Chapter No.

1
Introduction
High performance is achieved by well-motivated people who are prepared to exercise discretionary
effort. Even in fairly basic roles, Hunter et al (1990) found that the difference in value- added
discretionary performance between ‘superior’ and ‘standard’ performers was 19 per cent. For
highly complex jobs it was 48 per cent.
To motivate people it is necessary to appreciate how motivation works.
This means understand- ing motivation theory and how the theory can be put into practice, as
discussed in this chapter.
Motivation defined
A motive is a reason for doing something. Motivation is concerned with the strength and direction
of behavior and the factors that influence people to behave in certain ways. The term ‘motivation’
can refer variously to the goals individuals have, the ways in which individuals chose their goals
and the ways in which others try to change their behavior
Motivating other people is about getting them to move in the direction you want them to go in
order to achieve a result. Motivating yourself is about setting the direction independently and then
taking a course of action that will ensure that you get there. Motivation can be described as goal-
directed behaviour. People are motivated when they expect that a course of action is likely to lead
to the attainment of a goal and a valued reward – one that satisfies their needs and wants. Well-
motivated people engage in discretionary behaviour – in the majority of roles there is scope for
individuals to decide how much effort to exert. Such people may be self-motivated, and as long as
this means they are going in the right direction to attain what they are there to achieve, then this is
the best form of motivation. Most of us, however, need to be motivated to a greater or lesser degree.
There are two types of motivation, and a number of theories explaining how it works as discussed
below
Types of motivation
The two types of motivation are intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation.
Intrinsic motivation
Intrinsic motivation can arise from the self-generated factors that influence people’s behaviour. It
is not created by external incentives. It can take the form of motivation by the work itself when
individuals feel that their work is important, interesting and challenging and pro- vides them with
a reasonable degree of autonomy (freedom to act), opportunities to achieve and advance, and scope
to use and develop their skills and abilities. Deci and Ryan (1985) sug gested that intrinsic
motivation is based on the needs to be competent and self-determining (that is, to have a choice).
Intrinsic motivation can be enhanced by job or role design. According to an early writer on the
significance of the motivational impact of job design (Katz, 1964): ‘The job itself must provide
sufficient variety, sufficient complexity, sufficient challenge and sufficient skill to engage the
abilities of the worker.’ In their job characteristics model, Hackman and Oldham (1974)
emphasized the importance of the core job dimensions as motivators, namely skill variety, task
identity, task significance, autonomy and feedback.
Extrinsic motivation
Extrinsic motivation occurs when things are done to or for people to motivate them. These include
rewards, such as incentives, increased pay, praise, or promotion; and punishments, such as
disciplinary action, withholding pay, or criticism. Extrinsic motivators can have an immediate and
powerful effect, but will not necessarily last long. The intrinsic motivators, which are concerned
with the ‘quality of working life’ (a phrase and movement that emerged from this concept), are
likely to have a deeper and longer-term effect because they are inherent in individuals and their
work and not imposed from outside in such forms as incentive pay.
Motivation theories
There are a number of motivation theories which, in the main, are complementary to one another.
The most significant ones are those concerned with expectancy, goal setting and equity, which are
classified as process or cognitive theories.
Instrumentality theory
‘Instrumentality’ is the belief that if we do one thing it will lead to another. In its crudest form,
instrumentality theory states that people only work for money. The theory emerged in the second
half of the 19th century with its emphasis on the need to rationalize work and on economic
outcomes. It assumes that people will be motivated to work if rewards and penalties are tied
directly to their performance; thus the awards are contingent upon effective performance.
Instrumentality theory has its roots in the scientific management methods of Taylor (1911), who
wrote: ‘It is impossible, through any long period of time, to get workmen to work much harder
than the average men around them unless they are assured a large and permanent increase in their
pay.’ This theory provides a rationale for incentive pay, albeit a dubious one. It is based on the
principle of reinforcement. Motivation using this approach has been and still is widely adopted
and can be successful in some circumstances. But it is based exclusively on a system of external
controls and fails to recognize a number of other human needs. It also fails to appreciate the fact
that the formal control system can be seriously affected by the informal relationship exist- ing
between workers.
Reinforcement theory
As experience is gained in taking action to satisfy needs; people perceive that certain actions help
to achieve their goals while others are less successful. Some actions bring rewards; others result
in failure or even punishment. Reinforcement theory as developed by Hull (1951) suggests that
successes in achieving goals and rewards act as positive incentives and reinforce the successful
behaviour, which is repeated the next time a similar need emerges. The more power- ful, obvious
and frequent the reinforcement, the more likely it is that the behaviour will be repeated until,
eventually, it can become a more or less unconscious reaction to an event. Conversely, failures or
punishments provide negative reinforcement, suggesting that it is nec- essary to seek alternative
means of achieving goals. This process has been called ‘the law of effect’. The associated concept
of operant conditioning (Skinner, 1974) explains that new behaviours or responses become
established through particular stimuli, hence conditioning – getting people to repeat behaviour by
positive reinforcement in the form of feedback and knowledge • Herzberg’s two-factor
(motivation-hygiene) theory. • McGregor’s theory X and theory Y. Motivation 323 of results. The
concept suggests that people behave in ways they expect will produce positive outcomes. It is
linked to expectancy theory, as described later in this chapter and also contrib- utes to learning
theory (see Chapter 41). The degree to which experience shapes future behaviour does, of course,
depend, first, on the extent to which individuals correctly perceive the connection between the
behaviour and its outcome and, second, on the extent to which they are able to recognize the
resemblance between the previous situation and the one that now confronts them. Perceptive
ability varies between people as does the ability to identify correlations between events. For these
reasons, some people are better at learning from experience than others, just as some people are
more easily motivated than others. It has been suggested that behavioural theories based on the
principle of reinforcement or the law of effect are limited because they imply, in Allport’s (1954)
phrase, a ‘hedonism of the past’. They assume that the explanation of the present choices of
individuals is to be found in an examination of the consequences of their past choices. Insufficient
attention is paid in the theories to the influence of expectations, and no indication is given of any
means of distinguishing in advance the class of outcomes that would strengthen responses and
those that would weaken them
Content (needs) theory
The theory focuses on the content of motivation in the shape of needs. Its basis is the belief that
an unsatisfied need creates tension and a state of disequilibrium. To restore the balance a goal is
identified that will satisfy the need, and a behaviour pathway is selected that will lead to the
achievement of the goal and the satisfaction of the need. All behaviour is therefore motivated by
unsatisfied needs.
There are three points that emerge from this model.
First, people have a multiplicity of needs depending on themselves and the situation they are in.
Second, they can select all sorts of goals and actions to satisfy those needs.
Third, while we can observe their behaviour we cannot be certain of the needs and goals that
motivated it. It is unwise to assume that any one approach to motivation will appeal to all affected
by it. Motivation policies and practices must recognize that people are different.
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
The most famous classification of needs is the one formulated by Maslow (1954). He suggested
that there are fi ve major need categories that apply to people in general, starting from the fun-
damental physiological needs and leading through a hierarchy of safety, social and esteem needs
to the need for self-fulfilment, the highest need of all. When a lower need is satisfied the next
highest becomes dominant and the individual’s attention is turned to satisfying this higher need.
The need for self-fulfilment, however, can never be satisfied. ‘Man is a wanting animal’; only an
unsatisfied need can motivate behaviour and the dominant need is the prime motivator of
behaviour. Psychological development takes place as people move up the hierarchy of needs, but
this is not necessarily a straightforward progression. The lower needs still exist, even if temporarily
dormant as motivators, and individuals constantly return to previously satisfi ed needs. Maslow’s
needs hierarchy has an intuitive appeal and has been very popular. But it has not been verified by
empirical research such as that conducted by Wahba and Bridwell (1979), and it has been criticized
for its apparent rigidity (different people may have different priorities and it is difficult to accept
that needs progress steadily up the hierarchy) and for the misleading simplicity of Maslow’s
conceptual language. In fact, Maslow himself expressed doubts about the validity of a strictly
ordered hierarchy.
ERG theory
(Alderfer) Alderfer (1972) devised a theory of human needs that postulated three primary
categories: 1. Existence needs such as hunger and thirst – pay, fringe benefi ts and working
conditions are other types of existence needs. 2. Relatedness needs, which acknowledge that
people are not self-contained units but must engage in transactions with their human environment
– acceptance, understanding, confirmation and influence are elements of the relatedness process.
3. Growth needs, which involve people in finding the opportunities ‘to be what they are most fully
and to become what they can.
McClelland’s achievement–affiliation–power needs
An alternative way of classifying needs was developed by McClelland (1961), who based it mainly
on studies of managers. He identified three needs as being most important: 1. The need for
achievement, defined as the need for competitive success measured against a personal standard of
excellence. 2. The need for affiliation, defined as the need for warm, friendly, compassionate
relation- ships with others. 3. The need for power, defi ned as the need to control or influence
others. Different individuals have different levels of these needs. Some have a greater need for
achievement, others a stronger need for affiliation, and still others a stronger need for power. While
one need may be dominant, however, this does not mean that the others are non- existent. The
three needs may be given different priorities at different levels of management. Achievement needs
are particularly important for success in many junior and middle management jobs where it is
possible to feel direct responsibility for task accomplishment. But in senior management positions
a concern for institutionalized as opposed to personal power becomes more important. A strong
need for affiliation is not so significant at any level.