motivaction manjeet kaur.doc

8/14/2019 Motivaction manjeet kaur.doc

1/22


2/22


3/22

MEANING OF MOTIVATION

The term motivation has been derived from the word motive.

Motive is anything that initiates or sustains activity. It is an inner state

that energises activates or moves and that directs or channels

behaviour toward goals. Motive is a psychological force within an

individual that sets him in motion. Behind every human action there is a

motive.

Motivation is the process of steering a person!s inner drives and

actions towards certain goals and committing his energies to achieve

these goals. It involves a chain reaction starting with felt needs resulting

in motives which give rise to tension "unfulfilled desires# which causes

action towards goals. It is the process of stimulating people to strive

willingly towards the achievement of organisational goals.

Motivation may be defined as the wor$ a manager performs in

order to induce subordinates to act in the desired manner by satisfying

their needs and desires. Thus motivation is concerned with how

behaviour gets started is energi%ed substance and directed


4/22

DEFINITION

According to E.F.L. Brech

&Motivation is a general inspirational process which gets the members of

the team to pull their weight effectively to give their loyalty to the group

to carry out properly ttas$s that they have accepted and generally to

play an effective part in the 'ob that the group has underta$en.


5/22

NATURE OF MOTIVATIONS

i) Moti!tion i" ! per"on!# !nd intern!# $ee#ing

Motivation is a psychological phenomenon which generates within

an individual. Motives are the energetic forces within a person that

drive him to action.

ii) Moti!tion prod%ce" go!#&directed 'eh!io%r

Motivation is a behavioural concept that directs human behaviour

towards certain goals.

iii) Moti!tion i" ! contin%o%" proce""

(uman needs are unlimited. Therefore motivation is an ongoing

process.

i) Moti!tion i" co(p#e*

Individual differ in their motivation. Different people see$ different

things or they wor$ for different reasons. (uman needs and

motives are varied and they change from time to time.

) Moti!tion c!n 'e either po"itie or neg!tie

)ositive motivation implies use of pay incentives etc. to satisfy

human needs while negative motivation emphasi%es penalties

e.g. reprimands threat of demotion fear of loss of 'ob etc.

i) Moti!tion i" di$$erent $ro( +o' "!ti"$!ction

Motivation is the drive to satisfy a want and it is concerned with

goal directed behaviour.


6/22


7/22

T-EORIES OF MOTIVATION

+ome of the popular theories of motivation are given below-

Need -ier!rch Theor

braham (. Maslow an eminent merican psychologist

developed a general theory of motivation $now as the /Need hierarchy

theory.

0. The urge to fulfill needs is a prime factor in motivation of people at

wor$.

1. (uman needs form a particular structure or hierarchy

2. It is a process as soon as one need is satisfied another need

emerges.

3. 4ach higher level need emerges before the lower level need is

completely satisfied.

s shown in 5ig. there are five categories of human needs-


8/22


9/22

CRITICAL A,,RAISAL

i# Needs are not the only determinant of behaviour.

ii# The theory gives an oversimplification of human needs and

motivation.

iii# The hierarchy of needs is not always fi6ed.

Despite these limitations Maslow!s theory has a commonsense

appeal for managers. It is still relevant because needs are important for

understanding behaviour.


10/22

-er4'erg5" Moti!tion -giene Theor

In the late fifties 5rederic$ (er%berg and his associates conducted

interviews of 188 engineers and accountants in the )ittsburgh area of

the 9nited +tates. These persons were as$ed to related elements of

their 'obs which made them happy or unhappy. n analysis of their

answers revealed that feelings of unhappiness or dissatisfaction were

related to the environment in which people were wor$ing.

ccording to (er%berg maintenance or hygiene factors are

necessary to maintain a reasonable level of satisfaction among

employees.

T!'#e 3./

:n the other hand motivational factors are intrinsic parts of the

'ob. ny increase in these factors will satisfy the employees and help to

improve performance. But a decrease in these factors will not cause

dissatisfaction.

M!inten!nce F!ctor" Moti!ting F!ctor"

Company )olicy and dministration chievementTechnical +upervision ;ecognition

Inter7personal relation with peers dvancementInter7relationship with supervisors :pportunity for growthInter7relationship with subordinates ;esponsibility+alary


11/22

Critic!# !ppr!i"!#

(er%berg!s theory has been critici%ed on the following grounds-

0. The theory is based on a small sample of 188 accountants and

engineers which is not representative of the wor$ force in general.

:ther researchers have drawn different results from similar

studies.

1. (erberg!s model is method bound and is limited by the critical

incident method used to obtain information.

2. The theory focuses too much attention on satisfaction rather than

on performance level.

3. The distinction between maintenance factors and motivating

factors is not fi6ed.

McGregor5" Theor 6 !nd Theor 7


12/22

)rof. Douglas Mc>regor has developed a theory of motivation on

the basis of hyphotheses relating to human behaviour. ccording to

Mc>regor the function of motivating people involves certain

assumptions about human nature. There are two alternative sets of

assumptions which Mc>regor has described as Theory ? and Theory @.

Theor 6

Theory ? of motivation is based on the following assumptions-

0. The average individual is by nature indolent and will avoid wor$ if

he can.

1. The average personlac$s ambition disli$es responsibility and

prefers to be led.

2. n average human being is inherently self7centred and indifferent

to organi%ational goals not be to concerned.

3. Most people are by nature resistant to change and want security

above all.

A. The average individual is guhible not very bright the ready victim

of the schemer.

The above assumptions are negative in nature. Therefore ? is a

conventional or traditional approach to motivation. ccording to

Mc>regor an organi%ation built upon Theory /?! notions will be one in

which there is close supervision and control of subordinates and high

centrali%ation of authority. Leadership in such an organi%ation will tend

to be autocratic and wor$ers will have very little "if any# say in decisions

affecting them. The clime in a Theory ? organi%ation would be

impersonal 7 this theory implies use of /carrot and stic$ approach!.

Theor 7


13/22

The assumptions of Theory @ are described by Mc>regor in the

following words-

0. The e6penditure of physical and mental effort in wor$ is natural as

play or rest. The average human being does not inherently disli$e.

1. 46ternal control and the threat of punishment are not the only

means for bringing about effort towards orgnisational ob'ectives.

2. Commitment to ob'ectives is a function of the reward associated

with their achievement. The most significant of such awards e.g.

the satisfaction of ego and self7actualisation needs can be direct

product of effort directed towards orgnisational ob'ectives.

3. The average human being learns under proper conditions not only

to accept but to see$ responsibility.

A. the capacity to e6ercise a relatively high degree of imagination

ingenuity and creativity in the solution of organi%ational problems

is widely not narrowly distributed in the population.

The assumption of Theory @ suggest a new approach in

management. It emphasi%es on the co7operative endeavour of

management and employees. The attempt is to get ma6imum output

with minimum amount of control and direction. >enerally no conflict is

visible between organi%ational goals and individual goals. Thus the

attempts of employees which are in their best interests are also in the

interests of organi%ation.

Critic!# Appr!i"!#

Mc>regor!s theory has been critici%ed for various reasons.


14/22

0. It tends to over greneralise and over7simplify people as being one

way or the other. The theory overloo$s the comple6 nature of

human beings.

1. In this theory s,uee%es all managerial styles and philosophies into

two e6tremes of conduct which is devoid of reality.

2. In this theory all persons do not loo$ for motivation in the 'ob and

not all wor$ can be made intrinsically challenging and rewarding.

3. +ome managers may have Theory @ assumptions about human

nature.

E8%it Theor


15/22

4,uity theory of motivation was formulated by =. +tacy dams of

the 9nited +tates in 0A. The theory is based on the assumption that

members of employers. There are two main variables in this theory

input and outcomes. Inputs are the contributions which an individual

perceives that he puts into his 'ob. :utcomes are the rewards which

the individual receives from the organi%ation and from his 'ob. Inputs

include the employee!s training e6perience special $nowledge

personal characteristics etc. :utcomes consist of pay promotion

recognition status fringe benefits etc.

inputssOther

outcomesOthers

sinputsPerson

outcomessPersonEquity

,

,

,,

,==

The main postulates of the e,uity theory are as follows-

a# )erceived ine,uity creates tension in the individual.

b# The amount of tension is proportional to the magnitude of the

ine,uity.

c# The tension created in the individual motivates himEher to reduceit.

d# The degree of motivation is proportional to the perceived ine,uity.

Critic!# Appr!i"!#"

4,uity theory suffers from several limitations-

0. The theory is somewhat narrow in its emphasis on visible rewards

and overstresses conscious processes.

1. The theory is easily understood but its application is difficult.

There are no good measures to assess the perceptions of ine,uity

tension in an individual.


16/22

2. :ne of the wea$est elements of e,uity theory is its analysis of the

process by which individuals choose comparison with others. The

process by which individuals decide whom to compare themselves

with is not clear.

3. 4,uity theory is not a complete theory of motivation but deals

only with one particular aspect "e,uity# of motivation.

In spite of these drawbac$s e,uity theory is useful particularly in

the formulation of compensation policies and practices.

Vroo(5" Epect!nc Theor

Froom!s e6pectancy model of motivation is built around the

concepts of valence e6pectancy and instrumentality.

V!#ence

Falence implies the strength of a person!s desire or preference for

a particular outcome. It is importance or value that an individual places

on the potential outcomes or reward. 5or e6ample a person desires

promotion and feels that superior performance is a very strong factor in

achieving his goal. (is first level outcome is superior performance and

his second level outcome is promotion. person would be motivated

towards superior performance because of the valence for promotion.

Epect!nc

It implies the e6tent to which a person believes that his effort will

lead to high performance. It is the possibility that a particular action will

lead to the first level outcome. Managers can improve e6pectancy by

matching 'obs to people.


17/22

In"tr%(ent!##

It implies the degree to which a first level outcome will lead to a

desired second level outcome. In the above e6ample superior

performance is being seen as instrumentality in getting promotion.

Instrumentality is the relationship between first level outcome

"performance# and second level outcome "promotion#.

Motivation "force # G Falence 6 46pectancy 6 Instrumentality.

Critic!# Appr!i"!#

Froom!s model recogni%es individual differences in wor$

motivation. It recogni%es the comple6ities of wor$ motivation and does

not present an over7simplified approach. (owever the theory suffers

from the following limitations.

0. The theory is difficult to research and apply in practice. It is

primarily a theory for the scholar rather than for the practitioner.

1. The theory has not been fully tested empirically. Most studies

underta$en to test its viability have been only marginallysuccessful.

2. It is overly rational as it is based upon a rational economic view of

people.

Despite these limitations Froom!s theory holds great promise for

predicting behaviour in organi%ations. This promise arises due to the

model!s vigour of formulation relative ease of ma$ing the concepts

operational and emphasis on individual differences.


18/22

CLOSING COMMENTS

Motivation is one of the most important factors affecting human

behaviour. Motivation not only affects other cognitive factors li$e

perception and learning but affects the total performance of an individual

in organi%ational setting.

caution for grouping various theories into categories is that

there may be overlapping in this grouping. Farious theories of motivation

approach the problems of motivation from different perspectives but

they all emphasi%e similar set of relationships. These relationships are

the individual his needs his perception of how he will be able to satisfy

his needs and whether his need satisfaction is e,uitable.


19/22

LIMITATIONS

Action&B!"ed Orient!tion

Too many companies place great value on management theories and

fancy presentations 77 but little value on action. Leaders in business

organi%ations must go beyond research to actually implement

motivational strategies. There are a number of ways to create an action7

based orientation within teams. In employee communications use

action7oriented language that is simple clear direct and values common

sense. 5ollow up to ensure decisions are implemented. lso refuse to

accept e6cuses for why things will not wor$. Instead encourage

employees to thin$ of actions to overcome challenges.

Recogni4ing S%cce""


20/22

;emember an attempt often facilitates the learning process and

modification may be an option. This does not mean avoid giving

negative feedbac$ to poor performers because this can create a

phenomenon described as the feedbac$ gap by management academic

directors +herry 4. Moss and =uan I. +anche%. Instead motivate

employees by sharing failures in a way that communicates permission to

ta$e ris$. Do not however tolerate humiliation at any level.

S"te(ic Ch!##enge"

The policies and procedures within a business organi%ation can eithermotivate and inspire an employee or demorali%e and demotivate him.

bsenteeism and unmet performance ob'ectives are a couple of signs

that business systems may need to be revisited. 5or e6ample

recogni%ing the impact of increased business demands on current

processes can go a long way in motivating employees. In such

instances management sends a message ac$nowledging the impact of

e6ternal factors on a teamHs productivity. There is nothing more

damaging to an employeeHs motivation than unrealistic business

demands that goes unac$nowledged by business leaders.

Le!der"hip

Monitoring the motivation of teams is a continuous process. +uccessful

leaders foster positive environments that can facilitate an employeeHs

learning process and increase his productivity. Do not let research

paralysis set in to stymie a teamHs potential for success. ;emember

actions spea$ louder than words.


21/22

CONCLUSION

Motivating employees is an important role for managers. This case study

illustrates how in amodern engineering environment li$e +iemens the

wor$ of Maslow and (er%berg applies more than TaylorHs.

In the past as the wor$ of 5rederic$ Taylor illustrated motivation theory

lin$ed very closely to pay and output. Individuals now need to be

motivated in a completely different way. They have higher order needs.

This was illustrated through the wor$ of braham Maslow.

5rederic$ (er%berg discovered there are also elements within the

wor$place that both satisfy and dissatisfy employees.

Lower order needs are met by the organisation providing good pay and

a safe wor$ing environment. (igher order needs are also provided for its

engineers through training and development as well as the opportunity

to underta$e creative and challenging wor$.

+iemens employees are motivated by being recognised for their

achievements and by having opportunities for progression regardless of

the level at which they started wor$ing for +iemens.

BIBLIOGRA,-7


22/22

0. Management Theory )ractice by C.B. >upta.

1. :rgani%ation behaviour by L.M. )arsad.

motivaction manjeet kaur.doc

Documents