CHAPTER FOUR:

FUNDAMENTALS OF MOTIVATION

3.1 THE CONCEPT OF MOTIVATION

Maybe the place to begin is to say what motivation isn’t. Many people incorrectly view
motivation as a personal trait - that is, some have it and others don’t. In practice, some
managers label employees who seem to lack motivation as lazy. Such a label assumes
that an individual is always lazy or is lacking in motivation. Our knowledge of
motivation tells us that this just isn’t true. What we know is that motivation is the result
of the interaction of the individual and the situation. Certainly, individuals differ in
their basic motivational drive. But the same employee who is quickly bored when
pulling the lever on his drill press may pull the lever on a slot machine in Las Vegas for
hours on end without the slightest hint of boredom. You may read a complete novel at
one sitting; yet find it difficult to stay with a textbook for more than 20 minutes. It’s not
necessarily you - it’s the situation. So as we analyze the concept of motivation, keep in
mind that level of motivation varies both between individuals and within individuals at
different times.

 Motivation refers to the forces within a person that affect his or her direction,
intensity, and persistence of voluntary behaviour. Motivated employees are willing to
exert a particular level of effort (intensity), for a certain amount of time (persistence),
toward a particular goal (direction).

 Motivation is the willingness to exert high levels of effort toward organizational

goals, conditioned by the effort’s ability to satisfy some individual need.

 Motivation refers to those psychological processes that cause arousal, direction, and
persistence of voluntary actions that are goal oriented.

 Motivation is an internal force that energizes behaviour, gives direction to behaviour,

and underlies the tendency to persist. This definition of motivation recognizes that in
order to achieve goals, individuals must be sufficiently stimulated and energetic,
must have a clear focus or end in mind, and must be willing and able to commit
their energy for a long enough period of time to realize their aim.
o Because motivation is an internal force, we cannot measure the motivation of
others directly. Instead, we typically infer whether or not other individuals are
motivated by watching their behavior.

Technically, the term motivation is derived can from the Latin word “movere”, which
means “to move.” This meaning is evident in the following comprehensive definition:

 Motivation is a process that starts with a physiological or psychological deficiency or

need that activates behaviour or a drive that is aimed at a goal or incentive.

1
The Basic Motivation Process or Motivation Cycle

The starting point in this cycle is a need - a deficiency or a state of felt deprivation an
individual experiences at a particular time. An unsatisfied need creates tension
(physiological or psychological in balance), which will be modified by one’s culture and
personality that stimulates drives within the individual. These drives generate a search
behavior to find particular goals that, if attained, will satisfy the need and lead to the
reduction of tension, and one cycle of motivation will be completed.

So we can say that motivated employees are in a state of tension. To relieve this tension,
they exert effort. The greater the tension, the higher the effort level. If this effort
successfully leads to the satisfaction of the need, tension is reduced. But since we are
interested in work behavior, this tension-reduction effort must also be directed toward
organizational goals. Therefore, inherent in our definition of motivation is the
requirement that the individual’s needs be compatible and consistent with the
organization’s goals.

Types of Needs

These dimensions of the basic motivation process serve as a point of departure for the content
and process theories of work motivation. After discussion of primary, general, and secondary
motives, those work-motivation theories, more directly related to the study and application of
organisational behaviour and human resource management are examined.

Primary motives. Such motives are variously called physiological, biological, unlearned, or
primary. Two criteria must be met in order to be included in the primary classification: It must
be unlearned, and it must be physiologically based. These include hunger, thirst, sleep,
avoidance of pain, sex, and maternal concern. Although the precedence of primary motives is
implied in some motivation theories, there are many situations in which general and secondary
motives predominate over primary motives.

General motives. There are a number of motives that lie in the grey area between the
primary and secondary classifications. To be included in the general category, a motive
must be unlearned but not physiologically based.Whereas the primary needs seek to
reduce the tension or stimulation. Thus, these needs are sometimes called “stimulus
motives.” The motives of curiosity, manipulation, activity, and affection seem to best
meet these criteria for this classification. General motives are more relevant to
organisational behaviour than are primary motives.

Secondary motives. The secondary drives are questionably the most important to the
study of human behaviour in organisations. As human society develops economically and
becomes more complex, the primary drives, and to a lesser degree the general drives,
gives way to the learned secondary drives in motivating behaviour. Secondary motives
are closely tied to the learning concepts. In particular, the learning principle of
reinforcement is conceptually related to motivation. The relationship is obvious when
reinforcement is divided into primary and secondary categories and is portrayed as
incentives.

2
A motive must be learned in order to be included in the secondary classification.
Need for power, achievement, affiliation, security and status are important secondary
needs.
Motivation Vs Satisfaction

Motivation refers to the drive and effort to satisfy a want or a goal. Satisfaction refers to
the contentment experienced when a want is satisfied. In other words, motivation implies
a drive toward an outcome, and satisfaction is the outcome already experienced.

Motivation Results Satisfaction

Motivation and Performance

All too often, motivation and performance are assumed to be one and the same. This
faulty assumption can lead to poor managerial decisions. The following formula for
performance helps put motivation in to proper perspective:

Performance = Ability x Motivation x Environmental conditions.

Thus, we see motivation is a necessary but insufficient contributor to job performance.

The multiplication sign is used to emphasize how a weakness in one factor can negate the
other.
The above relationship between performance and motivation clearly shows us that
managers should hire individuals who have the ability to do what is required. After then,
the management challenge is providing environmental conditions that nurture and support
individual motivation to work toward organizational goals.

Keeping other variables constant, motivation and performance have neither positive nor
negative relationship. As motivation increases, job performance increases, reaches its
Performance

maximum and the decreases.

Optimal/maximum
-------

Motivation

NB: After the optimal point further motivation brings about anxiety, tenseness,
fretfulness, and the anxiety eventually decreases performance.

3
4
 3.2 A JOB PERFORMANCE MODEL OF MOTIVATION

A conceptual model for understanding motivation was created by integrating elements

from several of the motivation theories. The foundation of the model is based on the
systems theory and reinforcement theory. Systems theory suggests that good performance
7-3a results from a process of combining effort and technology to transform inputs into
Figure 7-1a desired outputs. Systems theory further implies that people do not perform in isolation.
Rather, employees frequently work on interdependent tasks and rely on each other's
output as their input. Reinforcement theory, the other component of the model, involves
making performance stronger with feedback and contingent consequences.

Individual Inputs Skills

Ability, Job knowledge Skills

Dispositions & Traits

Emotions, Moods, &Affect
Beliefs & Values
Motivational Process

Motivated
Arousal Attention Intensity Behaviors
& &
Direction Persistence
Job Context
Physical Environment
Task Design
Rewards & Reinforcement
Supervisory Support & Coaching Enable, Limit
Social Norms
Organizational Culture

Skills Skills
Individual Inputs

Focus: Direction, What we do

Motivational Performance
Process Intensity: Effort, how hard we try

Quality: Task strategies, the way we do it

Job Context Enable, Limit

5
As can be seen from the above diagrams, four types of inputs that affect employee effort
and performance: individual differences and needs, supervisory support and coaching,
performance goals, and job characteristics. Managers use support and coaching as input
to employee performance. Support entails supplying employees with adequate resources
to get the job done. In addition, coaching involves providing employees with direction,
advice, and guidance. These behaviors include effective listening, furnishing employees
with successful role modes, showing employees how to complete complex tasks, and
helping them maintain high self-efficacy and self-esteem.

Because behavior is geared toward accomplishing end results, performance goals are a
critical input to employee performance. Goals and action plans provide employees with
direction and guidance about how to spend their time on specific tasks. Job
characteristics, the final input variable, represent the types of tasks completed by
employees.

The relationship between employee effort and performance is affected by work

environment and external constraints. These constraints, which include such things as
defective raw materials, broken equipment, poor management, and economic
considerations, can impair employees' ability to transform their inputs into desired
performance outcomes. It is management's responsibility to manage and remove such
performance roadblocks. In addition, managers dramatically affect employee effort and
performance by providing feedback and by reinforcing employee behavior with
consequences.

3.3 THEORIES OF MOTIVATION

3.3.1 THE CONTENT THEORIES OF MOTIVATION

The content theories of work motivation attempt to determine what motivates people at
work. The content theorists are concerned with identifying the needs/drives that people
have and how these need/drives are prioritised. They are concerned with the types of
incentives or goals that people strive to attain in order to be satisfied and perform well.
Content theories do not necessarily predict work motivation or behaviour, but are still
important to understand what motivates people at work. They explain the dynamics of
employee needs; why people have different needs at different times; understanding which
we can discover what motives them

MASLOW’S NEEDS HIERARCHY THEORY

Abraham H. Maslow suggested that people have a complex set of exceptionally strong
needs, which can be arranged in a hierarchy. Underlying this hierarchy are the following
basic assumptions:
o A satisfied need does not motivate. However, when one need is satisfied,

6
 another need emerges to take its place, so people are always striving to satisfy
some need.
o The needs network for most people is very complex, with a number of needs
affecting the behavior of each person at any one time.
o Lower level needs must be minimally satisfied, before higher level needs are
activated sufficiently to drive behavior.
o There are more ways to satisfy higher level needs than lower level needs.
o If satisfaction is not maintained for a once-satisfied need, it will become a
priority need again

Based on the above premises, the theory postulates five needs categories that are arranged
hierarchically as physiological, security, affiliation, esteem, and self-actualization.
Physiological Needs

Physiological needs constitute the lowest level in Maslow's hierarchy. They are the basic
needs for sustaining human life it self, such as food, water, air, shelter, sleep, sex, and
other bodily needs. Maslow took the position that until these needs are satisfied to the
degree necessary to maintain life, other needs will not motivate people. In other words,
As Maslow points out, a person lacking food, love and esteem wants food more than
he/she wants acceptance or prestige. Managers who focus on physiological needs in
attempting to motivate subordinates assume that people work primarily for money and are
primarily concerned with comfort, avoidance of fatigue, and the like. These managers try to
motivate employees by offering wage increases, better working conditions, more leisure time,
longer breaks, and better fringe benefits.

Security Needs

Safety needs include freedom from fear and anxiety, job security, desires for retirement
and insurance programs and so on. Like physiological needs, unsatisfied security needs
cause people to be preoccupied with satisfying them. People who are motivated primarily by
security needs value their jobs mainly as a defense against the loss of basic need
satisfactions. Managers who feel that security needs are most important to their employees
focus on them by emphasizing rules and regulations, job security, and fringe benefits.
Managers whose subordinates have strong security needs will not encourage innovation in
solving problems and will not reward risk taking. The employees, in turn, will strictly follow
rules and regulations. As with physiological needs, management attempts to satisfy safety
needs primarily through salary.

Affiliation Needs

The needs for friendship, companionship, a place in a group, love, and a feeling of belonging,
the desire to affiliate with and be accepted by others are all affiliation needs. When
physiological and security needs have been satisfied, affiliation needs emerge and motivate
people. Managers must realize that, when affiliation needs are the primary sources of motivation,
people value their work as an opportunity for finding and establishing warm and friendly
interpersonal relationships. Managers who believe that their subordinates are striving primarily

7
to satisfy these needs are likely to act in a more supportive and permissive way, emphasizing
employee acceptance by co-workers, extracurricular activities (such as organized sports
programs and company picnics), and group norms. Love needs include both giving and
receiving. These needs are met by frequent interaction with fellow workers and
acceptance by others.

Esteem Needs [Self-esteem + Public-esteem]

Both personal feelings of achievement and self-worth and recognition or respect from others
meet esteem needs. People with esteem needs want others to accept them for what they are and
to perceive them as competent and able. Managers who focus on esteem needs in their attempts
to motivate employees tend to emphasize public rewards and recognition for services.
Acknowledgment of the work's difficulty and the skills required for doing it successfully
characterizes the managers' recognition of employees. These managers may use lapel pins,
articles in the company paper, achievement lists on the bulletin board, and the like to
promote their employees' pride in their work. In other words, esteem needs can be met in an
organization through recognition by peers and superiors of the person’s work, by
acquiring organizational titles and by the accomplishment of work projects.

Self-Actualization Needs

Self-actualization needs refer to the need for fulfillment, the desire to become what one
is capable of becoming-to maximize one’s potential and to accomplish something. People
who strive for self-actualization experience acceptance of themselves and others and increased
problem-solving ability. Self-actualization can take many forms, depending on the
individual. You may be on a quest for knowledge, peace, different experiences and self-
fulfillment. In other words, these needs differ greatly from person to person. For
example, for the athlete, it may be breaking a world’s record; for the research scientist, it
may be finding a cure for HIV/AIDS; and for the physical therapist, it may be the
satisfaction of helping a child walk or laugh for the first time. Managers who emphasize
self-actualization may involve employees in designing jobs, make special assignments that
capitalize on employees' unique skills, or provide leeway to employee groups in planning
and implementing work procedures.

Maslow separated the five needs into higher and lower orders. Physiological and safety
needs were described as lower-order and social, esteem, and self-actualization as
higher-order needs. The differentiation between the two orders was made on the
premise that higher-order needs are satisfied internally (within the person), whereas
lower-order needs are predominantly satisfied externally (by such things as pay, union
contracts, and tenure). Maslow’s need theory has received wide recognition, particularly
among practicing managers. This can be attributed to the theory’s intuitive logic and ease
of understanding. Unfortunately, however, research does not generally validate the
theory. Maslow provided no empirical substantiation and several studies that sought to
validate the theory found no support for it.

Possible Work Related Means of Fulfilling the Various Needs in the Hierarchy

8
 Needs Hierarchy Potential Means of Fulfillment at Work

SELF-ACTUALIZATION Challenging projects, opportunities for

NEEDS innovation and creativity

ESTEEM NEEDS Important projects, recognition, prestigious office

location.

BELONGINGNESS Good co-workers, peers, superiors, customers

NEEDS

SAFETY NEEDS Job security; benefits, like

life insurance; safety regulation.

PHYSIOLOGICAL NEEDS Basic pay, workspace, heat, water,

company cafeteria (food)

Managerial Implications

 Research has found that top managers generally are more able to satisfy their esteem and
self-actualization needs than are lower level managers
 Line managers perceive greater fulfillment of security, affiliation, esteem, and self-
actualization needs than do staff managers. The largest differences between line and staff
managers occur in meeting esteem and self-actualization needs.
 Top managers tend to have more challenging jobs and an opportunity for self-
actualization. Lower level managers, on the other hand, tend to have more routine jobs,
which makes satisfying higher level needs more difficult. Employees who have little or no
control over their work (such as assembly-line workers) may not even experience higher
level needs in relation to their jobs.
 Fulfillment of needs differs according to the job a person performs, a person's age or race,
the size of the company, and the cultural background of the employee. Young workers (25
or younger) have greater deficiencies in meeting esteem and self-actualization needs than
do older workers (36 or older).
 At lower levels of management, managers of small companies are less deficient in meeting
their needs than are managers who work for larger companies.; however managers at upper
levels in large companies are more satisfied than their counterparts in small companies.

9
ALDERFER’S ERG THEORY

Clay Alderfer agrees with Maslow that individuals have a hierarchy of needs. But instead of the
five categories of needs suggested by Maslow, Alderfer's ERG Theory holds that the individual
has three sets of basic needs: existence, relatedness, and growth. Alderfer describes them as
follows:

 Existence needs are concerned with providing our basic material existence
requirements. They include the items that Maslow considered to be physiological
and safety needs: food, air, water, pay, fringe benefits, working conditions, etc.
 Relatedness needs are concerned with needs for establishing and maintaining
interpersonal relationships with co-workers, superiors, subordinates, friends, and
family. These social and status desires require interaction with others if they are to
be satisfied, and they align with Maslow’s social need and the external component
of Maslow’s esteem classification.
 Growth needs refer to intrinsic desires for personal development, that is, needs that
are expressed by an individual's attempt to find opportunities for unique personal
development by making creative or productive contributions at work. These include
the intrinsic component from Maslow’s esteem category and the characteristics
included under self-actualization.

Besides substituting three needs for five, how does Alderfer’s ERG theory differ from
Maslow’s? In contrast to the hierarchy of needs theory, the ERG theory demonstrates that
(1) more than one need may be operative at the same time, and (2) if the gratification of a
higher-level need is stifled, the desire to satisfy a lower-level need increases.

However, the two theories differ in their views of how way people satisfy the different sets of
needs. Maslow states that unfilled needs are motivators and that the next higher level need is not
activated until the preceding lower level need is satisfied. Thus a person progresses up the
needs hierarchy as each set of lower level needs is satisfied. In contrast, ERG theory suggests
that in addition to this fulfilment-progression process, a frustration-regression process is at
work at the same time. That is, if a person is continually frustrated in attempts to satisfy growth
needs, relatedness needs will re-emerge as a major motivating force. The individual will return to
satisfying this lower level need instead of attempting to satisfy growth needs, and frustration will
lead to regression. Figure below illustrates these relationships.

10
 Indicates a direct relationship between the set of needs, desire, and needs
satisfaction

Represents what happens when a set of needs is frustrated

According to Alderfer's ERG theory, for example, if a person's growth needs are frustrated,
the importance of relatedness needs increases. The same behavior that had led to the
frustration of growth needs now becomes the means for the person to satisfy relatedness
needs. The frustration-regression process assumes that existence, relatedness, and growth
needs vary along a continuum of concreteness, with relatedness being the most concrete and
growth being the least concrete. Alderfer further assumes that when the lesser concrete needs
are not met, more concrete need fulfillment is sought. (Note that the direction of the dotted
lines in Figure above is downward from needs frustration to needs importance.)

In summary, ERG theory argues, like Maslow that satisfied lower-order needs lead to the
desire to satisfy higher-order needs; but multiple needs can be operating as motivators at
the same time, and frustration in attempting to satisfy a higher-level need can result in
regression to a lower-level need.

ERG theory is more consistent with our knowledge of individual differences among
people. Variables such as education, family background, and cultural environment can
alter the importance or driving force that a group of needs holds for a particular
individual. The evidence demonstrating that people in other cultures rank the need
categories differently —for instance, natives of Spain and Japan place social needs before
their physiological requirements - would be consistent with ERG theory. Several studies
have supported ERG theory, but there is also evidence that it doesn’t work in some
organizations.

Managerial Implications

The ERG theory states that individuals will be motivated to engage in behavior to satisfy one of
the three sets of needs. Thus Alderfer's ERG theory provides an important insight for
managers. If a manager observes that a subordinate's growth needs are blocked, perhaps
because the job doesn't permit satisfaction of these needs or the company lacks the
resources to satisfy them, the manager should attempt to redirect the subordinate's behavior
toward satisfying relatedness or existence needs.

Because it is relatively new, very few research studies have tested the ERG theory of
motivation. However, several studies support the concept of the three sets of needs in the ERG
theory, rather than the five categories of needs in Maslow s hierarchy. Some of the most
interesting findings are:

 Individuals with parents who have more education had greater growth needs than did
individuals with parents who have less education.
 Men had higher strength of existence needs and lower strength of relatedness needs
than did women.

11
  Blacks showed significantly greater strength of existence needs than did whites.

HERZBERG’S MOTIVATION-HYGIENE THEORY

The motivator-hygiene theory is one of the most controversial theories of motivation,

probably because of two unique features. First, the theory stresses that some job factors lead
to satisfaction, whereas others can only prevent dissatisfaction. Second, it states that job
satisfaction and dissatisfaction do not exist on a single continuum.

Frederick Herzberg and his associates

examined the relationship between job
satisfaction and productivity in a group of
accountants and engineers. Through the use
of semi-structured interviews, they
accumulated data on various factors that these
employees said had an effect on their feelings
about their jobs. Two different sets of factors
emerged: motivators and hygiene.

Motivator and Hygiene Factors

The first set of factors, motivator factors, includes the work itself, recognition,
advancement, and responsibility. They are associated with an individual's positive feelings
about the job and are related to the content of the job itself. These positive feelings, in turn,
are associated with the individuals' experiences of achievement, recognition, and
responsibility in the past. They are predicated on lasting rather than temporary
achievement in the work setting.
The second set of factors, hygiene factors, includes company policy and administration,
technical supervision, salary, working conditions, and interpersonal relations. They are
associated with an individual's negative feelings about the job and are related to the context
or environment in which the job is performed. That is, these are extrinsic factors, or factors
external to the job. In contrast, motivators are intrinsic factors, or internal factors directly
related the job.

Viewed somewhat differently, extrinsic outcomes are largely determined by the company
(for example, salary, policies and rules, and fringe benefits). They serve as rewards for
high performance only if the organization recognizes high performance. On the other hand,
intrinsic outcomes (for example, a feeling of accomplishment after successful task
performance) are largely internal to the individual. The organization's policies have only an
indirect impact on them. Thus by defining exceptional performance, an organization may
be able to influence individuals to feel that they have performed their tasks exceptionally
well.

This theory also states that satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not a single continuum but
are on a separate and distinct continua, as indicated in the figure above. Thus the concept is
that a person can be satisfied and dissatisfied at the same time. Hygiene factors, such as

12
working conditions and salary, cannot increase or decrease job satisfaction; they can only
affect the amount of job dissatisfaction.

Relation to Maslow's Need Hierarchy Herzberg's theory is closely related to Maslow's

need hierarchy. The hygiene factors are preventive and environmental in nature , and they
are roughly equivalent to Maslow's lower-level needs . These hygiene factors prevent
dissatisfaction, but they do not lead to satisfaction. In effect, they bring motivation up to a
theoretical zero level and are a necessary "floor" to prevent dissatisfaction, and they serve
as a takeoff point for motivation. By themselves, the hygiene factors do not motivate. Only
the motivators motivate employees on the job. They are roughly equivalent to Maslow's
higher-level needs. According to Herzberg's theory, an individual must have a job with a
challenging content in order to be truly motivated.

Contribution to Work Motivation Herzberg's two-factor theory casts a new light on the
content of work motivation. Up to this point, management had generally concentrated on
the hygiene factors. When faced with a morale problem, the typical solution was higher
pay, more fringe benefits, and better working conditions. However, as has been pointed
out, this simplistic solution did not really work. Management are often perplexed because
they are paying high wages and salaries, have an excellent fringe-benefit package, and
provide great working conditions, but their employees are still not motivated. Herzberg's
theory offers an explanation for this problem. By concentrating only on the hygiene factors,
management are not motivating their personnel.

There are probably very few workers or associates who do not feel that they deserved the
raise they received. On the other hand, there are many dissatisfied associates and managers
who feel they did not get a large enough raise. This simple observation points out that the
hygiene factors seem to be important in preventing dissatisfaction but do not lead to
satisfaction. Herzberg would be the first to say that the hygiene factors are absolutely
necessary to maintain the human resources of an organization. However, as in the Maslow
sense, once "the belly is full" of hygiene factors, which is the case in most modern
organizations, dangling any more in front of employees will not motivate them. According
to Herzberg's theory, only a challenging job that has the opportunities for achievement,
recognition, responsibility, advancement, and growth will motivate personnel.

Criticisms of Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory

The motivation-hygiene theory is not without its detractors. The criticisms of the theory
include the following:

1. The procedure that Herzberg used is limited by its methodology.

When things are going well, people tend to take credit themselves. Contrarily,
they blame failure on the external environment.
2. The reliability of Herzberg’s methodology is questioned. Since raters have to
make interpretations, it is possible that they may contaminate the findings by
interpreting one response in one manner while treating another similar response
differently.

13
 3. The theory, to the degree that it is valid, provides an explanation of job
satisfaction. It is not really a theory of motivation.
4. No overall measure of satisfaction was utilized. In other words, a person may
dislike part of his or her job, yet still think the job is acceptable.
5. The theory is inconsistent with previous research. The motivation- hygiene theory
ignores situational variables.
6. Herzberg assumes that there is a relationship between satisfaction and
productivity. But the research methodology he used looked only at satisfaction,
not at productivity. To make such research relevant, one must assume a high
relationship between satisfaction and productivity.

Regardless of criticisms, Herzberg’s theory has been widely read and few managers are
unfamiliar with his recommendations. The popularity over the past 30 years of vertically
expanding jobs to allow workers greater responsibility in planning and controlling their
work can probably be largely attributed to Herzberg’s findings and recommendations.

McCLELLAND'S LEARNED NEEDS THEORY

McClelland has proposed a theory of motivation that is closely associated with learning
concepts. He believes that many needs are acquired from the culture. Three of these
learned needs are the need for achievement (n Ach), the need for affiliation (n Aff), and
the need for power (n Pow). They are defined as follows:

 Need for achievement: The drive to excel, to achieve in relation to a set of

standards, to strive to succeed. Some people have a compelling drive to succeed.
They’re striving for personal achievement rather than the rewards of success per se.
They have a desire to do something better or more efficiently than it has been done
before. This drive is the achievement need (nAch). From research into the
achievement need, McClelland found that high achievers differentiate themselves
from others by their desire to do things better. They seek situations where they can
attain personal responsibility for finding solutions to problems, where they can
receive rapid feedback on their performance so they can tell easily whether they are
improving or not, and where they can set moderately challenging goals. High
achievers are not gamblers; they dislike succeeding by chance. They prefer the
challenge of working at a problem and accepting the personal responsibility for
success or failure rather than leaving the out-come to chance or the actions of others.
Importantly, they avoid what they perceive to be very easy or very difficult tasks.
They want to overcome obstacles, but they want to feel that their success (or failure)
is due to their own actions. This means they like tasks of intermediate difficulty.

High achievers perform best when they perceive their probability of success as being
0.5, that is, where they estimate that they have a 50-50 chance of success. They
dislike gambling with high odds because they get no achievement satisfaction from
happen-stance success. Similarly, they dislike low odds (high probability of success)
because then there is no challenge to their skills. They like to set goals that require

14
 stretching themselves a little. When there is an approximately equal chance of success
or failure, there is the optimum opportunity to experience feelings of accomplishment
and satisfaction from their efforts.

 Need for power: The need to make others behave in a way that they would not
have behaved otherwise. The need for power (nPow) is the desire to have impact, to
be influential, and to control others. Individuals high in nPow enjoy being “in
charge,” strive for influence over others, prefer to be placed into competitive and
status-oriented situations, and tend to be more concerned with prestige and gaining
influence over others than with effective performance.

 Need for affiliation: The desire for friendly and close interpersonal relationships.
The third need isolated by McClelland is affiliation (nAf f). This need has received the
least attention from researchers. Affiliation can be likened to Dale Carnegie’s goals
—the desire to be liked and accepted by others. Individuals with a high affiliation
motive strive for friendship; prefer cooperative situations rather than competitive
ones, and desire relationships involving a high degree of mutual understanding. How
do you find out if someone is, for instance, a high achiever? There are questionnaires
that tap this motive, but most research uses a projective test in which subjects respond
to pictures.

The main theme of McClelland's theory is that these needs are learned through coping with
one's environment. Since needs are learned, behaviour, which is rewarded, tends to recur
at a higher frequency. Managers who are rewarded for achievement behavior learn to take
moderate risks and to achieve goals. Similarly, a high need for affiliation or power can be
traced to a history of receiving rewards for sociable, dominant, or inspirational behavior.
As a result of the learning process, individuals develop unique configurations of needs
that affect their behavior and performance.

Relying on an extensive amount of research, some reasonably well-supported predictions

can be made based on the relationship between achievement need and job performance.
Although less research has been done on power and affiliation needs, there are consistent
findings here, too.

First, individuals with a high need to achieve prefer job situations with personal
responsibility, feed-back, and an intermediate degree of risk. When these characteristics
are prevalent, high achievers will be strongly motivated. The evidence consistently
demonstrates, for instance, that high achievers are successful in entrepreneurial activities
such as running their own businesses and managing a self-contained unit within a large
organization.

Second, a high need to achieve does not necessarily lead to being a good manager,
especially in large organizations. People with a high achievement need are interested in
how well they do personally and not in influencing others to do well. High-nAch sales-
people do not necessarily make good sales managers, and the good general manager in a
large organization does not typically have a high need to achieve.

15
Third, the needs for affiliation and power tend to be closely related to managerial success.
The best managers are high in their need for power and low in their need for affiliation.
In fact, a high power motive may be a requirement for managerial effectiveness. Of
course, what the cause is and what the effect is are arguable. It has been suggested that a
high power need may occur simply as a function of one’s level in a hierarchical
organization. The latter argument proposes that the higher the level an individual rises to
in the organization, the greater is the incumbent’s power motive. As a result, powerful
positions would be the stimulus to a high power motive.

Finally, employees have been successfully trained to stimulate their achievement need.
Trainers have been effective in teaching individuals to think in terms of
accomplishments, winning, and success, and then helping them to learn how to act in a
high achievement way by preferring situations where they have personal responsibility,
feedback, and moderate risks. So if the job calls for a high achiever, management can
select a person with a high nAch or develop its own candidate through achievement
training.

Content theories of motivation compared

16
3.3.2 PROCESS THEORIES OF MOTIVATION

The process theories of motivation are concerned with answering the questions of how
individual behaviour is energised, directed, maintained, and stopped. In other words, they
are more concerned with the cognitive antecedents that go into motivation or effort, and,
more important, with the way they relate to one another.

VROOM’S EXPECTANCY THEORY OF MOTIVATION

Currently, one of the most widely accepted explanations of motivation is Victor Vroom’s
expectancy theory. Although it has its critics, most of the research evidence is
supportive of the theory. Expectancy theory argues that the strength of a tendency to act
in a certain way depends on the strength of an expectation that the act will be followed by
a given outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome to the individual. In more
practical terms, expectancy theory says that an employee will be motivated to exert a
high level of effort when he or she believes that effort will lead to a good performance
appraisal; that a good appraisal will lead to organizational rewards like a bonus, a salary
increase, or a promotion; and that the rewards will satisfy the employee’s personal goals.
The theory, therefore, focuses on three relationships. But before discussing the three
relationships, explaining first and second level outcomes is important.

First-level outcomes resulting from behaviour are those associated with doing the job
itself and include productivity, absenteeism, turnover, and quality of productivity.

The second-level outcomes are those events (rewards or punishments) that the first-level
outcomes are likely to produce, such as merit pay increases, group acceptance or
rejection, promotion, and termination.

1. Effort – performance relationship. The probability perceived by the individual

that exerting a given amount of effort will lead to performance. This relationship
is also called Expectancy. In other words, expectancy refers to the individual’s
belief regarding the likelihood or subjective probability that a particular behaviour
will be followed by a particular outcome. Expectancy can take values ranging
from 0, indicating no chance that an outcome will occur after the behaviour or act,
to +1, indicating perceived certainty that a particular outcome will follow a
behaviour or act. Expectancy answers the question “If I give a maximum effort,
will it be recognized in my performance appraisal?” For a lot of employees, the
answer is “No.” Why? Their skill level may be deficient, which means that no
matter how hard they try, they’re not likely to be a high performer. The
organization’s performance appraisal system may be designed to assess
nonperformance factors like loyalty, initiative, or courage, which means more
effort won’t necessarily result in a higher evaluation. Still another possibility is
that the employee, rightly or wrongly, perceives that her boss doesn’t like her. As
a result, she expects to get a poor appraisal regardless of her level of effort. These

17
 examples suggest that one possible source of low employee motivation is the
belief, by the employee, that no matter how hard she works, the likelihood of
getting a good performance appraisal is low.
2. Performance – reward relationship. The degree to which the individual
believes that performing at a particular level will lead to the attainment of a
desired outcome. This relationship is also called Instrumentality. Instrumentality
is the perception by an individual that first level outcomes (performance) are
associated with second-level outcomes (rewards/punishment). Instrumentality can
be negative, suggesting that attaining a second-level outcome is less likely if a
first-level outcome has occurred, or positive, suggesting that the second-level
outcome is more likely if the first-level outcome has been obtained.
Instrumentality answers the question “If I get a good performance appraisal, will
it lead to organizational rewards? Many employees see the performance – reward
relationship in their job as weak. The reason is that organizations reward a lot of
things besides just performance. For example, when pay is allocated to employees
based on factors such as seniority, being cooperative, or for “kissing up” to the
boss, employees are likely to see the performance – reward relationship as being
weak and demotivating.

3. Rewards – personal goals relationship. The degree to which organizational

rewards satisfy an individual’s personal goals or needs and the attractiveness of
those potential rewards for the individual. This relationship is also called
Valence: Valence means the strength of an individual’s preference for a particular
outcome. An outcome is positively valent when it is preferred and negatively
valent when it is not preferred or is avoided. An outcome has a valence of zero
when the individual is indifferent to attaining or not attaining it. Valence answers
the question “If I’m rewarded, are the rewards ones that I find personally
attractive? The employee works hard in hope of getting a promotion but gets a
pay raise instead. Or the employee wants a more interesting and challenging job
but receives only a few words of praise. Or the employee puts in extra effort to be
relocated to the company’s Addis office but instead is transferred to Mekelle.
These examples illustrate the importance of the rewards being tailored to
individual employee needs. Unfortunately, many managers are limited in the
rewards they can distribute, which make it difficult to individualize rewards.
Moreover, some managers incorrectly assume that all employees want the same
thing, thus overlooking the motivational effects of differentiating rewards. In
either case, employee motivation is sub maximized.

Expectancy relates efforts to first-level outcomes, whereas instrumentality relates first-

level outcomes and second-level outcomes. In other words, expectancy in Vroom’s
theory is probability (ranging from 0 to +1) that a particular action or effort will lead to a
particular first-level outcome. Instrumentality refers to the degree to which a first-level
outcome will lead to a desired second-level outcome. The strength of the motivation to
perform a certain act will depend on the algebraic sum of the products of the valences for
the outcomes (which include instrumentality) times the expectancies.

18
Expectancy theory helps explain why a lot of workers aren’t motivated on their jobs and
merely do the minimum necessary to get by.

In summary, the key to expectancy theory is the understanding of an individual’s goals

and the linkage between effort and performance, between performance and rewards, and,
finally, between the rewards and individual goal satisfaction. As a contingency model,
expectancy theory recognizes that there is no universal principle for explaining
everyone’s motivations. Additionally, just because we understand what needs a person
seeks to satisfy does not ensure that the individual perceives high performance as
necessarily leading to the satisfaction of these needs.

Does expectancy theory work? Attempts to validate the theory have been complicated by
methodological, criterion, and measurement problems. As a result, many published
studies that purport to support or negate the theory must be viewed with caution.

Importantly, most studies have failed to replicate the methodology as it was originally
proposed. For example, the theory proposes to explain different levels of effort from the
same person under different circumstances, but almost all replication studies have looked
at different people. Correcting for this flaw has greatly improved sup port for the validity
of expectancy theory. Some critics suggest that the theory has only limited use, arguing
that it tends to be more valid for predicting in situations where effort – performance and
performance – reward linkages are clearly perceived by the individual.

Since few individuals perceive a high correlation between performance and rewards in
their jobs, the theory tends to be idealistic. If organizations actually rewarded individuals
for performance rather than according to such criteria as seniority, effort, skill level, and
job difficulty, then the theory’s validity might be considerably greater. However, rather
than invalidating expectancy theory, this criticism can be used in support of the theory,
for it explains why a large segment of the work force exerts low levels of effort in
carrying out job responsibilities.

Managerial Implications
While there are still problems with expectancy theory, it has some direct implications for
motivating employees. These implications can be grouped into six suggestions for
managerial action.
 First, managers should try to determine the outcomes that each employee values.
They can do so by (1) using a questionnaire; (2) observing employee reactions to
different rewards; and (3) asking employees about their career goals and the kinds
of rewards they want. However, managers must understand that employees can
and do change their minds about desired outcomes. The effective manager
correctly diagnoses these changes and also does not assume that all employees are
alike.
 Second, managers should determine the kinds of performance they desire. They
must define good performance and adequate performance in terms that are
observable and measurable, so that subordinates can understand what managers
desire of them.
 Third, managers should make sure that desired levels of performance can be

19
 attained. Motivation is determined not only by expectancy, but also by instrumen-
tality. This means that the levels of performance set by managers as the points at
which employees receive desired outcomes must be attainable. If employees feel
that the level of performance necessary to get a reward is higher than they can
reasonably achieve, their motivation to perform will be low.
 Fourth, managers should directly link the specific performance they desire to the
outcomes desired by employees. If an employee has achieved the desired level of
performance and wants a promotion, the manager should promote that person as
soon as possible. If a high level of motivation is to be created and maintained, it is
extremely important for employees to clearly see the reward process at work in a
timely manner. Concrete acts must accompany statements of intent in linking
performance to rewards. Managers should not forget that it is an individual's
perceptions-not reality-that determines motivation. It does not matter, for example,
whether a manager feels that subordinates' pay is related to their motivation.
Employees will be motivated by pay raises only if they see the relationship. Too
often, managers misunderstand the behavior of their subordinates because they
tend to rely on their own perceptions of the situation and forget that their
subordinates' perceptions may be different.
 Fifth, managers should analyze the situation for conflicts. Having set up positive
expectancies for employees, managers must look at the entire situation to see
whether other factors conflict with the desired behaviours (for example, the
informal work group or the organization's formal reward system). Motivation will be
high only when employees see many rewards and few negative outcomes
associated with good performance.
 And sixth, managers should make sure that changes in outcomes or rewards are
large enough to motivate significant behavior. Trivial rewards may result in
minimal efforts, if any, to improve performance. Rewards must be large enough to
motivate individuals to make the effort required to significantly change perfor-
mance.

J. STACY ADAM’S EQUITY (FAIRNESS) THEORY

Tigist graduated last year from the Addis Ababa University with a degree in Accounting
and Finance. After interviews with a number of organizations on campus, she accepted a
position with one of the nation’s largest public accounting firms and was assigned to their
Addis Ababa office. Tigist was very pleased with the offer she received: challenging
work with a prestigious firm, an excellent opportunity to gain important experience, and
the highest salary any accounting major at Addis was offered last year — Birr 2,950 a
month. But Tigist was the top student in her class; she was ambitious and articulate and
fully expected to receive a commensurate salary.

Twelve months have passed since Tigist joined her employer. The work has proved to be
as challenging and satisfying as she had hoped. Her employer is extremely pleased with
her performance; in fact, she recently received a Birr 200-a-month raise. However,
Tigist’s motivational level has dropped dramatically in the past few weeks. Why? Her
employer has just hired a fresh college graduate out of Addis Ababa University, who
lacks the one-year experience Tigist has gained, for Birr 3,200 a month - Birr 50 more

20
than Tigist now makes! It would be an understatement to describe Tigist in any other
terms than irate. Tigist is even talking about looking for another job. Tigist’s situation
illustrates the role that equity plays in motivation.

Equity theory refers to an individual’s subjective judgements about the fairness of the
reward she or he got, relative to the inputs (which may include many factors such as
effort, experience, education, and so on), in comparison with the rewards of others.

The essence of equity (which also means "fairness") theory is that employees compare
their efforts and rewards with those of others in similar work situations. This theory of
motivation is based on the assumption that individuals are motivated by a desire to be
equitably treated at work. The individual works in exchange for rewards from the
organization. Four important terms in this theory are:

1. Person. The individual for whom equity or inequity is perceived

2. Comparison other. Any group or persons used by Person as a referent regarding the
ratio of inputs and outcomes
3. Inputs. The individual characteristics brought by Person to the job. These may be
achieved (e.g., skills, experience, learning) or ascribed (e.g., age, sex, race)
4. Outcomes. What Person received from the job (e.g., recognition, fringe benefits,
pay)

Employees might compare themselves to friends, neighbors, co-workers, colleagues in

other organizations, or past jobs they them-selves have had. Which referent an employee
chooses will be influenced by the information the employee holds about referents as well
as by the attractiveness of the referent. This has led to focusing on four moderating
variables —gender, length of tenure, level in the organization, and amount of education
or professionalism.

Research shows that both men and women prefer same-sex comparisons. The research
also demonstrates that women are typically paid less than men in comparable jobs and
have lower pay expectations than men for the same work. So a female that uses another
female as a referent tends to result in a lower comparative standard.

This leads us to conclude that employees in jobs that are not sex segregated will make
more cross-sex comparisons than those in jobs that are either male or female dominated.

21
This also suggests that if women are tolerant of lower pay, it may be due to the
comparative standard they use. Employees with short tenure in their current organizations
tend to have little information about others inside the organization, so they rely on their
own personal experiences. On the other hand, employees with long tenure rely more
heavily on co-workers for comparison. Upper-level employees, those in the professional
ranks, and those with higher amounts of education tend to be more cosmopolitan and
have better information about people in other organizations. Therefore, these types of
employees will make more other-outside comparisons.

Consequences of Inequity

Employees are motivated to reduce or eliminate their feelings of inequity by correcting

the inequitable situation. There are six possible ways to reduce feelings of inequity.
Notice, however, that the strategy used depends on the persons past experience as well as
whether they are under or overrewarded.
1. Changing inputs - Underrewarded workers tend to reduce their effort and
performance if these outcomes don't affect their paycheck. Overpaid workers
sometimes (but not very often) increase their inputs by working harder and producing
more.
2. Changing outcomes - People with underreward inequity might ask for more desired
outcomes, such as a pay increase. If this does not work, some are motivated to join a
labor union and demand these changes at the bargaining table. Others misuse sick
leave for more paid time off. At the extreme, some people steal company property or
use facilities for personal use as ways to increase their outcomes.
3. Changing perceptions - Employees may distort inputs and outcomes to restore
equity feelings. Overrewarded employees typically follow this strategy because it's
easier to increase their perceived inputs (seniority, knowledge, etc.) than to ask for
less pay!
4. Leaving the field - Some people try to reduce inequity feelings by getting away from
the inequitable situation. Thus, equity theory explains some instances of employee
turnover and job transfer. This also explains why an underrewarded employee might
take more time off work even though he or she is not paid for this absenteeism.
5. Acting on the comparison other - Equity is sometimes restored by changing the
comparison others inputs or outcomes. If you feel overrewarded, you might
encourage the referent to work at a more leisurely pace. If you feel underrewarded,
you might subtly suggest that the overpaid co-worker should be doing a larger share
of the workload.
6. Changing the comparison other - If we can't seem to alter the outcome/ input ratio
through other means, we might eventually replace the comparison other with
someone having a more compatible outcome/input ratio so feelings of inequity may
be reduced fairly easily by adjusting the features of this composite referent.

Specifically, the theory establishes four propositions relating to inequitable pay:

1. Given payment by time, overrewarded employees will produce more than will
equitably paid employees. Hourly and salaried employees will generate high

22
 quantity or quality of production in order to increase the input side of the ratio and
bring about equity.
2. Given payment by quantity of production, overrewarded employees will produce
fewer, but higher-quality, units than will equitably paid employees. Individuals
paid on a piece-rate basis will increase their effort to achieve equity, which can
result in greater quality or quantity. However, increases in quantity will only
increase inequity, since every unit produced results in further overpayment.
Therefore, effort is directed toward increasing quality rather than increasing
quantity.
3. Given payment by time, underrewarded employees will produce less or poorer
quality of output. Effort will be decreased, which will bring about lower
productivity or poorer-quality output than equitably paid subjects.
4. Given payment by quantity of production, underrewarded employees will
produce a large number of low-quality units in comparison with equitably paid
employees. Employees on piece-rate pay plans can bring about equity because
trading off quality of output for quantity will result in an increase in rewards with
little or no increase in contributions.

These propositions have generally been supported, with a few minor qualifications. First;
inequities created by overpayment do not seem to have a very significant impact on
behavior in most work situations. Apparently, people have a great deal more tolerance of
overpayment inequities than of underpayment inequities, or are better able to rationalize
them. Second, not all people are equity sensitive. For example, there is a small part of the
working population who actually prefer that their outcome – input ratio be less than the
referent comparison. Predictions from equity theory are not likely to be very accurate
with these “benevolent types.”

It’s also important to note that while most research on equity theory has focused on pay,
employees seem to look for equity in the distribution of other organizational rewards. For
instance, it’s been shown that the use of high-status job titles as well as large and lavishly
furnished offices may function as outcomes for some employees in their equity equation.

Managerial Implications
 Managers should treat employees equitably. When individuals believe that they
are not being treated fairly, they will try to correct the situation and reduce tension
by means of one or more of the six types actions discussed above.
 People make decisions concerning equity only after they compare their inputs and
outcomes with those of comparable employees. These others may be employees
of the same organisation or of other organisation. The latter presents a major
problem for managers.
 Women, and members of minority groups, have argued for pay based on
comparable worth. Comparable worth means that individuals holding jobs that
require similar qualifications and involve similar level of effort should receive
equal pay.

23
Finally, recent research has been directed at expanding what is meant by equity or
fairness. Historically, equity theory focused on distributive justice or the perceived
fairness of the amount and allocation of rewards among individuals. But equity should
also consider procedural justice - the perceived fairness of the process used to
determine the distribution of rewards.

Procedural Justice Equity theory focuses on fairly distributing outcomes to create an

atmosphere of high, intense positive motivation. The concept of procedural justice states
that people when reacting to organizational decisions and processes that affect them are
influenced by procedures used to establish the outcomes. That is, employees are
concerned with the fairness of the decision-making procedures, or what is referred to as
procedural justice. This focus on procedural justice is in contrast to distributive justice,
which is the basis of equity theory.

Procedural justice has been shown to have a positive impact on a number of affective and
behavioral reactions. These reactions include:
o Organizational commitment
o Intent to stay with organization
o Organizational citizenship
o Trust in supervisor
o Satisfaction with decision outcome
o Work effort
o Performance

Positive consequences of procedural justice have been found in important organizational

decision contexts including pay allocation, personnel selection, and performance appraisal.
Since procedural justice can provide benefits to organizations, an important issue involves the
types of decision-making procedures that people consider to be fair. People are more
inclined to interpret decisions to be fair when they have a voice in the decision, there is
consistency in decision making, and the process and procedures conform to ethical and moral
values.

Two explanations have emerged regarding why procedural justice works. Self-interest theory
proposes that people want fair procedures because such fairness enables them to obtain
desired extrinsic outcomes. Although a manager may decide not to promote a person, if the
process has been fair it will be accepted.

Group value theory suggests that people value fairness as a means of realizing such desired
intrinsic outcomes as self-esteem. People have a strong sense of affiliation with groups to
which they belong. Fair group procedures are considered to be a sign of respect and an
indication that they are valued members of the group. This results in feeling a sense of self-
esteem.

Treating employees and customers fairly, respectfully, and in a timely manner is a worthy
managerial approach. First, managers must understand the importance of procedural justice.
Second, managers can achieve good performance results when procedural justice is widely

24
practiced for decision making. Finally, employee perceptions are extremely critical in
identifying procedural justice. Determining these perceptions requires strong interpersonal
and observation skills on the part of managers.

In conclusion, equity theory demonstrates that, for most employees, motivation is

influenced significantly by relative rewards as well as by absolute rewards, but some key
issues are still unclear. For instance, how do employees handle conflicting equity signals,
such as when unions point to other employee groups who are substantially better off,
while management argues how much things have improved? How do employees define
inputs and outcomes? How do they combine and weigh their inputs and out-comes to
arrive at totals? When and how do the factors change over time? Yet, regardless of these
problems, equity theory continues to offer us some important insights into employee
motivation.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EQUITY THEORY AND PROCEDURAL

JUSTICE

Recent theory development specifies that equity theory can be extended into what is now
commonly known as procedural justice. Equity theory explains conditions under which decision
outcomes (pay levels, pay raises, promotions) are perceived as being fair or unfair. Persons
engaged in this type of thinking examine the results as opposed to how those results were
achieved. Equity theory is based on a perception of distributive justice, which is an individual's
cognitive evaluation regarding whether or not the amounts and allocations of rewards in a
social setting are fair. In simple terms, distributive justice is one's belief that everyone should
"get what they deserve." Culturally, the Judeo-Christian ethic is based, in part, on the notion
that divine rewards accrue to those who lead good lives and behave appropriately, even while
here are on earth. This reflects the distributive justice and equity perspectives.

Procedural justice is concerned with the fairness of the procedure used to make a decision. For
example, a pay raise may be based on a sales representative selling more units of, for example,
automobiles or houses. Some coworkers may consider this procedure to be unfair, believing
management should instead base pay raises on dollar volume. This conclusion may be reached
because selling 10 houses or cars for a low amount of money each contributes very little to
company profits and are, at the same time, easier to sell. Selling high-priced cars or houses may
take much longer to finalize, but the profits gained for the company are also higher. In this
case it is not the outcome in dispute, which is the amount of the pay received. Instead, it is the
perceived justice (fairness) of the procedure used to reach the outcome.

Procedural justice can raise issues of equality as opposed to equity. Equality means that in a
promotion situation, males and females and all races would have equal opportunities to be
selected, and that the criteria used would not discriminate. Equity would mean that the actual
choice was fair, and that the criteria were correctly applied and therefore the most-qualified
individual was promoted. The accompanying Managing Diversity and Ethics in Action box
gives examples of how this is playing out in society at large.

Both equity theory and procedural justice can be combined into organizational justice, which

25
suggests that the process and the outcomes of organizational decisions regarding the
distribution of resources should be properly carried out. Organizational justice can help explain
why employees retaliate against both inequitable outcomes and inappropriate processes.
Retaliation in the form of theft, sabotage, forged time cards, and even violence toward an
employer can be explained using the principles of organizational justice.

GOAL-SETTING THEORY

Goal setting is one of the most effective and widely practiced theories of motivation in
organizations. Goals are the immediate or ultimate objectives that employees are trying
to accomplish from their work effort. Goal setting is the process of establishing desired
results that guide and direct behavior. In organizations, in started with Taylor’s idea that
performance standards would lead to higher worker performance. The theory has
developed based on laboratory studies, field research experiments, and comparative
investigations by Edwin Locke, Gray Latham, John M. Ivancevich, and others.

Goal setting theory is a relatively applied approach to motivation and is based upon the
assumption that the type as well as the challenge of the goal induces motivation in the
individual to achieve such goal. The theory as proposed by Locke studies the process by
which people set goals for themselves and then put some efforts in order to achieve them.
The quality of performance is generally shaped by how difficult and how specifically
defined the goal is. General goal such as “do your best,” do not lend to accurate
performance appraisal and proportionate rewards. Specific goals are clear and tend to
give a clear direction to the worker, resulting in improved performance. Similarly,
difficult goals, once accepted, lead to higher performance. Goal setting potentially
improves employee performance in two ways: (1) by stretching the intensity and
persistence of effort and (2) by giving employees clearer role perceptions so that their
effort is channeled toward behaviors that will improve work performance.

Characteristics of Effective Goals

Goal setting is more complex than simply telling someone to “do your best.” In stead,
organizational behavior scholars have identified five conditions that are necessary to
maximize task effort and performance.

Specific Goals Employees put more effort into a task when they work toward specific
goals rather than “do your best” targets. Specific goals have measurable levels of change
over a specific time, such as “increase students’ enrolment by 20% over the next 2
years.” Specific goals communicate more precise performance expectations, so
employees can direct their effort more efficiently and reliably.

Result-oriented goals Result-oriented goals improve work performance more than

process-oriented goals. A results-oriented goal is one that directly refers to the person’s
job performance, such as the number of customers served per hour. Process-oriented
goals refer to the work processes used to get the job done. An example of process-

26
oriented goal would be finding one way to reduce the time for customers to describe their
problems. Research indicates that these process-oriented goals encourage employees to
think about different ways to get the job done, but they seem to block them from
choosing one method and getting on with the job. Therefore, results-oriented goals tend
to be more effective.

Challenging goals Employees tend to have more intense and persistent work effort when
they have challenging rather than easy goals. Challenging goals also fulfill a person’s
need for achievement or growth needs when the goal is achieved.

Goal Commitment Of course, there are limits to challenging goals. At some point, a
goal becomes so difficult that employees are no longer committed to achieving it. At that
point, work effort falls dramatically. This is the same as the Effort-performance
expectancy that we discussed in expectancy theory. The less the effort-performance
expectancy that the goal can be accomplished, the less committed (motivated) the
employee is to the goal.

The optimal level of goal difficulty is the area in which it is challenging but employees
are still committed to achieving the goal. Another influence on goal commitment is the
employee’s self-efficacy. High self-efficacy employees have a “can-do” attitude. They
are confident that they can perform the tasks facing them. There is some evidence that
high self-efficacy employees are more likely to accept their goals because they believe
that they can choose successful strategies to reach those goals. Those with low self-
efficacy, on the other hand, tend to be in a panic when given a unique goal where the
means to achieve the goal isn’t obvious.

Participation in goal formation Another way to build or maintain commitment to goals

is to ensure that employees are involved in goal setting process. Participation in goal
formation tends to increase goal commitment because employees take ownership of the
goal compared to the goals that are merely assigned by supervisors.

Goal feedback Feedback is another necessary condition for effective goal setting.
Feedback lets employees know whether they have achieved the goal or are properly
directing their effort toward it. Feedback is also an essential ingredient in motivation
because employees’ growth needs can’t be satisfied unless they receive information on
goal accomplishment.

How does Goal setting work?

According to Locke’s model, goal setting has four motivational mechanisms.

Goals Direct Attention goals that are personally meaningful tend to focus one’s
attention on what is relevant and important. If, for example, you have a term paper due in
few days, your thoughts tend to revolve around completing that project. Similarly, the

27
members of a home appliance sales force who are told they can win a trip to a recreation
area for selling the most refrigerators will tend to steer customers toward the refrigerator
display.

Goals Regulate Effort Not only do goals make us selectively perceptive, they also
motivate us to act. The instructor’s deadline for turning in your term paper would prompt
you to complete it, as opposed to going out with friends, watching television, or studying
for another course. Generally, the level of effort expended is proportionate to the
difficulty of the goal.

Goals Increase Persistence Within the context of goal setting, persistence represents the
effort expended on a task over an extended period of time. It takes effort to run 100
meters; it takes persistence to run a 26-mile marathon. Persistent people tend to see
obstacles as challenges to be overcome rather than as reasons to fail. A difficult goal that
is important to the individual is a constant reminder to keep exerting effort in the
appropriate direction.

Goals Foster Strategies and Action Plans Goals can help because they encourage
people to develop strategies and action plans that enable them to achieve their goals.

REINFORCEMENT THEORY

A counterpoint to goal-setting theory is reinforcement theory. The former is a cognitive

approach, proposing that an individual’s purposes direct his or her action. In
reinforcement theory, we have a behaviorist approach, which argues that reinforcement
conditions behavior. The two are clearly at odds philosophically. Reinforcement theorists
see behavior as being environmentally caused. You need not be concerned, they would
argue, with internal cognitive events; what controls behavior are reinforcers - any
consequence that, when immediately following a response, increases the probability that
the behavior will be repeated. Reinforcement theory ignores the inner state of the
individual and concentrates solely on what happens to a person when he or she takes
some action. Because it does not concern itself with what initiates behavior, it is not,
strictly speaking, a theory of motivation. But it does provide a powerful means of
analysis of what controls behavior, and it is for this reason that it is typically considered
in discussions of motivation.

We showed how using reinforcers to condition behavior give us considerable insight into
how people learn. Yet we cannot ignore the fact that reinforcement has a wide following
as a motivational device. In its pure form, however, reinforcement theory ignores
feelings, attitudes, expectations, and other cognitive variables that are known to impact
behavior. In fact, some researchers look at the same experiments that reinforcement
theorists use to support their position and interpret the findings in a cognitive framework.
Reinforcement is undoubtedly an important influence on behavior, but few scholars are
prepared to argue that it is the only influence. The behaviors you engage in at work and
the amount of effort you allocate to each task are affected by the consequences that

28
follow from your behavior. If you are consistently reprimanded for out producing your
colleagues, you will likely reduce your productivity. But your lower productivity may
also be explained in terms of goals, inequity, or expectancies.

29