.)
|
Notes:
|
3. Additionally, the referent that an
employee selects adds to the complexity of equity theory. There are four
referent comparisons that an employee can use:
·
Self-inside: An employee’s experiences in a different
position inside his or her current organization
·
Self-outside: An employee’s experiences in a situation or
position outside his or her current organization
·
Other-inside: Another individual or group of individuals
inside the employee’s organization
·
Other-outside: Another individual or group of individuals
outside the employee’s organization
4. Which referent an employee chooses will be
influenced by the information the employee holds about referents, as well as
by the attractiveness of the referent.
·
There are four moderating variables: gender, length of
tenure, level in the organization, and amount of education or
professionalism.
·
Men and women prefer same-sex comparisons. This also
suggests that if women are tolerant of lower pay, it may be due to the
comparative standard they use.
·
Employees in jobs that are not sex-segregated will
make more cross-sex comparisons than those in jobs that are either male- or
female-dominated.
5. Employees with short tenure in their
current organizations tend to have little information about others.
6. Employees with long tenure
rely more heavily on coworkers for comparison.
7. Upper-level employees tend to be more
cosmopolitan and have better information about people in other organizations.
Therefore, these types of employees will make more other-outside comparisons.
8. When employees perceive an inequity, they
can be predicted to make one of six choices:
·
Change their inputs.
·
Change their outcomes.
·
Distort perceptions of self.
·
Distort perceptions of others.
·
Choose a different referent.
·
Leave the field.
9. The theory establishes the
following propositions relating to inequitable pay:
·
Given payment by time, over-rewarded employees will
produce more than will equitably paid employees.
·
Given payment by quantity of production, over-rewarded
employees will produce fewer, but higher quality, units than will equitably
paid employees.
·
Given payment by time, under-rewarded employees will
produce less or poorer quality of output.
·
Given payment by quantity of production,
under-rewarded employees will produce a large number of low-quality units in
comparison with equitably paid employees.
|
H.
Equity Theory (cont.)
|
Notes:
|
10. These
propositions have generally been supported with a few minor qualifications.
·
Inequities created by overpayment do not seem to have
a very significant impact on behavior in most work situations.
·
Not all people are equity sensitive.
11. Employees also
seem to look for equity in the distribution of other organizational rewards.
12. Finally, recent
research has been directed at expanding what is meant by equity or fairness.
·
Historically, equity theory focused on distributive
justice or the perceived fairness of the amount and allocation of rewards
among individuals.
·
Equity should also consider procedural justice, the
perceived fairness of the process used to determine the distribution of
rewards.
·
The evidence indicates that distributive justice has a
greater influence on employee satisfaction than procedural justice.
·
Procedural justice tends to affect an employee’s
organizational commitment, trust in his or her boss, and intention to quit.
·
By increasing the perception of procedural fairness,
employees are likely to view their bosses and the organization as positive
even if they are dissatisfied with pay, promotions, and other personal
outcomes.
13. Equity theory
demonstrates that, for most employees, motivation is influenced significantly
by relative rewards as well as by absolute rewards, but some key issues are
still unclear.
|
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the POINT-COUNTER
POINT: Money Motivates
found in the text and at the end of these chapter notes.
I. Expectancy Theory
|
Notes:
|
1. Expectancy theory is one of the most
widely accepted explanations of motivation.
Victor Vroom’s expectancy theory has its critics but most of the
research is supportive.
2. Expectancy theory argues that the strength
of a tendency to act in a certain way depends on the strength of an
expectation that the act will be followed by a given outcome and on the
attractiveness of that outcome to the individual.
3. It says that an employee will be motivated
to exert a high level of effort when he/she believes that:
·
Effort will lead to a good performance appraisal.
·
That a good appraisal will lead to organizational
rewards.
·
That the rewards will satisfy his/her personal goals.
|
I.
Expectancy Theory (cont.)
|
Notes:
|
4. Three key relationships (See
Exhibit 6-7).
·
Effort-performance relationship: the probability
perceived by the individual 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
the attainment of a desired outcome
·
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
5. Expectancy theory helps explain why a lot
of workers merely do the minimum necessary to get by. For example:
·
If I give a maximum effort, will it be recognized in
my performance appraisal?
No, if
the organization’s performance appraisal assesses nonperformance
factors. The employee, rightly or
wrongly, perceives that his/her boss does not like him/her.
·
If I get a good performance appraisal, will it lead to
organizational rewards?
Typically
many employees see the performance-reward relationship in their job as weak.
·
If I am rewarded, are the rewards ones that I find
personally attractive?
It is important the rewards being tailored to
individual employee needs
6. The key to expectancy theory is the
understanding of an individual’s goals and the linkage between effort and performance,
between performance and rewards, and finally, between the rewards and
individual goal satisfaction.
7. As a contingency model, expectancy theory
recognizes that there is no universal principle for explaining everyone’s
motivations.
8. Attempts to validate the theory have been
complicated by methodological criterion and measurement problems.
·
Published studies that purport to support or negate
the theory must be viewed with caution.
·
Importantly, most studies have failed to replicate the
methodology as it was originally proposed.
·
Some critics suggest that the theory has only limited
use, arguing that it tends to be more valid for predicting in situations
where effort-performance and performance-reward linkages are clearly
perceived by the individual.
|
J.
Don’t Forget Ability and Opportunity
|
Notes:
|
1. Success on a job is facilitated or
hindered by the existence or absence of support resources.
2. A popular although arguably simplistic way
of thinking about employee performance is as a function of the interaction of
ability and motivation; that is, performance = f(A ´ M).
3. If either is inadequate, performance will
be negatively affected. We need to add opportunity to perform to our
equation—performance = f(A ´ M ´ O).
(See Exhibit 6-9).
4. When you attempt to assess why an employee
may not be performing to the level that you believe he or she is capable of,
look to the environment to see if it is supportive.
|
Integrating Contemporary Theories of Motivation
|
Notes:
|
1. The Model in Exhibit 6-10
integrates much of what we know about motivation. Its basic foundation is the
expectancy model.
2. Expectancy theory predicts that an
employee will exert a high level of effort if he/she perceives that there is
a strong relationship between effort and performance, performance and
rewards, and rewards and satisfaction of personal goals.
3. Each of these relationships, in turn, is
influenced by certain factors. For effort to lead to good performance, the
individual must have the requisite ability to perform, and the performance
appraisal system must be perceived as being fair and objective.
4. The final link in expectancy
theory is the rewards-goals relationship.
5. ERG theory would come into play at this
point. Motivation would be high to the degree that the rewards an individual
received for his or her high performance satisfied the dominant needs
consistent with his or her individual goals.
6. The model considers the achievement, need,
reinforcement, and equity theories. High achievers are internally driven as
long as the jobs they are doing provide them with personal responsibility,
feedback, and moderate risks.
7. Reinforcement theory recognizes that the
organization’s rewards reinforce the individual’s performance.
8. Individuals will compare the rewards
(outcomes) they receive from the inputs they make with the outcome-input
ratio of relevant others and inequities may influence the effort expended.
|
|
Instructor Note: At this point in the lecture you may want to introduce the CASE INCIDENT:
What Drives Employees at
Microsoft? found in the text and at the end of these chapter notes. The case will give students the opportunity
to identify motivation theories in practice.
Caveat Emptor: Motivation
Theories Are Culture Bound Many—Theories Were Developed in the United States
|
Notes:
|
1. The most blatant pro-American
characteristic inherent in these theories is the strong emphasis on
individualism and quantity of life. Both goal-setting and expectancy theories
emphasize goal accomplishment as well as rational and individual thought.
2.
Maslow’s need hierarchy
·
People start at the physiological level and then move
progressively up the hierarchy in this order: physiological, safety, social,
esteem, and self-actualization. This hierarchy aligns with American culture.
·
In countries where uncertainty avoidance
characteristics are strong, Japan, Greece and Mexico, security needs would be
on top of the need hierarchy. Countries like the Netherlands and Denmark who
score high on quality of life characteristics would have social needs at the
top.
·
The view that a high achievement need acts as an
internal motivator presupposes two cultural characteristics—a willingness to
accept a moderate degree of risk and a concern with performance.
3.
Equity theory
·
It is based on the assumption that workers are highly
sensitive to equity in reward allocations. In the United States, equity is
meant to be closely tying pay to performance.
·
However, in collectivist cultures such as the former
socialist countries, employees expect rewards to reflect their individual
needs as well as their performance.
Moreover, consistent with a legacy of communism and centrally planned
economies, employees exhibited an entitlement attitude.
4. There are cross-cultural
consistencies.
·
The desire for interesting work seems important to
almost all workers.
·
Growth, achievement, and responsibility were rated the
top three and had identical rankings in another study of several countries.
|
|
QUESTIONS FOR REVIEW
1. Does motivation come
from within a person, or is it a result of the situation? Explain.
Answer – Many
people incorrectly view motivation as a personal trait—that is, some have it
and others do not. Motivation is the result of the interaction of the
individual and the situation. The text defines motivation as the processes that
account for an individual’s intensity, direction, and persistence of effort
toward attaining a goal. There are three key elements.
·
Intensity is concerned with how hard a person tries.
This is the element most of us focus on when we talk about motivation.
·
Direction is the orientation that benefits the
organization.
·
Persistence is a measure of how long a person can
maintain his/her effort. Motivated individuals stay with a task long enough to
achieve their goal.
2. What are the
implications of Theories X and Y for motivation practices?
Answer –
Douglas McGregor concluded that a manager’s view of the nature of human beings
is based on a certain grouping of assumptions. Theory X assumptions are
basically negative. Theory Y assumptions are basically positive. There are
several implications. Theory X assumes that lower-order needs dominate
individuals. Theory Y assumes that higher-order needs dominate individuals.
McGregor himself held to the belief that Theory Y assumptions were more valid
than Theory X. Either Theory X or Theory Y assumptions may be appropriate in a
particular situation.
3. Compare and contrast
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory with (a) Alderfer’s ERG theory and (b)
Herzberg’s two-factor theory.
Answer –
Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.
·
Physiological—Includes hunger, thirst, shelter, sex, and
other bodily needs
·
Safety—Includes security and protection from physical
and emotional harm
·
Social—Includes affection, belongingness, acceptance,
and friendship
·
Esteem—Includes internal esteem factors such as
self-respect, autonomy, and achievement; and also external esteem factors such
as status, recognition, and attention
·
Self-actualization—The drive to become what one is
capable of becoming; includes growth, achieving one’s potential, and
self-fulfillment
·
See Exhibit 6-1.
No need is ever fully gratified; a substantially
satisfied need no longer motivates. Maslow separated the five needs into higher
and lower orders.
·
Physiological and safety needs were described as
lower-order.
·
Social, esteem, and self-actualization were described as
higher-order needs.
Higher-order needs are satisfied internally.
Lower-order needs are predominantly satisfied
externally.
Two-factor theory is sometimes also
called motivation-hygiene theory.
It was proposed by psychologist Frederick Herzberg when he investigated
the question, “What do people want from their jobs?” Herzberg concluded:
·
Intrinsic factors, such as advancement, recognition,
responsibility, and achievement seem to be related to job satisfaction.
·
Dissatisfied respondents tended to cite extrinsic
factors, such as supervision, pay, company policies, and working conditions.
·
The opposite of satisfaction is not dissatisfaction.
·
Removing dissatisfying characteristics from a job does
not necessarily make the job satisfying.
·
See Exhibit 6-3.
Job satisfaction factors are separate and distinct
from job dissatisfaction factors. To motivate people, emphasize factors that are
intrinsically rewarding that are associated with the work itself or to outcomes
directly derived from it.
ERG theory. Clayton Alderfer reworked Maslow’s need
hierarchy to align it with the empirical research. His revised need hierarchy
is labeled ERG theory. Alderfer argues that there are three groups of core
needs—existence, relatedness, and growth. (cont.)
·
The existence group
Providing our basic material existence
requirements. They include Maslow’s physiological and safety needs.
·
Relatedness
The desire we have for maintaining important
interpersonal relationships. These social and status desires require
interaction with others. They align with Maslow’s social need and the external
component.
·
Growth needs
An intrinsic desire for personal development. These include the
intrinsic component from Maslow’s esteem category and the characteristics
included under self-actualization.
Alderfer’s ERG theory also differs from Maslow’s
in that:
·
More than one need may be operative at the same time.
·
If the gratification of a higher-level need is stifled,
the desire to satisfy a lower-level need increases.
·
ERG theory does not assume that there exists a rigid
hierarchy.
·
A person can be working on growth even though existence
or relatedness needs are unsatisfied, or all three need categories could be
operating at the same time.
·
ERG theory also contains a frustration-regression
dimension.
Maslow argued that an individual would stay at a
certain need level until that need was satisfied.
ERG theory notes that when a higher-order need
level is frustrated, the individual’s desire to increase a lower-level need
takes place. ERG theory is more consistent with our knowledge of individual
differences among people.
4. Describe the three
needs isolated by McClelland. How are they related to worker behavior?
Answer – Developed
by David McClelland and his associates, the theory focuses on three needs:
achievement, power, and affiliation.
·
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
Some people have a compelling drive to succeed. They are striving for
personal achievement rather than the rewards of success, per se. This drive is
the achievement need (nAch). McClelland found that high achievers differentiate
themselves from others by their desire to do things better.
The need for power (nPow) is the desire to have
impact, to be influential, and to control others. Individuals high in nPow
enjoy being “in charge” and strive for influence over others. They prefer to be
placed into competitive and status-oriented situations, and tend to be more concerned
with prestige and gaining influence over others than with effective
performance.
The third need isolated by McClelland is
affiliation (nAfl). This need has received the least attention from
researchers. Individuals with a high affiliation motive strive for friendship.
Prefer cooperative situations rather than competitive ones, and desire
relationships involving a high degree of mutual understanding.
5. Explain cognitive
evaluation theory. How applicable is it to management practice?
Answer – Cognitive
evaluation theory is well researched and supported. It suggests that when
extrinsic rewards are used by organizations as payoffs for superior
performance, the intrinsic rewards, which are derived from individuals doing
what they like, are reduced. If the cognitive evaluation theory is valid, it
should have major implications for managerial practices.
·
If pay or other extrinsic rewards are to be effective
motivators, they should be made contingent on an individual’s performance.
·
Cognitive evaluation theorists would argue that this
will tend only to decrease the internal satisfaction that the individual
receives from doing the job.
·
If correct, it would make sense to make an individual’s
pay non-contingent on performance in order to avoid decreasing intrinsic
motivation.
6. What is the role of
self-efficacy in goal setting?
Answer – If
factors such as ability and acceptance of the goals are held constant, we can
also state that the more difficult the goal, the higher the level of
performance. People will do better when they get feedback on how well they are
progressing toward their goals. Self-generated feedback is more powerful a
motivator than externally generated feedback.
Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s belief
that he or she is capable of performing a task. The higher one’s self-efficacy,
the more confidence one has in his or her ability to succeed in a task.
7. Contrast distributive
and procedural justice. What implications might they have for designing pay
systems in different countries?
Answer –
Historically, equity theory focused on distributive justice or “the
perceived fairness of the amount and allocation of rewards among
individuals.” Equity should also
consider procedural justice, “the perceived fairness of the process used
to determine the distribution of rewards.” The evidence indicates that
distributive justice has a greater influence on employee satisfaction than
procedural justice. Procedural justice tends to affect an employee’s
organizational commitment, trust in his or her boss, and intention to quit. By
increasing the perception of procedural fairness, employees are likely to view
their bosses and the organization as positive even if they are dissatisfied
with pay, promotions, and other personal outcomes.
8. Identify the variables
in expectancy theory.
Answer –
Expectancy theory is one of the most widely accepted explanations of
motivation. It argues that the strength of a tendency to act in a certain way
depends on the strength of an expectation that the act will be followed by a
given outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the individual. It
says that an employee will be motivated to exert a high level of effort when
he/she believes that:
·
Effort will lead to a good performance appraisal.
·
That a good appraisal will lead to organizational
rewards.
·
That the rewards will satisfy the employee’s personal
goals.
Three key relationships (See Exhibit 6-7.)
·
Effort-performance relationship: the probability
perceived by the individual 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 the
attainment of a desired outcome
·
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
9. Explain the formula:
Performance = f(A ´ M ´ O), and give an example.
Answer –
Success on a job is facilitated or hindered by the existence or absence of
support resources. A popular although arguably simplistic way of thinking about
employee performance is as a function of the interaction of ability and
motivation; that is, performance = f(A ´ M). If either is
inadequate, performance will be negatively affected. We need to add opportunity
to perform to our equation—performance = f(A ´ M ´ O). See Exhibit 6-8. When you attempt to assess why an employee may not
be performing to the level that you believe he or she is capable of, take a look
at the work environment to see if it is supportive.
10. What consistencies
among motivation concepts, if any, apply cross-culturally?
Answer – Exhibit 6-9
presents a model that integrates much of what we know about motivation. There
are cross-cultural consistencies.
·
The desire for interesting work seems important to
almost all workers.
·
Growth, achievement, and responsibility were rated the
top three and had identical rankings in another study of several countries.
QUESTIONS FOR CRITICAL
THINKING
1. “The cognitive
evaluation theory is contradictory to reinforcement and expectancy theories.”
Do you agree or disagree? Explain.
Answer – As students make their arguments they
should include the following facts from the text.
·
Cognitive evaluation theory
When extrinsic rewards are used by organizations as payoffs for superior
performance, the intrinsic rewards, which are derived from individuals doing
what they like, are reduced. The elimination of extrinsic rewards can produce a
shift—from an external to an internal explanation—in an individual’s perception
of causation of why he or she works on a task. If the cognitive evaluation
theory is valid, it should have major implications for managerial practices.
The theory may have limited applicability to work organizations because most
low-level jobs are not inherently satisfying enough to foster high intrinsic
interest, and many managerial and professional positions offer intrinsic
rewards.
·
Reinforcement theory
Reinforcement theory is behavioristic in approach and is clearly in
contradiction to cognitive evaluation theory. It argues that reinforcement
conditions behavior. Reinforcement theorists see behavior as being
environmentally caused. Reinforcement theory ignores the inner state of the
individual and concentrates solely on what happens to a person when he or she
takes some action. Reinforcement is undoubtedly an important influence on
behavior, but few scholars are prepared to argue that it is the only influence.
·
Expectancy theory
Expectancy theory is one of the most widely accepted explanations of
motivation. Expectancy theory argues that the strength of a tendency to act in
a certain way depends on the strength of an expectation that the act will be
followed by a given outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the
individual. It says that an employee will be motivated to exert a high level of
effort when he/she believes that:
·
Effort will lead to a good performance appraisal.
·
That a good appraisal will lead to organizational
rewards.
·
That the rewards will satisfy the employee’s personal
goals.
Three key relationships (See Exhibit 6-7.)
·
Effort-performance relationship: the probability
perceived by the individual 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 the
attainment of a desired outcome
·
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
The key to expectancy theory is the understanding of an individual’s
goals and the linkage between effort and performance, between performance and
rewards, and finally, between the rewards and individual goal satisfaction. As
a contingency model, expectancy theory recognizes that there is no universal
principle for explaining everyone’s motivations.
2. “Managers should be
able, through proper selection and job design, to have every employee
experience flow in his or her job.” Do
you agree or disagree? Discuss.
Answer – That would be a lofty accomplishment,
however studies done on this theory have been done on management level
employees and it remains to be seen whether or not it would apply to the rank
and file worker. However, managers can
try to design jobs with the goal of increased job satisfaction using intrinsic
factors as motivators. Thomas suggests
that the are four components to be considered.
They are:
·
Choice: the
ability to select tasks activities that make sent to you and perform them as
you deem appropriate.
·
Competence: the
accomplishment you feel in skillfully performing tasks activities you have
chosen.
·
Meaningfulness: the
opportunity to pursue a worthy task purpose—that matters in the larger scheme
of things.
·
Progress:
feeling you are making significant advancement in achieving the task’s
purpose.
Jobs requiring high levels of education, training, and skill with a high
degree of autonomy would be the most likely to allow employees to experience
the “flow.”
3. Analyze the
application of Maslow’s and Herzberg’s theories to an African or Caribbean
nation where more than a quarter of the population is unemployed.
Answer – Students may lack sufficient knowledge of
these cultures to fully answer the question. They should focus on the issues of
large scale unemployment. It should be relatively obvious to students that people in other cultures world rank the need
categories differently and that what is satisfaction or motivation will vary as
well.
Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.
·
Physiological—Includes hunger, thirst, shelter, sex, and
other bodily needs
·
Safety—Includes security and protection from physical
and emotional harm
·
Social—Includes affection, belongingness, acceptance,
and friendship
·
Esteem—Includes internal esteem factors such as
self-respect, autonomy, and achievement; and external esteem factors such as
status, recognition, and attention
·
Self-actualization—The drive to become what one is
capable of becoming; includes growth, achieving one’s potential, and
self-fulfillment
·
See Exhibit 6-1.
Motivation-hygiene theory
Intrinsic factors, such as advancement,
recognition, responsibility, and achievement seem to be related to job
satisfaction. Dissatisfied respondents tended to cite extrinsic factors, such
as supervision, pay, company policies, and working conditions. Job satisfaction
factors are separate and distinct from job dissatisfaction factors.
4. Can an individual be
too motivated, so that his or her performance declines as a result of excessive
effort? Discuss.
Answer – Students’ responses may vary but should
consider the following elements from the text. McClelland found that high achievers differentiate themselves from others
by their desire to do things better. If a high achiever sets too high goals for
him/herself, he/she could end up demotivating him/herself because of the
failure to achieve the goals. According to cognitive evaluation theory, when extrinsic rewards are used by
organizations as payoffs for superior performance, the intrinsic rewards, which
are derived from individuals doing what they like, are reduced. The popular
explanation is that the individual experiences a loss of control over his/her
own behavior so that the previous intrinsic motivation diminishes. Furthermore,
the elimination of extrinsic rewards can produce a shift—from an external to an
internal explanation—in an individual’s perception of causation of why he/she
works on a task.
5. Identify three
activities you really enjoy (for example, playing tennis, reading a novel,
going shopping). Next, identify three activities you really dislike (for
example, going to the dentist, cleaning the house, staying on a
restricted-calorie diet). Using the expectancy model, analyze each of your
answers to assess why some activities stimulate your effort while others do
not.
Answer – Students’ responses will vary but should
take into consideration the following elements of expectancy theory. The strength of a tendency to act in a certain way depends
on the strength of an expectation that the act will be followed by a given
outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the individual. It says
that an employee will be motivated to exert a high level of effort when he/she
believes that:
·
Effort will lead to a good performance appraisal.
·
That a good appraisal will lead to organizational
rewards.
·
That the rewards will satisfy the employee’s personal
goals.
Three key relationships
·
Effort-performance relationship: the probability
perceived by the individual 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 the
attainment of a desired outcome
·
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
POINT-COUNTERPOINT
– Money Motivates
POINT
Behavioral scientists tend to down play money as a
motivator. They prefer to emphasize the importance of challenging jobs, goals,
participative decision-making, feedback, cohesive work teams, and other
non-monetary factors. We argue otherwise here—that is, money is the critical
incentive to work motivation.
Money is important to employees because it is a medium of
exchange. People may not work only for money, but take the money away
and how many people would come to work? A study of nearly 2,500 employees found
that although these people disagreed over what was their number-one motivator,
they unanimously chose money as their number two.
As equity theory suggests, money has symbolic value in
addition to its exchange value. We use pay as the primary outcome against which
we compare our inputs to determine if we are being treated equitably. That an
organization pays one executive $80,000 a year and another $95,000 means more
than the latter’s earning $15,000 a year more. It is a message, from the
organization to both employees, of how much it values the contribution of each.
In addition to equity theory, both reinforcement and
expectancy theories attest to the value of money as a motivator. In
the former, if pay is contingent on performance, it will encourage workers to
generate high levels of effort. Consistent with expectancy theory, money will
motivate to the extent that it is seen as being able to satisfy an individual’s
personal goals and is perceived as being dependent on performance criteria.
However, maybe the best case for money is a review of
studies that looked at four methods of motivating employee performance: money,
goal setting, participative decision making, and redesigning jobs to give
workers more challenge and responsibility. The average improvement from money
was consistently higher than with any of the other methods.
S. Caudron,
“Motivation? Money’s Only No. 2,” Industry Week, November 15, 1993, p.
33. bT. R. Mitchell and A. E. Mickel, “The Meaning of Money: An
Individual-Difference Perspective,” Academy of Management Review, July
1999, p. 570.
E. A. Locke et
al., “The Relative Effectiveness of Four Methods of Motivating Employee
Performance,” in K. D. Duncan, M. M. Gruenberg, and D. Wallis (eds.), Changes
in Working Life (London: Wiley, 1980), pp. 363–83.
COUNTER POINT
Money can motivate some people under some conditions,
so the issue is not really whether or not money can motivate. The answer to
that is: “It can!” The more relevant question is: Does money motivate most
employees in the workforce today? The answer to this question, we will argue,
is No.
For money to motivate an individual’s performance, certain
conditions must be met. First, money must be important to the individual, but
money is not important to everybody. High achievers, for instance, are intrinsically
motivated. Money would have little impact on these people.
Second, money must be perceived by the individual as being
a direct reward for performance. Unfortunately, performance and pay are poorly
linked in most organizations. Pay increases are far more often determined by
non–performance factors such as experience, community pay standards, or company
profitability.
Third, the marginal amount of money offered for the
performance must be perceived by the individual as being significant. Research
indicates that merit raises must be at least 7 percent of base pay for
employees to perceive them as motivating. Unfortunately, recent data indicates
average merit increases are only in the 3.9 to 4.4 percent range.
Finally, management must have the discretion to reward
high performers with more money. Yet unions and organizational compensation
policies constrain managerial discretion. Where unions exist, that discretion
is almost zero. In non-unionized environments, traditional limited compensation
grades create severe restrictions on pay increases. For example, in one
organization, a Systems Analyst IV’s pay grade ranges from $4,775 to $5,500 a
month. No matter how good a job that analyst does, her boss cannot pay her more
than $5,500 a month. Similarly, no matter how poorly she performs, she will not
earn less than $4,775. So money might be theoretically capable of motivating
employee performance, but most managers are not given enough flexibility to do
much about it.
A. Mitra, N.
Gupta, and G. D. Jenkins Jr., “The Case of theInvisible Merit Raise: How People
See Their Pay Raises,” Compensation & Benefits Review, May–June
1995, pp. 71–76; and Hewitt Associates Salary Survey,
2000.
Class
Exercise:
1. This exercise reveals at what level money
motivates.
2. Bring a one dollar bill, a
fifty-cent piece, a quarter, a dime, a nickel, and a penny to class.
3. Ask for a volunteer to come up to the front
of class. [Be sure the volunteer can bend and pick something up off the floor.]
Have the volunteer face away from the class.
4. While placing the one dollar bill on the
floor, tell a story to the class and the volunteer about walking across campus
and coming across the dollar on the ground.
5. Caution the class not to speak
their answers to your questions.
6. Now ask the class how many would bend over
and pick up the dollar. Have them raise their hand rather than speak. Record
the number where you can refer to it later but not where the volunteer can see
it.
7. Ask the volunteer to turn
around, and ask him/her what he/she would do.
·
If he/she would pick it up, let him/her do so and keep
it. [This will increase volunteerism in later classes!]
·
If he/she will not, ask why (almost all students will).
8. Have the volunteer face away from the class
again. Continue the story while placing the fifty-cent piece on the floor.
9. Again ask the class what they
would do; record the raised hands for picking it up, for leaving it.
10. Again ask the volunteer to turn around, and ask him/her what he/she
would do.
11. Repeat this cycle with each denomination of coin.
12. Stop when you reach a denomination that the volunteer will not pick
up.
13. Now, lead a discussion regarding the different responses from the
class and the student.
·
At what point did the value of the money go low enough
that most students would not pick it up? Why?
·
Why did the volunteer continue to pick up the money at a
point when the class members probably would not?
·
At what point does a bonus or pay raise motivate them on
the job? What factors make a raise or bonus important enough to motivate extra
effort?
TEAM
EXERCISE – What Do People Want from Their Jobs?
Purpose
This exercise will help students understand the value and importance of
Herzberg’s model. It will bring home to them the difference between what
motivates individuals versus what causes only satisfaction and the importance
of the difference.
Procedure
1. Each class member begins by
completing the following questionnaire.
2. Rate the following 12 job
factors according to how important each is to you.
3. Place a number on a scale of 1
to 5 on the line before each factor.
Very important Somewhat
important Not
important
5 4 3 2 1
_____ 1. An
interesting job
_____ 2. A
good boss
_____ 3. Recognition
and appreciation for the work I do
_____ 4. The
opportunity for advancement
_____ 5. A
satisfying personal life
_____ 6. A
prestigious or status job
_____ 7. Job
responsibility
_____ 8. Good
working conditions
_____ 9. Sensible
company rules, regulations, procedures, and policies
_____ 10. The
opportunity to grow through learning new things
_____ 11. A
job I can do well and succeed at
_____ 12. Job
security
This questionnaire taps the dimensions in Herzberg’s two-factor
theory. To determine if hygiene or
motivating factors are important to you, place the numbers 1-5 that represent
your answers below.
Hygiene
factors score Motivational
factors score
2. _____ 1. _____
5. _____ 3. _____
6. _____ 4. _____
8. _____ 7. _____
9. _____ 10. _____
12. _____ 11. _____
Total points _____ Total
points _____
4. Add up each column. Did you
select hygiene or motivating factors as being most important to you?
5. Now break into groups of five
or six, and compare your questionnaire results. Discuss the following
questions.
·
How similar are your scores?
·
How close did your group’s results come to those found
by Herzberg?
·
What motivational implications did your group arrive at
based on your analysis?
[This exercise is based on
R.N. Lussier, Human Relations in
Organizations: A Skill Building Approach, 2nd ed. Homewood, IL: Richard D.
Irwin, 1993. With permission.]
CASE
INCIDENT – What Drives Employees at Microsoft?
The reality of software development in a huge company like
Microsoft (it employs more than 48,000 people) is that a substantial portion of
your work involves days of boredom punctuated by hours of tedium. You basically
spend your time in an isolated office writing code and sitting in meetings
during which you participate in looking for and evaluating hundreds of bugs and
potential bugs. Yet Microsoft has no problem in finding and retaining software
programmers. Their programmers work horrendously long hours and obsess on the
goal of shipping product.
From the day new employees begin work at Microsoft, they
know they are special and that their employer is special. New hires all have
one thing in common—they are smart. The company prides itself on putting all
recruits through a grueling “interview loop,” during which they confront a
barrage of brain-teasers by future colleagues to see how well they think. Only
the best and the brightest survive to become employees. The company does this
because Microsofties truly believe that their company is special. For instance,
it has a high tolerance for nonconformity. Would you believe that one software
tester comes to work every day dressed in extravagant Victorian outfits? But
the underlying theme that unites Microsofties is the belief that the firm has a
manifest destiny to change the world. The least consequential decision by a programmer
can have an outsized importance when it can effect a new release that might be
used by 50 million people.
Microsoft employees are famous for putting in long hours.
One program manager said, “In my first five years, I was the Microsoft
stereotype. I lived on caffeine and vending-machine hamburgers and free beer
and 20-hour workdays. . . . I had no life. . . . I considered everything
outside the building as a necessary evil.” More recently, things have changed.
There are still a number of people who put in 80-hour weeks, but 60- and
70-hour weeks are more typical and some even are doing their jobs in only 40
hours.
No discussion of employee life at Microsoft would be
complete without mentioning the company’s lucrative stock option program.
Microsoft created more millionaire employees, faster, than any company in
American history—more than 10,000 by the late-1990s. While the company is
certainly more than a place to get rich, executives still realize that money
matters. One former manager claims that the human resources’ department
actually kept a running chart of employee satisfaction versus the company’s
stock price. “When the stock was up, human resources could turn off the
ventilation and everybody would say they were happy. When the stock was down,
we could give people massages and they would tell us that the massages were too
hard.” In the go-go 1990s, when Microsoft stock was doubling every few months
and yearly stock splits were predictable, employees not only got to participate
in Microsoft’s manifest destiny, but they could get rich in the process. By the
spring of 2002, with the world in a recession, stock prices down, and the
growth for Microsoft products slowing, it was not so clear what was driving its
employees to continue the company’s dominance of the software industry.
Questions:
1.
If you were a programmer, would you
want to work at Microsoft? Why or why not?
Answer:
Student’s answers will vary—encourage them to think beyond their present
circumstances or a “first” job.
Encourage them to think about this question as it would apply to
different phases (real or imagined) in their life. For example, when they first begin their
career position, when they are considering making a move in their early thirties
to gain a promotion, when they have young children, older children, are
bankrupt because their own business failed, aging parents, etc. This is not a simple yes or no question, as
the situation they are in at the time does play a part in the decision.
2.
How many activities in this case can
you tie into specific motivation theories? List the activities, the motivation
theories, and how they apply.
Answer: Students
will have varying opinions on how these theories are being applied. The following list is not exhaustive, but is
meant to be representative of possible responses.
Maslow
New Employee Orientation = Social
Tolerance for nonconformity = Esteem
Stock Program = Physiological or even esteem due to the
recognition factor
Two Factor Theory
Stock Plan, tolerance for nonconformity (e.g. dress) =
Hygiene
United belief that MS has a manifest destiny to change the
world = Motivational
ERG
Stock Plan = Existence
New Employee Orientation, tolerance for nonconformity =
Relatedness
Freedom to Make Decisions/Goals = Growth
McClelland’s Theory of Needs
Freedom to Make Decisions/Goals = Achievement
New Employee Orientation = Affiliation
Goal Setting Theory
Freedom to Make Decisions/Goals
3.
As Microsoft continues to get larger
and its growth rate flattens, do you think management will have to modify any
of its motivation practices? Elaborate.
Answer: Students
will have varying opinions. The article
emphasizes how much the stock price places in motivation. Employee orientation is a good idea—but it is
a one time event. Goal setting also
appears to be important from the statement that “obsessed on the goal of
shipping product.” Any modifications
should include goals and financial rewards.
Source: Based on M.
Gimein, “Smart Is Not Enough!” Fortune, January 8, 2001, pp. 124–36.
Exploring OB Topics on the World Wide Web
|
Search Engines are our
navigational tool to explore the WWW.
Some commonly used search engines are:
- Motivation
the old fashioned way? Read how
Bill Mork reenergized his workforce and realized real savings in the
process. Go to: http://www.inc.com/magazine/19941101/3187.html
and read the article of his companies success. Choose one classic theory of motivation
and one contemporary theory to explain why his program works. Bring your analysis to class.
- What
motivated you to go to college?
What is motivating you to stay and succeed? Visit these sites for ideas and tips for
being successful and staying motivated during your academic career.
http://home.okstate.edu/homepages.nsf/toc/chp12_1
http://www.academictips.org/acad/collegemotivation.html
- Stock
options are used as management and employee motivators. Are they powerful motivators when the
stock is going up? What happens
when stock goes down? Not always
what you might think. Read the
article found on the Red Herring web site, which discusses this
issue. Write a short reaction paper
(1 page) on this article. Include in the paper your thoughts on what
organizations should do when stock plummets, but they still need to
motivate employees.
- Intrinsic
or extrinsic rewards for workers?
Which are best? How can a
manager impact intrinsic motivational sources when rewards are
extrinsic? Read the thoughts of Bob
Nelson at the Foundation of Enterprise Development to see if you
agree/disagree with him. Print the
article and bring to class for further discussion. Go to: http://www.fed.org/resrclib/articles/building.html
- For
brief outlines of classic motivation theories go to:
Select one theory that you
think has application to the job you have now, or a previous job, and write a
short description of the job and how the theory was applied. Now look over the class syllabus. What theories of motivation are applicable
for the way this class is set up? Again,
write a short description and the theory as it’s applied. For example:
Paper due on ?/?/200? = Goal Setting Theory.
- Read the article found on http://www.cnr.berkeley.edu/ucce50/ag-labor/7research/7calag07.htm
concerning piece rate vs. hourly rate for agricultural workers. Write a journal entry or short reaction
paper to this article as to what you would do, and why, as a manager
confronting this issue with workers.
No comments:
Post a Comment