Introduction

As we saw in Topic 1, OB is concerned with understanding the behaviour of people at work. One of the most common questions managers discuss with each other in their informal conversations is: How do you motivate people? The question comes up each time a worker is seen by their manager to be not performing their job with sufficient enthusiasm, energy, or efficiency. In this topic, we will discuss various theories of motivation and how managers can put these theories to practical use.

Objectives

On completion of this topic, you should be able to:

• identify and discuss the key features of various early and contemporary motivation theories
• distinguish between intrinsic and extrinsic rewards
• describe the job characteristics model and show how changing the work environment contributes to worker motivation
• discuss different examples of employee involvement programs
• analyse the key components of a typical employee rewards program.

Approximate study time required

Actively engaging with the lecture content	2 hrs
Topic readings	2 hrs
Undertake the prescribed learning activities	1 hrs
Self-directed topic review	1 hrs
Total	6 hrs

What is ‘Motivation’?

Motivation, in an organisational context, describes the forces within the individual that account for the level, direction, and persistence of effort expended at work. Motivating workers and colleagues is therefore a key managerial activity as it directly influences productivity.

Although the word ‘motivation’ is commonly used in our day-to-day language, it has different shades of meaning in the different contexts in which we use it. So we will start by looking at what we seem to mean when we speak of motivating someone. The word ‘motive’ shares the same root as the word to ‘move’. To motivate is, in a literal sense, to move someone. You can see this in words such as locomotive, and automotive. When we say ‘How do you motivate people?’, the implicit metaphor is of an inanimate object which is to be moved by an external force. This is not a very flattering image of people. This dispositional or internal attribution assumes that some people lack motivation (i.e. they are lazy) and will not move unless they are given a push by someone else.

An alternative interpretation about motivation is to assume that people are always motivated, but in certain situations they may not be motivated to do what you want them to do. This is an example of the situational or external attribution. An employee may, for example, get up at 4 am, pack a lunch, and leave before day-break to stand in thigh-deep cold water for hours – in order to fish. The same employee may grumble at having to work in a comfortable, warm room for more than two hours without a tea break. Many OB researchers believe that the situational attribution is a more accurate interpretation of motivation. They tend to suggest that it would be more effective for a manager to think about why it is that activities like fishing evoke such devotion from the employees and to consider ways to make work more like fishing, rather than thinking of employees as objects in need of ‘motivation’.

Motivation theories

Let us now look at the main theories of motivation. The text gives an overview of several well-known early theories before a number of more recent ‘contemporary’ theories are discussed.

The hierarchy of needs and ERG theory

The best known early theory of motivation is probably Maslow’s theory of the hierarchy of needs; although, as the text notes, the empirical support for this theory has been fairly weak. A modification of Maslow’s theory, known as the ERG theory, has received greater support from empirical research.

McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y

McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y, and Herzberg’s two-factor theory are nearly as well known in the OB literature as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, although the empirical support for these theories is also rather weak. McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y are not theories so much as a description of two kinds of ways you can look at people’s motivation. McGregor seems to suggest that how we perceive someone’s motivation can create a self-fulfilling prophecy. If I think of a person as being lazy and in need of being ‘motivated’, I will behave towards that person accordingly, and the person will turn out to act in a lazy and unmotivated way. If, on the other hand, I perceive a person as being self-motivated, the person will behave in that way.

Expectancy theory

The second group of ‘contemporary’ theories include the equity and expectancy theories. The assumption behind these theories is that a person’s motivation depends on their evaluation of the potential outcomes. The following three factors are incorporated into the evaluation equation:

• expectancy
• instrumentality
• valence.

These factors sound rather difficult, but they are actually quite simple, and accord well with our common sense observations about motivation. Let us take an example. Suppose you offered one of your friends, John, the following proposition: If John manages to win the gold medal in the 100 metres freestyle at the World Swimming Championships, you will pay him a million dollars. Will John be motivated to accept your offer and try hard to win the gold medal? Well, it will depend on the three factors of valence, expectancy and instrumentality.

First, if John tried his best, will he able to win the gold medal? If he is a 45-year-old who has seldom participated in athletic activities, it is highly unlikely that he would win the gold medal regardless of how hard he tries. On the other hand, if John is the best athlete in Australia in this event, he may well decide that he has a good chance of winning the gold medal. This is the expectancy factor or the probability that his effort will lead to the expected performance.

Second, does John believe that you really have a million dollars and that you will give it to John if he wins the gold medal? This factor is called instrumentality, or the probability that his successful performance will lead to a reward.

Third, does John want the million dollars? Most of us would, but if John has taken a vow of poverty, or if he does not expect to be able to enjoy the money for some reason, then he may not have much use for the million dollars. This factor is called valence or the perceived attractiveness of the reward to the recipient.

Expectancy theory says that whether John will be motivated to work hard as a result of your offer is determined by the multiplication of these three factors. If John believes that he has a good chance of winning provided he works hard; that you will keep your word and pay him the money; and if he places a high value on the money, then he will indeed work hard to win the gold medal. If the value of any one of the three factors is zero, the multiplication will equal zero, and the person will display little if any motivation.

Equity theory

Expectancy theory looks at the motivation of an individual in isolation. Most people, however, do not work alone, but in cooperation with other people. According to equity theory, in such a situation an individual pays attention to not only the reward he or she is getting, but also to what other people are getting who are doing similar work. A person who gets paid less than someone else although both are doing similar work is likely to feel demotivated, and to reduce his or her effort at work. Surprisingly, a person who is getting paid more than others is also likely to change their behaviour, usually by putting in more effort than the others.

Job characteristics theory

Principles of early and contemporary theories have been integrated into a model called the Job Characteristics Theory. This theory assumes that the task is the stimulus to which the individual responds, and this response is what we call motivation. The Job Characteristic Theory, which has received considerable research support, suggests that:

• skill variety, task identity and task significance increase the meaningfulness of work
• job autonomy increases the worker’s feeling of responsibility for results
• getting quick feedback enables the worker to change his or her approach to the job to make it more productive.

This model is obviously linked to two well known techniques to improve motivation, namely job enlargement and job enrichment. Job enlargement is similar to increasing skill variety, while job enrichment increases task identity and autonomy.

It is interesting to note that the philosophy behind the job characteristics model (and the associated techniques of job enlargement and job enrichment) puts the emphasis for motivation not on the individual, but on the job. It assumes, in keeping with the situational attribution and McGregor’s Theory Y, that all individuals are not necessarily unmotivated by nature. Rather, it is a matter of redesigning the situation (i.e. job or task) in such a way as to utilise people’s need to work productively.

Summary

Motivation is a key topic for managers who are concerned with getting things done through people. A common view of motivation is that some people need to be ‘motivated’ by their superiors because they are not self-motivated. A different view of motivation is that people are always motivated, but the direction in which they will expend their effort depends on the design of their work. The expectancy theory formalises this view by considering expectancy, instrumentality and valence as three factors which together determine the level of motivation. Performance appraisals are an example of the way in which expectancy theory has been applied to the organisational context.