Douglas McGregor's Theory X and Theory Y

In his 1960 management book, The Human Side of Enterprise, Douglas McGregor made his
mark on the history of organizational management and motivational psychology when he
proposed the two theories by which managers perceive employee motivation. He referred to
these opposing motivational methods as Theory X and Theory Y management. Each assumes
that the manager's role is to organize resources, including people, to best benefit the company.
However, beyond this commonality, they're quite dissimilar.

Theory X Management

According to McGregor, Theory X leadership assumes the following:

Work is inherently distasteful to most people, and they will attempt to avoid work whenever
possible.
Most people are not ambitious, have little desire for responsibility, and prefer to be directed.
Most people have little aptitude for creativity in solving organizational problems.
Motivation occurs only at the physiological and security levels of Maslow's Needs Hierarchy.
Most people are self-centered. As a result, they must be closely controlled and often coerced to
achieve organizational objectives
Most people resist change.
Most people are gullible and unintelligent.

Essentially, theory x assumes that the primary source of most employee motivation is monetary,
with security as a strong second.

The Hard Approach and Soft Approach

Under Theory X, management approaches to motivation range from a hard approach to a soft
approach.

The hard approach to motivation relies on coercion, implicit threats, micromanagement, and tight
controls -- essentially an environment of command and control. The soft approach, however, is
to be permissive and seek harmony in the hopes that, in return, employees will cooperate when
asked. However, neither of these extremes is optimal. The hard approach results in hostility,
purposely low-output, and extreme union demands. The soft approach results in increasing desire
for greater reward in exchange for diminishing work output.

It would appear that the optimal approach to human resource management would be lie
somewhere between these extremes. However, McGregor asserts that neither approach is
appropriate since the foundations of theory x are incorrect.
The Problem with X Theory

Drawing on Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, McGregor argues that a need, once satisfied, no
longer motivates. The company relies on monetary rewards and benefits to satisfy employees'
lower level needs. Once those needs have been satisfied, the motivation is gone. This
management style, in fact, hinders the satisfaction of higher-level needs. Consequently, the only
way that employees can attempt to satisfy higher level needs at work is to seek more
compensation, so it is quite predictable that they will focus on monetary rewards. While money
may not be the most effective way to self-fulfillment, it may be the only way available. People
will use work to satisfy their lower needs, and seek to satisfy their higher needs during their
leisure time. Unfortunately, employees can be most productive when their work goals align with
their higher level needs.

McGregor makes the point that a command and control environment is not effective because it
relies on lower needs for motivation, but in modern society those needs are mostly satisfied and
thus no longer motivate. In this situation, one would expect employees to dislike their work,
avoid responsibility, have no interest in organizational goals, resist change, etc., thus creating a
self-fulfilling prophecy. To McGregor, motivation seemed more likely with the Theory Y model.

Theory Y

The higher-level needs of esteem and self-actualization are continuing needs in that they are
never completely satisfied. As such, it is these higher-level needs through which employees can
best be motivated.

In strong contrast to Theory X, Theory Y leadership makes the following general assumptions:

Work can be as natural as play if the conditions are favorable.

People will be self-directed and creative to meet their work and organizational objectives if they
are committed to them.
People will be committed to their quality and productivity objectives if rewards are in place that
address higher needs such as self-fulfillment.
The capacity for creativity spreads throughout organizations.
Most people can handle responsibility because creativity and ingenuity are common in the
population.
Under these conditions, people will seek responsibility.

Under these assumptions, there is an opportunity to align personal goals with organizational
goals by using the employee's own need for fulfillment as the motivator. McGregor stressed that
Theory Y management does not imply a soft approach.

McGregor recognized that some people may not have reached the level of maturity assumed by
Theory Y and therefore may need tighter controls that can be relaxed as the employee develops.

XY Theory Management Application - Business Implications for Workforce

Motivation
If Theory Y holds true, an organization can apply these principles of scientific management to
improve employee motivation:

Decentralization and Delegation - If firms decentralize control and reduce the number of levels
of management, managers will have more subordinates and consequently will be forced to
delegate some responsibility and decision making to them.
Job Enlargement - Broadening the scope of an employee's job adds variety and opportunities to
satisfy ego needs.
Participative Management - Consulting employees in the decision making process taps their
creative capacity and provides them with some control over their work environment.
Performance Appraisals - Having the employee set objectives and participate in the process of
evaluating how well they were met.

If properly implemented, such an environment would result in a high level of workforce

motivation as employees work to satisfy their higher level personal needs through their jobs.

Theory X and Theory Y

In his 1960 book, The Human Side of Enterprise, Douglas McGregor proposed two theories by
which to view employee motivation. He avoided descriptive labels and simply called the theories
Theory X and Theory Y. Both of these theories begin with the premise that management's role
is to assemble the factors of production, including people, for the economic benefit of the firm.
Beyond this point, the two theories of management diverge.

Theory X

Theory X assumes that the average person:

Dislikes work and attempts to avoid it.

Has no ambition, wants no responsibility, and would rather follow than lead.
Is self-centered and therefore does not care about organizational goals.
Resists change.
Is gullible and not particularly intelligent.

Essentially, Theory X assumes that people work only for money and security.

Theory X - The Hard Approach and Soft Approach

Under Theory X, management approaches can range from a hard approach to a soft approach.
The hard approach relies on coercion, implicit threats, close supervision, and tight controls,
essentially an environment of command and control. The soft appoach is to be permissive and
seek harmony with the hope that in return employees will cooperate when asked to do so.
However, neither of these extremes is optimal. The hard approach results in hostility, purposely
low-output, and hard-line union demands. The soft approach results in ever-increasing requests
for more rewards in exchange for ever-decreasing work output.

The optimal management approach under Theory X probably would be somewhere between
these extremes. However, McGregor asserts that neither approach is appropriate because the
assumptions of Theory X are not correct.

The Problem with Theory X

Drawing on Maslow's hierarchy, McGregor argues that a satisfied need no longer motivates.
Under Theory X the firm relies on money and benefits to satisfy employees' lower needs, and
once those needs are satisfied the source of motivation is lost. Theory X management styles in
fact hinder the satisfaction of higher-level needs. Consequently, the only way that employees can
attempt to satisfy their higher level needs in their work is by seeking more compensation, so it is
quite predictable that they will focus on monetary rewards. While money may not be the most
effective way to self-fulfillment, in a Theory X environment it may be the only way. Under
Theory X, people use work to satisfy their lower needs, and seek to satisfy their higher needs in
their leisure time. But it is in satisfying their higher needs that employees can be most
productive.

McGregor makes the point that a command and control environment is not effective because it
relies on lower needs as levers of motivation, but in modern society those needs already are
satisfied and thus no longer are motivators. In this situation, one would expect employees to
dislike their work, avoid responsibility, have no interest in organizational goals, resist change,
etc., thus making Theory X a self-fulfilling prophecy. From this reasoning, McGregor proposed
an alternative: Theory Y.

Theory Y

The higher-level needs of esteem and self-actualization are continuing needs in that they are
never completely satisfied. As such, it is these higher-level needs through which employees can
best be motivated.

Theory Y makes the following general assumptions:

Work can be as natural as play and rest.

People will be self-directed to meet their work objectives if they are committed to them.
People will be committed to their objectives if rewards are in place that address higher
needs such as self-fulfillment.
Under these conditions, people will seek responsibility.
Most people can handle responsibility because creativity and ingenuity are common in
the population.
Under these assumptions, there is an opportunity to align personal goals with organizational
goals by using the employee's own quest for fulfillment as the motivator. McGregor stressed that
Theory Y management does not imply a soft approach.

McGregor recognized that some people may not have reached the level of maturity assumed by
Theory Y and therefore may need tighter controls that can be relaxed as the employee develops.

Theory Y Management Implications

If Theory Y holds, the firm can do many things to harness the motivational energy of its
employees:

Decentralization and Delegation - If firms decentralize control and reduce the number of
levels of management, each manager will have more subordinates and consequently will
be forced to delegate some responsibility and decision making to them.
Job Enlargement - Broadening the scope of an employee's job adds variety and
opportunities to satisfy ego needs.
Participative Management - Consulting employees in the decision making process taps
their creative capacity and provides them with some control over their work environment.
Performance Appraisals - Having the employee set objectives and participate in the
process of evaluating how well they were met.

A Theory of Human Motivation

If properly implemented, such an environment would result in a high level of motivation as

emploIn 1943, Abraham Maslow's article A Theory of Human Motivation appeared in
Psychological Review, which were further expanded upon in his book: Toward a Psychology of Being In
this article, Abraham Maslow attempted to formulate a needs-based framework of human motivation
and based upon his clinical experiences with humans, rather than prior pyschology theories of his day
from leaders in the field of psychology such as Freud and B.F. Skinner, which were largely theoretical or
based upon animal behavior. From Maslow's theory of motivation, modern leaders and executive
managers find means of employee motivation for the purposes of employee and workforce
management. yees work to satisfy their higher level personal needs through their jobs.

The basis of Maslow's theory of motivation is that human beings are motivated by unsatisfied
needs, and that certain lower needs need to be satisfied before higher needs can be addressed. Per
the teachings of Abraham Maslow, there are general needs (physiological, safety, love, and
esteem) which have to be fulfilled before a person is able to act unselfishly. These needs were
dubbed "deficiency needs." While a person is motivated to fulfill these basal desires, they
continue to move toward growth, and eventually self-actualization. The satisfaction of these
needs is quite healthy. while preventing their gratification makes us ill or act evilly.
As a result, for adequate workplace motivation, it is important that leadship understands which
needs are active for individual employee motivation. In this regard, Abraham Maslow's model
indicates that basic, low-level needs such as physiological requirements and safety must be
satisfied before higher-level needs such as self-fulfillment are pursued. As depicted in this
hierarchical diagram, sometimes called 'Maslow's Needs Pyramid' or 'Maslow's Needs Triangle',
when a need is satisfied it no longer motivates and the next higher need takes its place.

Self-Actualization

Esteem Needs

Social Needs

Safety Needs

Physiological Needs

An individual will act in a certain way based on the expectation that the act will be
followed by a given outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the
individual.
Effort -------> Performance linkage (How hard will I have to work?)
Performance -------> Reward linkage (What is the reward?)
Attractiveness (How attractive is the reward?)
Herzberg's

Motivator factors increase job satisfaction:

Achievement
Recognition
Work itself
Responsibility
Advancement
Growth

Hygiene factors are those whose absence can create job dissatisfaction:
Supervision
Company policy
Working conditions
Salary
Peer relationship
Security
Need for Achievement

Need for Achievement

Personal responsibility
Feedback
Moderate risk

Need For Power

Influence
Competitive

Need for Affiliation

Acceptance and Friendship
Cooperative

Specific goals increase performance, and difficult goals, when accepted, result in
higher performance than easy goals.

An employee compares her/his job's inputs-outcomes ratio with that of referents.

If the employee perceives inequity, she/he will act to correct the inequity:

Lower productivity
Reduced quality
Increased absenteeism
Voluntary resignation.
Suggestions for Motivating the Employees

Recognize individual differences

Match people to jobs
Use goals
Individualize rewards
Link rewards to performance
Check the system for equity
Don't ignore money.

Self efficiency theory of motivation

Self-efficacy is defined as self-perceived ability to successfully complete or perform a particular task. For
example, when someone is presented with a challenge, such as to solve a problem or learn a new skill, a
person with high self-efficacy will expect that they will rise to the occasion and successfully complete
the task or learn the new skill. Motivation is directly related to self-efficacy in that if someone perceives
themselves as able to handle a situation (high self-efficacy), they will be more motivated to work hard at
successfully handling the situation. Someone who has low self-efficacy, or the subjective feeling that a
particular task is too difficult, will not be very motivated to engage in the task because they foresee
failure.
From the social-cognitive perspective, low self-efficacy plays a central role in anxiety and depression
(Pervin, et. al., 2005). It is unclear, however, if depression and anxiety are the cause of perceived
inefficacy, or if perceived inefficacy cause anxiety and depression.

Taylor

Frederick Winslow Taylor (1856 1917) put forward the idea that workers are motivated mainly
by pay. His Theory of Scientific Management argued the following:

Workers do not naturally enjoy work and so need close supervision and control

Therefore managers should break down production into a series of small tasks

Workers should then be given appropriate training and tools so they can work as efficiently as
possible on one set task.

Workers are then paid according to the number of items they produce in a set period of time-
piece-rate pay.

As a result workers are encouraged to work hard and maximise their productivity.

Taylors methods were widely adopted as businesses saw the benefits of increased productivity
levels and lower unit costs. The most notably advocate was Henry Ford who used them to design
the first ever production line, making Ford cars. This was the start of the era of mass production.

Taylors approach has close links with the concept of an autocratic management style (managers
take all the decisions and simply give orders to those below them) and Macgregors Theory X
approach to workers (workers are viewed as lazy and wish to avoid responsibility).
However workers soon came to dislike Taylors approach as they were only given boring,
repetitive tasks to carry out and were being treated little better than human machines. Firms
could also afford to lay off workers as productivity levels increased. This led to an increase in
strikes and other forms of industrial action by dis-satisfied workers.

Attribution Theory

Attribution theory (Weiner, 1980, 1992) is probably the most influential contemporary theory
with implications for academic motivation. It incorporates behavior modification in the sense
that it emphasizes the idea that learners are strongly motivated by the pleasant outcome of being
able to feel good about themselves. It incorporates cognitive theory and self-efficacy theory in
the sense that it emphasizes that learners' current self-perceptions will strongly influence the
ways in which they will interpret the success or failure of their current efforts and hence their
future tendency to perform these same behaviors.

According to attribution theory, the explanations that people tend to make to explain success or
failure can be analyzed in terms of three sets of characteristics:

First, the cause of the success or failure may be internal or external. That is, we may
succeed or fail because of factors that we believe have their origin within us or because of
factors that originate in our environment.

Second, the cause of the success or failure may be either stable or unstable. If the we
believe cause is stable, then the outcome is likely to be the same if we perform the same
behavior on another occasion. If it is unstable, the outcome is likely to be different on
another occasion.

Third, the cause of the success or failure may be either controllable or uncontrollable. A
controllable factor is one which we believe we ourselves can alter if we wish to do so. An
uncontrollable factor is one that we do not believe we can easily alter.

o Note that this factor is distinct from the previous two categories. An internal
factor can be controllable (we can control our effort by trying harder) or
uncontrollable (most people cannot easily change their basic intellectual ability or
change from being an introvert to being an extrovert). Likewise, an external factor
can be controllable (a person failing a difficult course could succeed by taking an
easier course) or uncontrollable (if calculus is difficult because it is abstract, it
will still be abstract no matter what we do).

An important assumption of attribution theory is that people will interpret their environment in
such a way as to maintain a positive self-image. That is, they will attribute their successes or
failures to factors that will enable them to feel as good as possible about themselves. In general,
this means that when learners succeed at an academic task, they are likely to want to attribute
this success to their own efforts or abilities; but when they fail, they will want to attribute their
failure to factors over which they have no control, such as bad teaching or bad luck.

The basic principle of attribution theory as it applies to motivation is that a person's own
perceptions or attributions for success or failure determine the amount of effort the person will
expend on that activity in the future.

There are four factors related to attribution theory that influence motivation in education: ability,
task difficulty, effort, and luck. In terms of the characteristics discussed previously, these four
factors can be analyzed in the following way:

Ability is a relatively internal and stable factor over which the learner does not
exercise much direct control.

Task difficulty is an external and stable factor that is largely beyond the learner's
control.

Effort is an internal and unstable factor over which the learner can exercise a
great deal of control.

Luck is an external and unstable factor over which the learner exercises very little
control.

Note that it is the learner's perception that determines how attributions will influence future
effort. A learner may believe that he is a "lucky person" - and for him luck would be an internal
and stable characteristic over which he exercises little control. In other words, for this person
"luck" is really what the preceding list calls an "ability" or personality characteristic. Likewise, a
person may believe that she expended a great deal of effort, when in fact she did not, or that an
objectively easy task was difficult. The basic principle of attribution theory as it applies to
motivation is that a person's own perceptions or attributions for success or failure determine the
amount of effort the person will expend on that activity in the future.

Students will be most persistent at academic tasks under the following circumstances:

1. if they attribute their academic successes to either:

o internal, unstable, factors over which they have control (e.g., effort) or
 o internal, stable, factors over which they have little control but which may
sometimes be disrupted by other factors (e.g., ability disrupted by
occasional bad luck);

and

2. if they attribute their failures to internal, unstable factors over which they have
control (e.g., effort).

The following guidelines can be derived from the preceding statement:

1. If we want students to persist at academic tasks, we should help them establish a

sincere belief that they are competent and that occasional imperfections or failures
are the result of some other factor (such as bad luck or a lack of sufficient effort)
that need not be present on future occasions. (That is, ability attributions for
success are likely to be beneficial, with the exception cited in the next guideline.)

2. It is not beneficial for students to attribute their successes entirely to ability. If

they think they already have all the ability they need, they may feel that additional
effort is superfluous. The ideal attribution for success is, "I succeeded because I
am a competent person and worked hard."

3. When students fail, they are most likely to persist and eventually succeed if they
attribute their failure to a lack of appropriate effort. Therefore, it is extremely
important that when students perceive themselves as unsuccessful teachers help
them develop the conviction that they can still succeed if they give it their best
shot. (Note that it is important to define effort appropriately, as in guideline 5.)

4. It is extremely hazardous to motivational health for students to fail repeatedly

after making a serious effort at academic tasks. When this happens, they will
either (a) stop believing they are competent, or (b) stop attributing their failure to
lack of effort. Both of these outcomes are likely to reduce persistence at the
academic tasks. It is important, therefore, to arrange tasks so that students who
work hard are able to perceive themselves as successful.

5. It is important to define effort correctly and for the learners to internalize an

accurate concept of effort. In practical terms effort is most usefully defined as
devoting effective academic learning time to the task. Just trying harder or
spending more time doing ineffective activities does not constitute effort. It is
extremely important to make this distinction. If we use another definition of
effort, when we tell children that their failures are a result of a lack of effort, we
run the risk of leading them to believe that they have an internal, stable
 characteristic called laziness, over which they have no control. This will reduce
motivation.

1. Another way to say this is that it is possible and desirable for students to
believe that even though they have "worked hard," they have not yet put
forth their best effort. If we can show students ways to improve their
efforts - and there are almost always ways to channel their energies more
effectively - then we can enable them to have an accurate perception that
increased effort is likely to pay off.

6. Excessively competitive grading and evaluation systems are likely to impair the
learning of many students. Competition will encourage students to persist only to
the extent that they believe additional effort will enable them to succeed within
the competitive atmosphere. In many instances, success in competition is
completely beyond the learner's control - no matter how hard a learner works,
another more competent and equally energetic competitor is likely to win.

7. It is useful to evaluate students at least partly (but not exclusively) on the basis of
their effort. This does not mean that the weakest students in a class should receive
the highest grades simply because they may spend more time trying to master the
subject matter. Ideally, course assignments should be arranged so that diligent
work actually leads to academic success, and the teacher's evaluation should help
students see this connection.

8. In general, it is best for students to believe that it is their own behavior rather than
external circumstances that leads to success or failure. Researchers refer to this as
having an internal locus of control. While it is good for students to have a
realistic understanding of what's happening around them, research shows that the
most successful students have a tendency to overestimate the degree to which
their own behavior leads to success or failure (Lefcourt, 1976).

9. When students have a conviction that they lack ability, it is necessary to take steps
to circumvent or overcome this conviction. Such students are likely to repudiate
successes. For example, when they do well, they are likely to have a sincere
conviction that they were "just lucky." It is difficult to alter this conviction.
Changing this conviction is tantamount to altering the learner's self-concept, and
this cannot be accomplished in a short time. There are many approaches available
to teachers, including the following:

o Find areas in which the learner perceives himself or herself as successful,

and show connections between that area and the topic currently under
consideration.
o Use guidelines discussed in chapter 8 to enhance the learner's self-concept.
o Focus heavily on effort as the factor critical to success.
 While the teacher's long-range goal may be to enhance the child's self-
concept, the immediate goal is to promote motivation with regard to the
subject matter at hand.

10.
11. When students reject the value of effort, it is important to change their perception.
This can be done by clarifying the meaning of effort and by seeing to it that effort
does actually pay off. In addition, if students attribute their success to luck, it may
be best to refrain from arguing with their attributions, while simply praising or
otherwise reinforcing them for their effective use of academic learning time.

The preceding guidelines should enable teachers to use attribution theory to motivate students
more effectively. In addition, it is possible simply to reinforce effort attributions (Schunk, 1982,
1983) and to conduct training programs designed to promote attributions that are likely to lead to
higher levels of motivation and productivity (McCombs, 1984; Forsterling, 1985; Licht &
Kistner, 1986; Zimmerman, 1989).

Attribution theory is an evolving field, and it is likely that further research will lead to additional
practical insights regarding motivation. It is important to note that this discussion of attribution
theory has barely scratched the surface. The following are some additional concepts related to
attribution theory:

Learning goals are set by individuals who seek to increase their competence. People who
emphasize learning goals are likely to seek challenges, if they believe the challenges will lead to
greater competence; and they tend to respond to failure by increasing their effort (Elliott &
Dweck, 1988; Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Dweck, 1989). It is good to encourage students to set and
pursue learning goals rather than performance goals.

Performance goals, on the other hand, are set by individuals who seek to gain favorable
judgments or to avoid unfavorable judgments in the eyes of others. People who emphasize
performance goals are likely to avoid challenges unless they are certain they can succeed, and
they tend to respond to failure with feelings of learned helplessness and self-handicapping
(Elliott & Dweck, 1988; Dweck & Leggett, 1988; Dweck, 1989), which are discussed next. It is
often undesirable to emphasize performance goals; but schools, parents, and society often
overemphasize them to the detriment of learners.
Learned helplessness refers to the expectation, based on previous experience, that one's actions
cannot possibly lead to success (Dweck, 1975, 1978). Performance goals are much more likely
than learning goals to lead to ability rather than effort attributions and to result in feelings of
learned helplessness. Heyman & Dweck (1992) recommend encouraging students to focus
primarily on learning goals, while keeping performance goals in perspective by enjoying
recognition without letting it become an overriding concern. Teachers can accomplish this by
focusing on learning rather than normative comparisons when reinforcing students, by modeling
the use of learning goals, and by using the scaffolding strategies described in chapter 12 to teach
effect goal setting and self-monitoring.

Self-handicapping occurs when learners create impediments that make good performance less
likely. Examples of impediments include drug and alcohol use, refusing to practice, reporting
excessive symptoms, and reducing effort. These impediments may sound just plain foolish, but
they are very real and actually serve to protect the person's sense of self-competence. If the self-
handicapping person does poorly, his explanation for this failure lies in the impediment. If the
person does well, his success is exalted, because he overcame the impediment. Since the
impediments interfere with learning, they have the overall effect of reducing motivation and
performance. Self-handicapping is likely to become prominent during adolescence. Since it
occurs most often among persons with an overriding concern with their competence image, this
problem can best be minimized by focusing on effort attributions and by helping learners
develop secure feelings of self-efficacy (Riggs, 1992).

Self-handicapping may be imposed or at least supported by a learner's culture or subculture or by

the atmosphere of the school. For example, adolescents may handicap themselves by reducing
their effort because they feel that studying hard will be viewed as an undesirable form of
competition with their peers (Slavin, 1983). Likewise, African-American students may reduce
their effort because they resist conforming to the norms of the oppositional culture (Fordham &
Ogbu, 1986).

Attribution Theory on Motivation

Do You Know You Lie to Yourself?

The attribution theory describes how people explain the behavior of others or themselves with
something else. Hello! Does excuses and/or blame ring a bell? Human Beings are very good at
rationalization. We can always find a twist or perspective to support our thinking or actions;
therefore, we must be careful.
The motivation theory associated here describes how people explain, justify, and/or provide
excuses about influences on their motivation - meaning, their current motivation level is due to
some external reason that has nothing to do with them.

Blame It On Anybody But Me!

The attribution theory is in direct conflict with one of the key components for success -
individual accountability. As you know, motivation is an inside job and each person must take
responsibility for finding motivation from within or finding external motivational factors to fire
them up. More often than not - a combination of internal and external motivation is needed.
Because success requires patience, fueling your motivation when necessary is important.

Don't Delude Yourself

There is something else to consider about this motivation theory. Have you ever noticed how
people are happy to take credit for positive or good things that happen, but blame the situation or
other factors when failure or other negative results occur? As I stated earlier, we are pretty good
at rationalizing things. Often this leads to self deception and delusionment. Don't kid yourself.
when you do, you only hurt yourself.

Make a commitment not to fall into the trap of unhealthy rationalization. If you want sustainable
motivation and success - you must own up to built up - otherwise you will not succeed.

Intrinsic/Extrinsic motivation and Hierarchy of Needs

MOTIVATION: Something that energizes, direct, and sustains behaviors.

INTRINSIC MOTIVATION: Internal desires to perform a particular task, people do

Certain activities because it gives them pleasure, develops a particular skill, or

Its morally the right thing to do.

EXTRINSIC MOTIVATION: Factors external to the individual and unrelated to the

Task they are performing. Examples include money, good grades, and other
 Rewards.

Intrinsically motivated students are bound to do much better in classroom activities, because

they are willing and eager to learn new material. Their learning experience is more

meaningful, and they go deeper into the subject to fully understand it. On the other hand,

extrinsically motivated students may have to be bribed to perform the same tasks.

How can we motivate students intrinsically?

A theorists by the name of Abraham Maslow, has concluded that before we can be

intrinsically motivated we must first satisfy some more basic human needs. According to

Maslow there are five basic levels of human needs.

1. Physiological needs. We are motivated to satisfy needs that ensure our physical

survival. Needs in this group include food, water, air, shelter, clothing and sex. Most

people have satisfied their physiological needs allowing them to concentrate on higher

level needs. For some though, physiological needs are dominant and are the biggest

needs in their lives.

2. Safety needs. Once physiological needs are met one can concentrate on bringing

safety and security to our lives. Safety and security needs include, order, stability,

routine, familiarity, control over ones life and environment, certainty and health.
3. Social needs or love and belonging needs. These needs include love, affection,

belonging and acceptance. People look for these needs in relationships with other

people and are motivated for these needs by the love from their families.

4. Esteem needs. All people have a need for stable, firmly based, usually high evaluation

of themselves for self-respect or self-esteem and for the esteem of others. These

needs may therefore be classified into two subsidiary sets. These are, first, the

desire for strength, achievement, adequacy, mastery of competence, confidence,

independence and freedom. Second, we have what we call the desire for reputation or

prestige (defining it as respect from other people), status, fame, glory, dominance,

importance, recognition, dignity or appreciation.

5. Need for self-actualization. This level of hierarchy is concentrated on an individual

being able to reach their full potential a human being. Once someone has satisfied the

first four levels of needs then they have the ability to concentrate on functioning to

their highest potential. But even if all these needs are satisfied, we may often still

expect that a new discontent and restlessness will soon develop, unless the individual is

doing what they are fitted for. Musicians must play music, artists must paint if they

are to be at peace with themselves. What humans can be, they must be. They must be

true to their own nature.

 The first four needs are what we call deficiency needs, because they come from things we

are lacking. These needs can be met only by external sources, by the environment, people or

things going on around us.

Self-actualization is a growth need. This doesnt just address what we are lacking in our

lives, but it gives us room to grow and develop as an individual. This need is always

intrinsically motivated, because we do it out of pure enjoyment and desire to grow.

Maslow, does explain that self-actualization is rarely achieved, even as adults. But we as

teachers, must make sure our students have satisfied their deficiency needs in order to

move on to their growth one. Intrinsic motivation will not occur until they are well fed,

safe in their environment, and can love and respect the teachers and their classmates.

From there on motivation will be a breeze.

Mayo

Elton Mayo (1880 1949) believed that workers are not just concerned with money but could be
better motivated by having their social needs met whilst at work (something that Taylor ignored).
He introduced the Human Relation School of thought, which focused on managers taking more
of an interest in the workers, treating them as people who have worthwhile opinions and realising
that workers enjoy interacting together.

Mayo conducted a series of experiments at the Hawthorne factory of the Western Electric
Company in Chicago

He isolated two groups of women workers and studied the effect on their productivity levels of
changing factors such as lighting and working conditions.

He expected to see productivity levels decline as lighting or other conditions became

progressively worse

What he actually discovered surprised him: whatever the change in lighting or working
conditions, the productivity levels of the workers improved or remained the same.
From this Mayo concluded that workers are best motivated by:

Better communication between managers and workers ( Hawthorne workers were consulted
over the experiments and also had the opportunity to give feedback)

Greater manager involvement in employees working lives ( Hawthorne workers responded to

the increased level of attention they were receiving)

Working in groups or teams. ( Hawthorne workers did not previously regularly work in teams)

In practice therefore businesses should re-organise production to encourage greater use of team
working and introduce personnel departments to encourage greater manager involvement in
looking after employees interests. His theory most closely fits in with a paternalistic style of
management.

Cognitive Motivation on wiseGEEK:

Need-based motivation theories would state that a person chooses the job that best
allows him to provide for his needs, which usually involves making money to obtain
food, shelter, and to provide for children. Cognitive motivation theories explain why
people choose jobs that they like more even though they pay less and provide less.
Other important focuses of cognitive therapies include evaluating how a patients brain
stores information, how he or she patterns behavior after others, and motivation.
Cognitive therapy teaches patients to question and invalidate negative thinking patterns
while replacing those patterns with more positive thought processes.

Social cognitive theory is a learning theory based on the ideas that people learn by watching
what others do and that human thought processes are central to understanding personality. While
social cognitists agree that there is a fair amount of influence on development generated by
learned behavior displayed in the environment in which one grows up, they believe that the
individual person (and therefore cognition) is just as important in determining moral
development [2].

People learn by observing others, with the environment, behavior, and cognition all as the chief
factors in influencing development. These three factors are not static or independent; rather, they
are all reciprocal. For example, each behavior witnessed can change a person's way of thinking
(cognition). Similarly, the environment one is raised in may influence later behaviors, just as a
father's mindset (also cognition) will determine the environment in which his children are raised
[2]
.