A Multitude Of Motivational Theories

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

Scholars have researched and studied motivation for generations. There are a multitude of motivational theories including employee encouragement, motivation measurements and principles, positive organisational environments, people motivation, strategic performance, salary, rewards, theory in practice, self motivation and employee motivation.

To try to understand the principles of motivational theories one must first try to understand business literature and psychology. Motivation factors in the work environment include reward, expectation, autonomy and work and performance feedback. Theory and empirical research suggests that work motivation is divided into either intrinsic motivation (the work value for the individual) or extrinsic motivation (rewards separate from the work itself).

Autonomy

Employees with high autonomy, receive feedback on performance from identifiably important pieces of skilled work. They may feel happiness for this work feedback, thus, intrinsic motivation to perform well continuously (Hackman & Oldham, 1980).

Hackman and Oldham propose that jobs may be more motivational by increasing task identity, skill variety, autonomy, task significance and feedback.

Motivation-Hygiene Theory

Frederick Herzberg, a professor at the University of Utah in Management and a behavioural theorist studied employee motivation during the 1950's. His development in the Motivator-Hygiene theory of worker satisfaction and dissatisfaction concluded that hygiene factors (e.g. salary, working conditions, and benefits) do not motivate employees but can help to prevent dissatisfaction. He claimed that advancement, responsibility, recognition and achievement maximise satisfaction and, therefore, motivate effort and performance. Abraham Maslow was the influence behind Herzberg’s behavioural theories (see Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, page 7).

Of the multiple theories on work motivation, Herzberg's (Hinton, 1968) Motivator-Hygiene theory has probably been one of the most dominant. The theory comprises of two categories:

Motivator factors (the work itself). Motivator factors include work responsibility, independence and satisfaction from completing challenging tasks.

Hygiene factors, (the surrounding context). Hygiene factors include security, pay and basic working conditions. 

 Frederick Herzberg declared that insufficient hygiene factors act as de-motivators and that when employees are more abundant in the motivator factor they are better satisfied and more productive.

These characteristics of work are referred as intrinsic motivators by social and personality psychologists. Deci and colleagues made a motion that intrinsic motivation ensues when people feel self-determined and competent (Deci, 2004).

One psychological view claims that very high levels of intrinsic motivation set with strong work interest and involvement, by perfect matches of task complexity with skill level, means individuals merge with their activities, experiencing a sense of "psychological flow" (cited by Csíkszentmihályi, et al., 2012).

Extrinsic motivation occurs when people are driven by external factors, such as any promised rewards or incentives. It is suggested that an incline in extrinsic motivators will cause declines in intrinsic motivation.

Job-Characteristics Theory

Psychologists J. Richard Hackman and G.R. Oldham created the Job-Characteristics theory. This work displayed five components to motivation:

Skill variety.

Task identity.

Task significance.

Autonomy.

Feedback.

The first three components relate to work meaningfulness while the fourth is ownership of the results, and the fifth returns feedback on those results.

There is five ways in which jobs may be altered or improved to enhance a worker’s performance or job-satisfaction. These include the combining of tasks, enhancing task identity and significance, establishing better client relationships, authority, responsibility and control and increased feedback.

There are two types of people’s needs involved here. One set of needs is basic biological needs (e.g. hunger makes its necessary to earn money, making money a specific drive). The other need is the ability to gain psychological growth through achievement.

Job Satisfaction Factors in Practice

Chart shows good working relationships as the most important factor

Figure 1: Most Important Job Satisfaction Factors 2005 and 2009

(Australian Public Services Commission, 2005-2009)

Factors involved in creating job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction were gathered by the Australian Public Services Commission (APSC) in 2005 and 2009 during their general census, depicted on figure 1. The results pointed out that motivators were the main cause of satisfaction and hygiene factors were the primary cause of unhappiness. 

The participants were questioned as to what events had happened in their work that brought extreme satisfaction or extreme dissatisfaction for them. 

Herzberg’s theory helped to focus on the significance of the intrinsic aspects of people’s jobs and the ability to motivate workers. From this, job enrichment was spawned. His belief lay in that motivation derives from the intrinsic nature of the work leading to an individual’s satisfaction and suggested ways of generating this motivation: 

Give employees personal accountability and responsibility for their own work by removing some of the control mechanisms.

Allow employees to complete a task not just do part of it. This allows them to develop a satisfaction for the finished product.

Provide reports to workers and not just managers on a regular basis. Keeping them in the loop makes them feel part of the team and also gives them the opportunity to provide feedback of their own.

Encourage new and difficult tasks.

Create experts by assigning specialised tasks.

Achievement Motivation Theory

David McClelland, a Harvard psychologist studied developed the Need for Achievement theory (aka Achievement Motivation Theory). He realised that high achievers value extrinsic rewards like money as methods of scoring, but that the satisfaction from achievement, arouse their performance.

He identified three traits of high achievement people:

They favour work situations in of personal responsibility for problem solving.

They take calculated risks and set achievement goals.

They demand feedback on their progress. 

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

Abraham H. Maslow, a university psychology professor, arranged human needs into five levels (Maslow, 1970). These levels are (in ascending order):

Physiological (e.g. food, sex, water, and shelter).

Safety (e.g. protection).

Social (e.g. acceptance and belonging).

Ego (e.g. status, achievement and appreciation).

Self-actualization (e.g. realizing one's potentials).

Physiological, safety and social needs are ones basic needs. It is believed that when they are pleased, then the ego and self-achievement needs are placed in demand.

Maslow's theory has very little research to support it effectiveness and is judged by some academics as having low scientific validity and usefulness when being applied. However, a case study made in India with regards to the Quality of Life (QoL). The results were found to be accurate and the theory was determined as highly reliable (Sen, et al., 2012). The theory is still used by managers and executives who have adopted a need for self-actualization when trying to apply motivating for the job.

Taylorism

Frederick W. Taylor brought ideas about motivation based on the belief that workers act to fulfil their own self interest. He deduced that there was an "us versus them" relationship between employees and employers. He observed the extent of some employees' poor performances, which convinced him that success was only possible when employees performed short, controlled tasks, thus meaning that efficiency was increased and little training was required. The problem with this is staffs grow increasingly bored of repetitive tasks and have no method of skill improvement or advancement within the organisation.

Denise M. Rousseau, a professor of Organizational behaviour, believes that organizations cannot succeed if their employees don’t agree to contribute to their goals and survival. This is a psychological contract based upon promises made by employers in return for employees fulfilling commitments. This concept is confirmed by Jacqueline A.-M. Coyle-Shapiro & Ian Kessler (2002) "When employees judge employer fulfilment to be high, they are more likely to feel obligated to reciprocate and hence increase their own sense of obligation towards the organization."

Research has been done regarding achievement evaluations having the ability to reduce employee motivation and achievement. Studies have shown that employees who receive negative evaluations experience a job achievement reduction, but employees who received good evaluations show no change. This deems the achievement evaluation process to have no affirmative effect for the companies. One would be lead to believe that this means that the boss/subordinate relationship is sustained but the relationships between employees and directors are not improved upon. One would then ultimately think that achievements through pay are severely threatened when confusing achievements with monetary rewards. Instead, the result would be "boot licking", where employees only provide loyalty so long as the price is right and can in turn cause a breakdown in communication between employees and employers. The information regarding this is inconclusive but studies have shown that the offer of rewards for high performance to be a strong motivational method (Zuckerman, et al., 1979).

The general observation of this review would determine that companies need to seek greater knowledge into what forces drive people to succeed without the need to offer monetary rewards. The overall agreement is that both reward and appreciation ensure that employees feel good about them-selves and in return do good work. By rewarding employees in ways that maximise impact that will please them personally, the employer will achieve far greater results in the long term than offering a little extra of monetary value.

The general consensus is that what motivates one individual does not necessarily have the same appeal for another. This is true in the case of some individuals are just plain lazy or incompetent and despite all attempts remedy this, the ultimate result is failure to motivate. The only solution to this problem is to install a system for purging this type of de-motivation from the workforce should it arise.

Analysis

The data gathered in the review shows good working relationships, with 64%, to be the main reason for motivation, followed by flexible working arrangements at 45%, with salary and usefulness to society both at 41%, closely followed by having a good supervisor, clear expectations and skills development with 39%-40%. Career development, skills usage and recognition/feedback evened out with only 31% respectively. Work interest and good result held a lowly 12-22% with workload, innovation and job autonomy bottoming out below 20%.

The success of motivation techniques depends on the combined knowledge of the reasons for raising motivation, the approach those supervisors take when trying to apply any theories and finally the attitude by which employees respond to the theories being put in place. The next question was how to handle poor performance in the most effective way possible with encouragement being the main response followed by dismissal and finally observation.

The general agreement from employers is that promotion is more likely to be obtained through better performance. The most commonly identified motivating factors (in order of preference);

Discipline

Recognition

Monetary reward (e.g. salary, bonus, pension, private health care)

Promotion

Criticism

Group moral, "esprit de corps", proves, in many cases, to be the best technique for motivation then recognition and lastly skill attainment and monetary gains.

Conclusion

Results depict that employers and employees jointly agree that employee performance is greatly affected by motivation. The only difference being the way employees perceive performance compared to employers. Research shows that employees choose "esprit de corps" over sociability and recognition, and salary was, remarkably, held in lowest regard. Managers, however, see monetary factors to be more motivational with skills advancement and recognition being almost disregarded. This review and its interpretation is the perception of the author’s analysis and shows significant difference between employees and their supervisors with regards to how motivation is successfully attained, but that both parties however, do agree that motivation is of vital importance in determining performance and ultimately greater profit for the organisation. This review does not target a specific type of organisation or a specific company and, therefore, its interpretation is to be taken loosely without further in-depth investigation and research.

Motivation is born out of the need for growth for any organisation. It takes a long time of planning, patience and perseverance to gain almost complete motivation within the workforce, from both employees and their supervisors. Motivation is about each individual’s personal growth and this is the final reward. Employee motivation gained through a combination of factor including responsibility, reward, feedback and advancement. The complexity and importance behind motivation being successful for business development demands the need for practical, as well as, theoretical insight into the different types of motivation and their theories and effects on performance. Unmotivated employees affect productivity negatively. The efficiency and productivity of the organisation as whole will reduce due to this lack of motivation in the workforce.

The emotions of all parties are affected by motivation. If one is highly emotional and then receives motivation setbacks they are more likely to show this by not performing well. Morale and attitude towards work and others (especially Management) is generated from motivational build up. If motivational methods are not in place then staffs are more likely to rebel or show lack of interest in the wellbeing of the organisation. It is believed that people tend to give 2/3 of their effort in normal conditions. Managers may show less understanding towards their team members and in turn reduce morale for the department.

Content workers who feel challenged in their duties and who have opportunities to reach goals, display constructive attitudes for the job. Less absences and less likely to quit jobs, they work to a higher standard.

The great philosopher and "Pleasure in the job puts perfection in the work" (cited by McKeon, 1941)