Theory of Achievement Motivation

Some people have an intense desire to achieve while others are not so keen about achievement. David C.
McClelland had studied this phenomenon for over twenty years at Harvard University and proposed
his Achievement Motivation Theory (Also called Manifest Need Theory). According to him, there are
certain needs that are learned and socially acquired as the individual interacts with the environment.
McClelland classified such needs into three broad categories. These are (a) Need for power, (b) Need for
affiliation, and (c) Need for achievement.

Need for Power (N-Pow) is a term that was popularized by renowned psychologist David McClelland in
1961. McClelland's thinking was influenced by the pioneering work of Henry Murray who first identified
underlying psychological human needs and motivational processes (1938). It was Murray who set out a
taxonomy of needs, including Achievement, Power and Affiliation - and placed these in the context of an
integrated motivational model. In McClelland's book The Achieving Society N-Pow helps explain an
individual's imperative to be in charge. According to his work there are two kinds of
power, social and personal.

People who exhibit N-Pow tendencies are most satisfied by seeing their environment move in a certain
direction, due to their involvements. As an example of the need for personal power, most corporate leaders
seek high level positions so as to control the direction in which their company is moving. As an example of
social power, most people might agree that Nelson Mandela not only has socio-political Power, but uses
this influence to bring to light social issues in order to further his desire for peace and equality on earth.

Sex differences affect the way power motive is expressed. While men with more N-Pow show high levels
of aggression, drink heavily, act in sexually exploitative manner, and participate in competitive sports,
women channel their N-Pow in a more socially acceptable and responsible manner, being more concerned
and caring.

McClelland defines the need for power (nPow) as a desire for "power either to control other people (for
[one's] own goals) or to achieve higher goals (for the greater good)," and describes people high in this trait
as seeking "neither recognition nor approval from others - only agreement and compliance."[5]. In his later
research, McClelland refined his theory to include two distinct types of power motivation: the need
for socialized power, expressed on the TAT by descriptions of plans, self-doubts, mixed outcomes, and
concern for others, and the need for personal power, expressed by stories in which one individual seeks
power and must oppose another to get it.[8] Compared to people who value affiliation or achievement,
individuals with high nPow scores tend to be more argumentative, more assertive in group discussions, and
more likely to experience frustration when they feel powerless or not in control of a situation.[9] They are
more likely to seek or hold a position in which they have control over others, and to engage in conspicuous
consumption.[10]
A high nPow score predicts greater career success for men and for women who report high satisfaction with
the power-related aspects of their workplace. [11][12] McClelland's own research included case studies
illustrating the advantage of high nPow in the workplace, especially for more experienced workers
competing for management positions. In one characteristic example, a successful salesman with a high
need for affiliation and a low need for power began to perform poorly after being promoted to management.
He experienced difficulty giving direct orders, leading his subordinates to complain that he failed to set
clear goals and reward individuals who performed well.[13]

Outside of work, a high nPow score is associated with both positive and negative outcomes, with the result
often depending on whether an individual also reports a strong sense of responsibility. When combined
with a low score on a measure of responsibility, a high nPow score predicts higher rates
of externalizing self-destructive behavior, such as binge-drinking and physical aggression. Men with this
combination of personality traits are more likely to divorce, separate, or physically abuse their spouses.
However, this association disappears for individuals with average or high responsibility scores, who are
disproportionately likely to report positive outcomes like taking on social leadership roles.

As with individual outcomes, whether a high need for power results in positive or negative outcomes is
influenced by the individual's other traits, particularly responsibility and empathy. An argumentative group
member may prevent groupthink, or they may intimidate other group members and refuse to make
reasonable compromises; a hard-charging manager may motivate and focus their team, or they may bully
and manipulate their subordinates. Even dangerous behaviors, like impulsive risk-taking, can be beneficial
in moderation: successful stock traders [15] and entrepreneurs[16] often have a high propensity for risk. On a
grand scale, high nPow scorers include both prosocial figures like Nelson Mandela and Thurgood
Marshall and antisocial figures like Josef Stalin and Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling.

On average, men report a higher need for power than women, which may be due to biological factors,
social factors, or an interaction between them. Gender also influences how the need for power is outwardly
expressed: men are more likely to express anger directly, use physical violence to establish control, or
engage in risky or impulsive behavior, while women are more likely to employ relational aggression or
suppress their hostility.[17] When the needs for socialized and personal power are measured separately,
women managers express a greater desire for socialized power than their male counterparts, but an equal
desire for personal power. Interestingly, men, but not women, reported greater job satisfaction if they had a
high need for socialized power.

The Need for affiliation (N-Affil) is a term that was popularized by David McClelland and describes a
person's need to feel a sense of involvement and "belonging" within a social group; McClellend's thinking
was strongly influenced by the pioneering work of Henry Murray who first identified underlying
psychological human needs and motivational processes (1938). It was Murray who set out a taxonomy of
needs, including achievement, power and affiliation—and placed these in the context of an integrated
motivational model. People with a high need for affiliation require warm interpersonal relationships and
approval from those with whom they have regular contact. People who place high emphasis on affiliation
tend to be supportive team members, but may be less effective in leadership positions. Affiliation is a
positive, sometimes intimate, personal relationship. Affiliation can include "concern over establishing,
maintaining, or restoring a positive affective relationship with another person or persons."
There are many situations in which people feel a need for affiliation. One situation that causes a greater
need for affiliation is during a stressful situation. An example where there was an increase in the need for
affiliation among individuals was right after the September 11 terrorist attack on the World Trade Center.
This event led to Americans putting their differences aside and coming together. The increase in an
individual's need for affiliation allowed individuals responding to the same stressor to come together and
find security in one another. Situations that include fear often lead people to want to be together and trigger
a need for affiliation. Research done by Schacter (1959) shows that fear that comes from anxiety increases
the need for the person to affiliate with others who are going through the same situation or that could help
them through the stressful event. The strength of this need changes from one person to the next, there are
moments that people just want to be together.
The need for affiliation for an individual can vary over short amounts of time; there are times when
individuals wish to be with others and other times to be alone. In one study, completed by Shawn O'Connor
and Lorne Rosenblood, beepers were distributed to the students. The students were then asked to record,
when their beepers went off, whether or not they wanted to be alone or if they wanted to be with others at
that particular moment. This study was done to observe how frequently college students were in the
presence of others and how frequently they were alone. The next step in this study asked for the students to
record whether, at the time their beeper went off, they wanted to be alone or in the company of others. This
response that they gave usually reflected which of the two situations they were experiencing the next time
their beepers went off. The information retained from this study helped to show the strength of an
individual's need for affiliation. By showing how frequently they obtained the presence of others when they
felt that it was what they wanted at that moment it showed how strong their need for affiliation was at that
particular moment.
Depending on the specific circumstances, an individual's level of need for affiliation can become increased
or decreased. Yacov Rofe suggested that the need for affiliation depended on whether being with others
would be useful for the situation or not. When the presence of other people was seen as being helpful in
relieving an individual from some of the negative aspects of the stressor, an individual's desire to affiliate
increases. However, if being with others may increase the negative aspects such as adding the possibility of
embarrassment to the already present stressor, the individual's desire to affiliate with others
decreases. Individuals are motivated to find and create a specific amount of social interactions. Each
individual desires a different amount of a need for affiliation and they desire an optimal balance of time to
their self and time spent with others.
Need for achievement (N-Ach) refers to an individual's desire for significant accomplishment, mastering
of skills, control, or high standards. The term was first used by Henry Murray and associated with a range
of actions. These include: "intense, prolonged and repeated efforts to accomplish something difficult. To
work with singleness of purpose towards a high and distant goal. To have the determination to win". The
concept of NAch was subsequently popularised by the psychologist David McClelland.

This personality trait is characterized by an enduring and consistent concern with setting and meeting high
standards of achievement. This need is influenced by internal drive for action (intrinsic motivation), and the
pressure exerted by the expectations of others (extrinsic motivation). Measured by thematic appreciation
tests, need for achievement motivates an individual to succeed in competition, and to excel in activities
important to him or her.

Need for Achievement is related to the difficulty of tasks people choose to undertake. Those with low N-
Ach may choose very easy tasks, in order to minimise risk of failure, or highly difficult tasks, such that a
failure would not be embarrassing. Those with high N-Ach tend to choose moderately difficult tasks,
feeling that they are challenging, but within reach.

People high in N-Ach are characterised by a tendency to seek challenges and a high degree of
independence. Their most satisfying reward is the recognition of their achievements. Sources of high N-
Ach include:

1. Parents who encouraged independence in childhood

2. Praise and rewards for success
3. Association of achievement with positive feelings
4. Association of achievement with one's own competence and effort, not luck
5. A desire to be effective or challenged
6. Intrapersonal Strength
7. Desirability
8. Feasibility
9. Goal Setting Abilities

McClelland said that most people possess and exhibit a combination of these characteristics. Some people
exhibit a strong bias to a particular motivational need, and this motivational or needs 'mix' consequently
affects their behaviour and working/managing style. Mcclelland suggested that a strong n-affil 'affiliation-
motivation' undermines a manager's objectivity, because of their need to be liked, and that this affects a
manager's decision-making capability. A strong n-pow 'authority-motivation' will produce a determined
work ethic and commitment to the organisation, and while n-pow people are attracted to the leadership role,
they may not possess the required flexibility and people-centred skills. McClelland argues that n-ach people
with strong 'achievement motivation' make the best leaders, although there can be a tendency to demand
too much of their staff in the belief that they are all similarly and highly achievement-focused and results
driven, which of course most people are not.
McClelland's particular fascination was for achievement motivation, and this laboratory experiment
illustrates one aspect of his theory about the affect of achievement on people's motivation. McClelland
asserted via this experiment that while most people do not possess a strong achievement-based motivation,
those who do, display a consistent behaviour in setting goals:
Volunteers were asked to throw rings over pegs rather like the fairground game; no distance was stipulated,
and most people seemed to throw from arbitrary, random distances, sometimes close, sometimes farther
away. However a small group of volunteers, whom McClelland suggested were strongly achievement-
motivated, took some care to measure and test distances to produce an ideal challenge - not too easy, and
not impossible. Interestingly a parallel exists in biology, known as the 'overload principle', which is
commonly applied to fitness and exercising, ie., in order to develop fitness and/or strength the exercise
must be sufficiently demanding to increase existing levels, but not so demanding as to cause damage or
strain. McClelland identified the same need for a 'balanced challenge' in the approach of achievement-
motivated people.
McClelland contrasted achievement-motivated people with gamblers, and dispelled a common pre-
conception that n-ach 'achievement-motivated' people are big risk takers. On the contrary - typically,
achievement-motivated individuals set goals which they can influence with their effort and ability, and as
such the goal is considered to be achievable. This determined results-driven approach is almost invariably
present in the character make-up of all successful business people and entrepreneurs.
McClelland suggested other characteristics and attitudes of achievement-motivated people:
 achievement is more important than material or financial reward.
 achieving the aim or task gives greater personal satisfaction than receiving praise or recognition.
 financial reward is regarded as a measurement of success, not an end in itself.
 security is not prime motivator, nor is status.
 feedback is essential, because it enables measurement of success, not for reasons of praise or
recognition (the implication here is that feedback must be reliable, quantifiable and factual).
 achievement-motivated people constantly seek improvements and ways of doing things better.
 achievement-motivated people will logically favour jobs and responsibilities that naturally satisfy
their needs, ie offer flexibility and opportunity to set and achieve goals, eg., sales and business
management, and entrepreneurial roles.
McClelland firmly believed that achievement-motivated people are generally the ones who make things
happen and get results, and that this extends to getting results through the organisation of other people and
resources, although as stated earlier, they often demand too much of their staff because they prioritise
achieving the goal above the many varied interests and needs of their people.