Motivation

MOTIVATION Introduction..............................................................................................................................2

What is Motivation? ................................................................................................................2

The Role of Motivation............................................................................................................3

The Process of Motivation.......................................................................................................3

Types of Motivation .................................................................................................................3 (1) Achievement Motivation............................................................................................................................... 3 (2) Affiliation Motivation ................................................................................................................................... 4 (3) Competence Motivation................................................................................................................................ 4 (4) Power Motivation.......................................................................................................................................... 4 (5) Attitude Motivation....................................................................................................................................... 4 (6) Incentive Motivation..................................................................................................................................... 4 (7) Fear Motivation............................................................................................................................................. 4

Motives in OB...........................................................................................................................4

Understanding Needs...............................................................................................................5

Measuring Motivation .............................................................................................................6

Motivating People in Different Ways.....................................................................................7 Requisites for Motivation: .................................................................................................................................. 7

Difference Between Motivation, Satisfaction, Inspiration and Manipulation....................7

Being a Motivating Manager: .................................................................................................7

Theories of Motivation ............................................................................................................8 A) Contributions of Robert Owen: ..................................................................................................................... 8 B) Jeremy Bentham’s "The Carrot and the Stick Approach": ............................................................................ 8 C) Contributions of Elton Mayo: ........................................................................................................................ 8 D) Abraham Maslow’s "Hierarchy of Needs Theory":....................................................................................... 8 E) Frederick Herzberg’s "Dual Factor Theory":............................................................................................... 10 F) Clayton Alderfer’s "ERG Theory":.............................................................................................................. 12 G) Douglas McGregor's "Theory X and Theory Y": ....................................................................................... 13 H) David McClelland’s "Theory of Needs": .................................................................................................... 14 I) "Goal Setting Theory" of Edwin Locke: ....................................................................................................... 16 J) Victor Vroom’s "Valence Expectancy Theory":........................................................................................... 17 K) The Porter and Lawler Model of Motivation:.............................................................................................. 19 L) J. Stacey Adam's "Equity Theory":.............................................................................................................. 20 M) B. F. Skinner's "Reinforcement Theory": ................................................................................................... 22 N) Cognitive Evaluation Theory: ..................................................................................................................... 23 O) Flow and Intrinsic Motivation Theory......................................................................................................... 24 P) Rensis Likert's Four Systems of Management: ............................................................................................ 25

Case Study: Piketon Research and Extension Centre and Enterprise Centre: ...............26

Case Study: Motivation And Its Practical Application In Public Libraries ....................29

Motivation and Middle School Students..............................................................................34

1

Motivation

MOTIVATION INTRODUCTION At one time, employees were considered just another input into the production of goods and services. What perhaps changed this way of thinking about employees was research, referred to as the Hawthorne Studies, conducted by Elton Mayo from 1924 to 1932 (Dickson, 1973). This study found employees are not motivated solely by money and employee behaviour is linked to their attitudes (Dickson, 1973). The Hawthorne Studies began the human relations approach to management, whereby the needs and motivation of employees become the primary focus of managers (Bedeian, 1993). Joe Kelly (How Managers Manage) presents a simple model that illustrates the process of motivation.

Needs --- Drives --- Behaviour --- Goals --- Reduction or release of tension Behaviour is both directed to, and results from, unsatisfied needs. The word unsatisfied is most important. As Maslow says, "If we are interested in what actually motivates us and not what has or will, or might motivate us, then a satisfied need is not a motivator." Kelly's model of motivation presents a sort of chicken-egg dilemma. Which comes first, the goal or the need? When we talk about behaviour being goal-oriented, we mean that individuals feel a need, want, desire or drive to do something that leads to the achievement of a goal. But is the goal, as part of the self, already there? Is it the factor that stimulates the need? Are goals and needs the same thing? It is useful to separate the two concepts. We can define a goal as that outcome which we strive to attain in order to satisfy certain needs. The goal is the end result, the need the driving force that spurs us towards that result. A student might have a goal to get an A in a course, but this goal may reflect a number of different needs. He or she may feel a need to confirm his or her competence; friends may all be getting A's; he or she may wish to have the esteem of others; simply to do the best possible: to keep a scholarship. It is difficult to infer needs from goals. Nearly all conscious behaviour of human being is motivated. The internal needs and drives lead to tensions, which in turn result into actions. The need for food results in hunger and hence a person is motivated to eat. We talk about money as a motivator. Money represents so many different things to different people that saying that individuals "work for money" is meaningless. What we have to know is what needs the money is satisfying. Is it survival, status, belonging, achievement, a convenient scorecard for performance? Remember, behaviour is both directed to, and results from, unsatisfied needs. Every individual has a number of needs which vie for satisfaction. How do we choose between these competing forces? Do we try to satisfy them all? Much like a small child in a candy store, faced with the dilemma of spending his or her allowance, we are forced to decide what we want the most; that is, we satisfy the strongest need first. Although there is general agreement among psychologists that man experiences a variety of needs, there is considerable disagreement as to what these needs are - and their relative importance. There have been a number of attempts to present models of motivation which list a specific number of motivating needs, with the implication that these lists are all-inclusive and represent the total picture of needs. Unfortunately, each of these models has weaknesses and gaps, and we are still without a general theory of motivation. A manager requires to create and maintain an environment in which individuals work together in groups towards the accomplishment of common objectives. A manager cannot do a job without knowing what motivates people. The building of motivating factors into organisational roles, the staffing of these roles and the entire process of leading people must be built on the sound knowledge of motivation. It is necessary to remember that level of motivation varies both between individuals and within group at different times. Today, in the increasingly competitive environment maintaining a highly motivated workforce is the most challenging task. The art of motivation starts by learning how to influence the behaviour of the individual. This understanding helps to achieve both, the individual as well as organisational objectives. Motivation is a powerful tool in the hands of leaders. It can persuade, convince and propel people to act.

WHAT IS MOTIVATION? It is a general tendency to believe that motivation is a personal trait of every individual. Some people have it and the others don’t. In practice, some are labelled to be lazy because they do not display an outward sign of motivation. However, individuals differ in their basic motivational drives. It also depends upon their areas of interest. The concept of motivation is situational and its level varies between different individuals, at different times. If you understand what motivates people, you have at your command the most powerful tool for dealing with them.

2

Motivation

Many contemporary authors have also defined the concept of motivation. Motivation has been defined as: the psychological process that gives behaviour purpose and direction (Kreitner, 1995); a predisposition to behave in a purposive manner to achieve specific, unmet needs (Buford, Bedeian, & Lindner, 1995); an internal drive to satisfy an unsatisfied need (Higgins, 1994); and the will to achieve (Bedeian, 1993). Motivation can be operationally defined as the inner force that drives individuals to accomplish personal and organisational goals. Motivation is to inspire people to work, individually or in groups such as to produce the best of results. It is the will to act by exerting high level of efforts towards achieving organisational goals, conditioned by smart and efficient working and the ability to satisfy some individual needs. Motivation is, getting somebody to do something because they want to do it. It was once assumed that motivation had to be injected from outside, but it is now understood that everyone is motivated by several differing forces. Motivation is a general term applied to the entire class of drives, desires, needs, wishes and similar forces. To say that managers motivate their subordinates is to say that they act in such a manner so as to satisfy drives and desires and induce the subordinates to act in a desired manner. To motivate others, is the most important of management tasks. It comprises the abilities to communicate, to set an example, to challenge, to encourage, to obtain feedback, to involve, to delegate, to develop and train, to inform, to brief and to provide a just reward.

THE ROLE OF MOTIVATION Why do we need motivated employees? The answer is survival (Smith, 1994). Motivated employees are needed in our rapidly changing workplaces. Motivated employees help organisations survive. Motivated employees are more productive. To be effective, managers need to understand what motivates employees within the context of the roles they perform. Of all the functions a manager performs, motivating employees is arguably the most complex. This is due, in part, to the fact that what motivates employees changes constantly (Bowen & Radhakrishna, 1991). For example, research suggests that as employees' income increases, money becomes less of a motivator (Kovach, 1987). Also, as employees get older, interesting work becomes more of a motivator.

THE PROCESS OF MOTIVATION In the initial stage, a person starts feeling the lack of something. There is an arousal of need so urgent, that the bearer has to venture in it’s search to satisfy it. This leads to creation of tension, which makes the person to forget everything else and start work in order to satisfy the same. This tension also creates attitudes and drives and regarding the type of satisfaction that is desired. Then it leads a person to venture in search of information. Eventually leading to evaluation of alternatives where the best alternative is chosen. After choosing the alternative, necessary action is taken. Because of the performance of the activity, satisfaction is achieved which then relieves him of his tensions.

TYPES OF MOTIVATION (1) Achievement Motivation It is the drive to pursue and attain goals. An individual with achievement motivation wishes to achieve objectives and advance up the ladder of success. Here, accomplishment is more important than the rewards that accompany it. It is similar to ‘Kaizen’ approach of Japanese Management.

3

Motivation

(2) Affiliation Motivation It is a drive to relate people on social basis. Persons with affiliation motivation perform work better when they are complimented for their favourable attitudes and co-operation. (3) Competence Motivation It is the drive to be good at something, allowing the individual to perform high quality work. Competence motivated people seek job mastery, take pride in developing and using their problem-solving skills and strive to innovate when confronted with obstacles. They learn from their experience. (4) Power Motivation It is the drive to influence people and change situations. Power motivated people wish to create an impact on their organisation and are willing to take calculated risks to do so. (5) Attitude Motivation Attitude motivation is how people think and feel. It is their self confidence, belief in themselves, and attitude to life. It is how they feel about the future and how they react to the past. (6) Incentive Motivation It is where a person or a team reaps an award performing an activity. It is "You do this and you get that", sort of attitude. It is the types of awards and prizes that drive people to work a little harder. (7) Fear Motivation Fear motivation, and coercion are acts against the will of the person. It is instantaneous and gets the job done quickly, but helpful only for a short run.

MOTIVES IN OB

It was Murray who originally suggested a long list of human motives or needs. Murray's work inspired a number of subsequent studies and resulted in different lists of significant motives. McClelland and his associates suggested three motives as being important-achievement, affiliation, and power. They also suggested elaborate methods of measuring them. Subsequently, they demonstrated the importance of the achievement motive to entrepreneurship and marketing, and of power motivation (among other things) to management. He has attempted to develop a leadership motive pattern, in which the power motive plays an important role. Litwin and Stringer (1968) used these three motives – achievement, affiliation, and power – in their study of organizational climate and found these useful for the study of organizational behaviour

While McClelland's study of the achievement and affiliation motives showed these to be simple variables, he found the power motive to be a complex one. As he admitted during his study of the power motive, it included both an urge to control others as well as the desire to make an impact. He called these instances of personalised power and socialised power. Thus McClelland seems to suggest three different elements in the power motive: the need to control others (personalised power), the need to make an impact on others, and the need to use power for doing something for other persons and groups, like organisations (both these being socialised power).

It seems necessary to make clear distinctions amongst these three. Management literature gives considerable importance to the concept of 'control', i.e. "keeping track of developments according to an agreed plan. This also seems to be one important need or motive. The so-called socialised dimension of power (as reflected in the use of power for the benefit of other persons and groups) seems to be a separate need or motive that is reflected in a concern for and desire to do something for others. This need is important for social development also and may be called the extension motive.

One more motive or need so far neglected, though relevant to organizational behaviour, is that of dependency. Thus far dependency was regarded as a negative force. However, Levinson pointed out the importance of dependency in the development of managers, and this need is reflected in the mentoring process to which considerable attention is being paid currently.

Thus we have six main needs or motives relevant for understanding the dynamics of people's behaviour in organisations~. These are briefly defined below:

1. The achievement motive: This is characterized by a concern for excellence, a tendency to compete with standards of excellence set by others or by the self, the setting of challenging goals for oneself, an awareness of the hurdles in the way of achieving one's goals, and persistence in trying out alternative paths to one's goal.

4

Motivation

2. The affiliation motive: This is characterized by a concern for establishing and maintaining close personal relationships, considerable value for friendship, and a tendency to express one's emotions.

3. The influence motive: This is characterized by a concern for making an impact on others, a desire to make people do what one thinks is right, and an urge to change matters and 'develop' people.

4. The control motive: This is characterized by a concern for orderliness, a desire to stay informed, and an urge to monitor a situation and take corrective action if needed.

5. The extension motive: This is characterised by a concern for others, an interest in the superordinate goal, and a need to be relevant and useful to larger groups, including society as a whole.

6. The dependency motive: This is characterised by a concern for self- development with others’ help’, checking ideas or proposed actions with significant others (those more knowledgeable or having higher status, experts, close associates), a need for approval, and expectations of such an 'approval' relationship.

UNDERSTANDING NEEDS

Intrinsic vs Extrinsic Needs: A simple way to classify ‘needs’ is to put them in two categories: Internal and external. These have also been called intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic needs or motives are derived from the internal sources within an individual or task (an individual’s interests or the nature of the job). Extrinsic needs or motives are external, tangible and satisfied by others (money, or a regular salary)

Individual differ in their patterns of needs. Some have higher intrinsic motivation while others have stronger extrinsic needs. The distinction, however, is not a sharp one. Some extrinsic motives (e.g., a reward) may arouse an intrinsic need (in this case, say for recognition).

Rewards can 'also be classified as extrinsic and intrinsic. Extrinsic rewards (often called incentives) make a person select a particular activity or organization over others and put in extra effort and time. However, external rewards may not stimulate creativity and may, in the long run, reduce a person's 'intrinsic' motivation. On the other hand, intrinsic rewards (such as recognition and opportunities for growth) sustain and strengthen a person's intrinsic motives. However, things are not always so clear-cut. There seems to be clearer relation between negative, extrinsic factors and intrinsic motivation, since punishment, threats, pressure, imposed goals, etc., reduce intrinsic motivation.

However, an individual's needs can be classified based on several different criteria. There are also several dimensions to needs. Motivation can be better managed. If one has a deeper insight into the way needs operate. Considering the various dimensions can be helpful in this regard:

The expressed vs wanted dimension: Schutz (1958) has postulated two dimensions for three interpersonal needs-inclusion (the need to socialize and interact with people), affection (the need to be close and relate personally to people), and control (the need to influence). He suggested that each of these interpersonal needs have both dimensions: the need for the person to take initiative (the 'expressed' dimension} and the need for others to take initiative (the 'wanted' dimension}. For example, a high wanted need for inclusion will be shown in a person attending a party and waiting eagerly for others to come and talk to him or her. On the other hand, a person with a high expressed need for inclusion will take the initiative in meeting new people and talking to them. Based on this concept, Schutz has devised an instrument called FIRO – B to measure both dimensions of the three needs. Data from the FIRO – B can be used for planning interpersonal effectiveness. Another system, called Inter-Personal Need Inventory (IPNI}, measures the other-directed (what Schutz calls 'expressed'} and self-directed (what Schutz calls 'wanted') dimensions of six interpersonal needs-inclusion, affiliation, extension, recognition, control, and influence.

The approach vs avoidance dimension: The approach – avoidance model was originally proposed by Atkinson (1953). This model has been used mostly with regard to achievement motivation (termed 'hope of success' or 'fear of failure'). But it can be used for other needs such as control, power, affiliation, extension, and dependency also. Any of these needs can be satisfied either by striving for the positive attainment of the goal (approach) or by reducing the possibilities of deprivation from goal attainment (avoidance). For example, say two persons – A and B have equally high achievement motivation. A is high on the approach dimension (called 'hope of success') and B is high on the avoidance dimension (called 'fear of failure'). Their working behaviours would be different. While A may set more challenging goals and enjoy the (positive) stress, B may be scared of

5

Motivation

such challenges and may either set lower goals in order to avoid failure or may become so anxious as to eventually not succeed. Yet both have high achievement motivation.

A lot of research has been done on fear of failure, which (as an avoidance behaviour) has been found to be dysfunctional, although a part of the achievement motive. For example, Varga {1977),analysing data collected from .Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan, and Poland,-,showed that 'hope of success' vs fear of failure (approach vs avoidance) is the main intervening variable determining whether one benefits from achievement motivation training programmes in terms of increase in entrepreneurial activities. The approach avoidance dimension may be significant in explaining the effects of deprivation (e.g. poverty) as well. In the case of power motivation, the approach dimension may be reflected in attempts to influence whereas the avoidance dimension may be shown in compensatory behaviour such as collecting symbols of prestige and power (a big car, expensive furniture, etc.) In case of extension motivation, the approach dimension may result in providing help and support to people for their development while the avoidance dimension may be shown in acts of individual charity and generosity. The following table briefly explains the approach and avoidance dimensions of each motive, based respectively on hope or fear of something. The behaviour of an employee can thus be analysed not only in terms of the various motives, but also on the basis of a positive aspect (approach) vs a negative aspect (avoidance), reflected as hope or fear. It is assumed that all the six motives have their legitimate place in organisation and contribute to the effectiveness of an employee.

MOTIVES Achievement Affiliation Extension Influence Control Dependency

APPROACH (Hope of) Success Inclusion Relevance Impacting Order Growth

AVOIDANCE (Fear of) Failure Exclusion Irrelevance Importance Chaos Loneliness

An employee’s effectiveness from the point of view of motivation can be defined in two ways. First, we may examine to what extent the individual has a particular motivation. Since all the six motives are relevant for an employee, if he or she is deficient in anyone, overall effectiveness may suffer. Secondly, an employee's effectiveness will also depend on the extent of avoidance behaviour related to a particular motivation. Any motive, howsoever strong it may be, may be rendered ineffective by high avoidance behaviour. A high score on motive indicates potential for effectiveness, but a larger share of avoidance items in the total score may reduce one's actual effectiveness. The behavioural aspects of motivation (both approach behaviour and avoidance), can be .measured with the help of a special instrument (MAO-B).

The personal vs interpersonal dimension Some needs may be fulfilled without any interpersonal context. For example, the need for achievement does not necessarily involve interpersonal interaction. Similarly, the need for creativity and curiosity may not involve interpersonal relations. But most needs are interpersonal in nature, like the needs for affiliation and power.

The individual vs social dimension Prayag Mehta (1994) has proposed that achievement and power motives have both individual and social aspects. A person who has a high need for personal achievement may have great concern for his or her career and will adopt all possible means to achieve personal excellence. On the other hand, a person with a high need for social achievement would strive to work with others towards a common goal. Similarly, the personal power motive may be reflected in attempts to control others whereas a need for social power may be found in attempts to overcome obstacles or in collective action. Mehta has reported a difference between the needs of workers and of managers in a public sector company, showing that the former are characterized more by the social dimension and the latter by the personal dimensions. He has proposed a scoring system to measure these dimensions. McClelland has also made a distinction between personalized power' and 'socialized power.

MEASURING MOTIVATION

For measuring the psychological needs of individuals, self-checking scales are used (the individual being required to check whether various statements apply to him or her); to assess specific psychological needs, the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) is widely used. Some pictures that are amenable to various interpretations are shown to the individual, who is then asked to write a story based on his or her response to each picture. Scoring systems have been developed to score the stories for specific needs (e.g., achievement, power, affiliation, extension, etc.) or dimensions (approach or avoidance, for instance). The rationale for this method is that the psychological needs of an individual are at a deeper level of consciousness and get expressed more easily in the unguarded imagery he or she may generate, rather than in verbal responses, which are more

6

Motivation

influenced by socially ‘desirable' needs. Motivation for both jobs and organisations can be measured in this way. Similarly, the motivational climate an organization promotes can also be assessed.

MOTIVATING PEOPLE IN DIFFERENT WAYS Motivation is not unidirectional i.e. downwards. In the present scenario, where the workforce is more informed, more aware, more educated and more goal oriented, the role of motivation has crossed the boundaries of the management hierarchy. Apart from a superior motivating a subordinate, encouragement and support to colleague as well as helpful suggestions at right time, even to the superior, brings about a rapport at various work levels. Besides, where the workforce is self motivated, just the acknowledgement of the same makes people feel important and wanted leading to higher morale and increased motivation. Requisites for Motivation: • We have to be motivated to motivate • Motivation requires a goal • Motivation once established, does not last if not repeated • Motivation requires recognition • Participation has motivating effect • Seeing ourselves progressing motivates us • Challenge only motivates if you can win • Everybody has a motivational fuse i.e. everybody can be motivated • Group belonging motivates

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MOTIVATION, SATISFACTION, INSPIRATION AND MANIPULATION Motivation refers to the drive and efforts to satisfy a want or goal, whereas satisfaction refers to the contentment experienced when a want is satisfied. In contrast, inspiration is bringing about a change in the thinking pattern, while manipulation is getting things done from others in a premeditated manner. Hence, manipulation or external stimulus as well as inspiration or internal stimulus act as carriers of either de-motivation or motivation which in turn either results in dissatisfaction or satisfaction depending upon the existing situations.

BEING A MOTIVATING MANAGER: 1) Treat staff well: Subordinates have to be treated with diligence. The manager has to stay friendly as well

as maintain a level of distance with his staff. It’s a tricky ground to tread. The staff looks up on the manager as their leader. They expect maturity, rationality and understanding from their superiors. Simple things like calling people by their first name, chatting about their families for a while or even a general inquiry about their well-being, brings in a feeling of belongingness. Small gestures of this type help in building up of a cordial relationship.

2) Think like a winner: A manager has to handle two situations, "The Winning" and "The Losing". The crux is to think like a winner even when all the odds seem against you. It is necessary to equip yourself with all the tools of a winner. Always remember that winning and losing rotate in a cycle. If you have been losing for a long time you are very near the winning edge.

3) Recognise the differences: All employees in the organisation vibrate to a different pace. A treatment that motivates one may de-motivate the other. Understanding the difference in temperament in between the individuals is important.

4) Set realistic goals: Set moderate goals. Setting too high a task creates a feeling of non-achievement, right from the beginning itself. The goals set should be feasible to the employees to be achieved. A slightly higher target than expected provides a challenge.

5) Prevent De-motivation: A job of the manager is to motivate people. His task requires him to punish and penalise people. This might create resentment in the minds of the staff members, which may affect the productivity of the workforce. Henceforth, care should be taken to ensure that punishment and penalties are used as a controlling technique and that they do not de-motivate.

6) Job-financial enrichment and small job changes are handy: To make jobs more effective and to break the monotonous routine, small task additions and minor changes are always welcome. Even small suggestions of the manager seem valuable to the employees. A few challenges in the same job can enrich it.

7) Non-financial rewards: Monetary rewards have always had a high motivational capacity. But non-monetary rewards are equally helpful. A thank you note, a letter of appreciation or even few words of praise can help smoothen the creases between the different levels of management.

7

Motivation

THEORIES OF MOTIVATION A) Contributions of Robert Owen: Though Robert Owen is considered to be paternalistic in his view, his contribution is of a considerable significance in the theories of Motivation. During the early years of the nineteenth century, Owen’s textile mill at New Lanark in Scotland was the scene of some unique way of treating people. His view was that people were similar to machines. A machine that is looked after properly, cared for and maintained well, performs efficiently, reliably and lastingly, similarly people are likely to be more efficient if they are cared for. Robert Owen practised what he preached and introduced such revolutionary concepts as employee housing and company shop. His ideas on this and other matters were considered to be too revolutionary during those times. B) Jeremy Bentham’s "The Carrot and the Stick Approach": Possibly the essence of the traditional view of people at work can be best appreciated by a brief look at the work of this English philosopher, whose ideas were also developed in the early years of the Industrial Revolution, around 1800. Bentham’s view was that all people are self-interested and motivated by the desire to avoid pain and seek pleasure. Any worker will work only if the reward is big enough, or he may undergo punishment that is unpleasant. This view-the ‘carrot and stick’ approach - was built into the philosophies of the age and is still to be found, especially in the older, more traditional sectors of industry. The various leading theories of motivation and motivators seldom make reference to the carrot and the stick. This metaphor relates, of course, to the use of awards and penalties in order to induce desired behaviour. It comes from the old story to make a donkey move, one must put a carrot in front of him or dab him with a stick from behind. Despite all the research on the theories of motivation, reward and punishment are still considered strong motivators. For centuries, however, they were too often thought of as the only forces that could motivate people. At the same time, in all theories of motivation, the inducements of some kind of ‘carrot’ are recognised. Often this is money in the form of pay or bonuses or commissions. Even though money is not the only motivating force, it has been and will continue to remain an important one. The trouble with the money, ‘carrot’ approach is that too often everyone gets a carrot, regardless of performance through such practices as salary raise and promotion out of seniority, automatic ‘merit’ increases, and executive bonus is not based on individual manager performance. It is as simple as this : If a person puts a donkey in a pen full of carrots and then stand outside the pen with a carrot, would the donkey be encouraged to come out of the pen ? The ‘stick’, in the form of fear - fear of loss of job, loss of income, reduction of bonus, demotion, or some other penalty - has been and continues to be a strong motivator. Yet, it is admittedly not the best of it’s kind. It often gives rise to defensive or retaliatory behaviour, such as union organisation, poor-quality work, executive indifference, failure of a manager to take any risks in decision making or even dishonesty. But fear of penalty cannot be overlooked. Whether managers are first-level supervisors or chief executives, the power of their position to give or with hold rewards or impose penalties of various kinds gives them an ability to control, to a very great extent, the economic and social well-being of their subordinates. C) Contributions of Elton Mayo: The work of Elton Mayo is famously known as " The Hawthorne Experiment". He conducted behavioural experiments at the Hawthorne Works of the American Western Electric Company in Chicago. He conducted some experiments involving the lighting and seating arrangements, introduced breaks in between the work performance and also introduced refreshments during the breaks. On the basis of this he drew the conclusions that motivation was a very complex subject. It was not only about pay, work condition and morale but also included psychological and social factors. Although this research has been criticised from many angles, the central conclusions drawn were: • People are motivated more by the environment, including psychological and social factors than just by pay

and conditions. • The need for recognition and a sense of belonging are very important. • Attitudes towards work are strongly influenced by the group. D) Abraham Maslow’s "Hierarchy of Needs Theory": One of the most widely mentioned theories of motivation that has gained a lot of attention, but not complete acceptance is the "Hierarchy of Needs Theory" put forth by psychologist Abraham Maslow. According to him, human beings are motivated by many different things that are related to various needs, desires and drives. Many theories of motivation have been proposed over the years to try to explain why employee A is a punctual hard worker and employee B is often late and performs just the minimal requirements of the job. Maslow's theory

8

Motivation

argues that individuals are motivated to satisfy a number of different kinds of needs, some of which are more powerful than others (or to use the psychological jargon, are more prepotent than others). The term prepotency refers to the idea that some needs are felt as being more pressing than others. Maslow believed that within every individual, there exists a hierarchy of five needs and that each level of need must be satisfied before an individual pursues the next higher level of need. Maslow argues that until these most pressing needs are satisfied, other needs have little effect on an individual's behaviour. In other words, we satisfy the most prepotent needs first and then progress to the less pressing ones. As one need becomes satisfied, and therefore less important to us, other needs loom up and become motivators of our behaviour. Maslow represents this prepotency of needs as a hierarchy. The most prepotent needs are shown at the bottom of the ladder, with prepotency decreasing as one progresses upwards and he concluded that when one set of needs is satisfied, these kind of needs ceases to motivate. As an individual progresses through the various levels of needs, the preceding needs loses their motivational value. According to his theory needs are of the following kinds: (i) Physiological needs These are important needs for sustaining human life. Food, water, warmth, shelter, sleep, medicine and education are the basic physiological needs which fall in the primary list of need satisfaction. Maslow was of an opinion that until these needs were satisfied to a degree to maintain life, no other motivating factors can work. As Maslow says: "Undoubtedly these physiological needs are the most prepotent of all needs. What this means specifically is that in the human being who is missing everything in life in an extreme fashion, it is most likely that the major motivation would be the physiological needs rather than any others. A person who is lacking food, safety, love and esteem would probably hunger for food more strongly than anything else". (ii) Security or Safety needs These are the needs to be free from the physical dangers such as the fear of losing a job, property, food or shelter. It also includes protection against any emotional harms. Once the first level needs are largely satisfied, Maslow maintains, the next level of needs emerges. Individuals become concerned with the need for safety and security - protection from physical harm, disaster, illness and security of income, life-style and relationships. (iii) Social needs Since people are social beings, they long for societal acceptation. People try to satisfy their needs for affection, acceptance and friendship. Once the safety needs have become largely satisfied, individuals become concerned with belonging - a sense of membership in some group or groups, a need for affiliation and a feeling of acceptance by others. (iv) Self Esteem needs When there is a feeling that the individual belongs somewhere, he or she is next motivated by a desire to be held in esteem. People need to be thought of as worthwhile by others, to be recognised as people with some value. They also have a strong need to see themselves as worthwhile people. Without this type of self-concept, one sees oneself as drifting, cut off, pointless. Much of this dissatisfaction with certain types of job centres around the fact that they are perceived, by the people performing them, as demeaning and therefore damaging to their self-concept. According to Maslow, once people begin to satisfy their Social needs, they want to be held in esteem both by themselves and by others. This kind of need produces such satisfaction as power, prestige, status and self-confidence. It includes both internal esteem factors like self-respect, autonomy, achievements, and external esteem factors such as status, recognition and attention. (v) Need for Self-Actualisation Maslow regards this as the highest need in his hierarchy. It is the drive to become what one is capable of becoming, it includes growth, achieving one’s potential and self-fulfilment. It is to maximise one’s potential and to accomplish something. According to Maslow, when all these needs have been satisfied at least to some extent, people are motivated by a desire to self-actualise, to achieve whatever they define as their maximum potential, to do their thing to the best of their ability. Maslow describes self-actualisation as follows: "A musician must make music, an artist must paint, a poet must write, if he is to be ultimately happy. What a man can do, he must do. This need we may call self-actualisation ... It refers to the desire for self-fulfilment, namely the tendency for one to become actualised in what one is potentially. This tendency might be phrased as the desire to become more and more what one is, to become everything that one is capable of becoming. The specific form these needs take will of course vary greatly from person to person. In one individual it may be expressed maternally, as the desire to be an ideal mother, in another athletically, in still another aesthetically, the painting of pictures, and in another inventively in the creation of new contrivances. It is not necessarily a creative urge although in people who have any capabilities for creation it will take this form."

9

Motivation

As each of these needs are substantially satisfied, the next need becomes dominant. From the standpoint of motivation, the theory would say that although no need is ever fully gratified, a substantially satisfied need no longer motivates. So if you want to motivate someone, you need to understand what level of the hierarchy that person is on and focus on satisfying those needs or needs above that level. Maslow’s need theory has received wide recognition, particularly among practising managers. This can be attributed to the theory’s intuitive logic and ease of understanding. However, research does not validate these theories. Maslow provided no empirical evidence and other several studies that sought to validate the theory found no support for it. However there have been many people who have criticised Maslow’s hierarchy as being too simple and rigid. Humans are psychologically very complex with needs that overlap each other at different times (Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 204). Others have argued that we have interpreted Maslow’s theory too literally (Baker & Sandore, 1991, p. 42). Instead, even if a level of need has been met in the past, this does not mean that this same level of need will not again become a source of motivation in a different situation. Several points must be made concerning Maslow's model of motivation. First, it should be made clear that he does not mean that individuals experience only one type of need at a time. In fact, we probably experience all levels of needs all the time, only to varying degrees. In many parts of the world, hunger is a genuine reality, but we have all experienced the phenomenon of not being able to concentrate upon a job because of a growling stomach. Productivity drops prior to lunch as people transfer their thoughts from their jobs to the upcoming meal. After lunch, food it not uppermost in people's minds but perhaps rest is, as a sense of drowsiness sets in. Similarly, in almost all organisational settings, individuals juggle their needs for security ("Can I keep this job?") with needs for esteem ("If I do what is demanded by the job, how will my peers see me, and how will I see myself?"). Given a situation where management is demanding a certain level of performance, but where group norms are to produce below these levels, all these issues are experienced. If the individual does not produce to the level demanded by management, he or she may lose the job (security). But if he or she conforms to management's norms rather than those of the group, it may ostracise him or her (belonging) while the individual may see him or herself as a turncoat (esteem) and may have a feeling of having let the side down (self-esteem.) We do not progress simply from one level in the hierarchy to another in a straightforward, orderly manner; there is a constant, but ever-changing pull from all levels and types of needs. A second point that must be made about Maslow's hierarchy is that the order in which he has set up the needs does not necessarily reflect their prepotence for every individual. Some people may have such a high need for esteem that they are able to subordinate their needs for safety, or their physiological or belonging needs to these. The war hero springs to mind. There is little concern for safety or physical comfort as the seeker of glory rushes forward into the muzzle of destruction. A third, and very important point to be made about Maslow's hierarchical model is the assertion that once a need is satisfied it is no longer a motivator - until it re-emerges. Food is a poor motivator after a meal. The point in this is clear for management. Unfortunately, many organisations and individuals still fail to get the message. Most incentive schemes are based upon needs that have already been largely satisfied. If management placed emphasis on needs that have not been satisfied, employees would be more likely to be motivated towards achieving the goals of the organisation. Human behaviour is primarily directed towards unsatisfied needs. Finally, an important aspect of Maslow's model is that it provides for constant growth of the individual. There is no point at which everything has been achieved. Having satisfied the lower needs, one is always striving to do things to the best of one's ability, and best is always defined as being slightly better than before. There has been a great deal of debate over Maslow's hierarchical concept of motivation. It has a basic attraction to most people because it seems to be logical, to make sense. A number of research studies have been conducted on a need hierarchy theory in organisations. Those studies reveal that human needs do not always emerge in a hierarchal manner. An example of the reversal of Maslow's theory is the starving artist who attempts to fulfil self-actualisation needs despite deprivation of physiological and security needs. The studies also prove that physiological and safety needs tend to decrease in importance and the needs for self esteem, belonging and self-actualisation tend to increase. E) Frederick Herzberg’s "Dual Factor Theory": Frederick Herzberg and his associates began their research into motivation during the 1950's, examining the models and assumptions of Maslow and others. He has tried to modify Maslow’s Need Hierarchy theory. He stated that there are certain satisfiers and dissatisfiers for employees at work. Intrinsic factors are related to job satisfaction, while extrinsic factors are associated with dissatisfaction.

10

Motivation

Herzberg and his colleagues were interested in finding out what factors in a job contributed to an employee’s satisfaction and dissatisfaction. He devised his theory on the question: "What do people want from their jobs ?" He asked people to describe in detail, such situations when they felt exceptionally good or exceptionally bad. From the responses that he received, he concluded that opposite of satisfaction is not dissatisfaction. Findings from their research showed that there were two groups of factors which contributed to employee satisfaction. The first group of factors are referred to as motivators, which are described as increasing job satisfaction for employees. These factors include being recognised for their work, obtaining the trust of their managers so that they are allowed to work without supervision, having responsibilities, and advancements in their positions. These are all intrinsic factors which the employees attribute to themselves. It is these intrinsic factors that correlates to Maslow’s esteem needs which serve as effective motivators. The other group of factors, which were identified in the research are referred to as hygiene or maintenance factors. These factors include the work environment, management, salaries, and company policies which are all extrinsic factors found in the external environment. The first group of factors are related to the actual job performed by the employees while the second group of factors are related to the environment under which the job was performed. It was found that extrinsic factors were not good motivators and do not provide satisfaction for employees in the long term; however, when these extrinsic factors were inadequate, they resulted in dissatisfaction. What this implies is that if managers want to motivate their staff, they need to provide an acceptable environment to work in, as well as the intrinsic motivating factors that provide job satisfaction. Removing dissatisfying characteristics from a job does not necessarily make the job satisfying. He states that presence of certain factors in the organisation is natural and the presence of the same does not lead to motivation. However, their non-presence leads to de-motivation. In similar manner, there are certain factors, the absence of which causes no dissatisfaction, but their presence has motivational impact. Hygienes, if applied effectively, can at best prevent dissatisfaction; if applied poorly, they can result in negative feelings about the job. The result of this work was the formulation of what Herzberg termed the Motivation-Hygiene Theory (M-H). The basic hypotheses of this theory are that: 1. There are two types of motivators, one type which results in satisfaction with the job, and the other which

merely prevents dissatisfaction. The two types are quite separate and distinct from one another. Herzberg called the factors which result in job satisfaction motivators and those that simply prevented dissatisfaction hygienes. Motivators are those things that allow for psychological growth and development on the job. They are closely related to the concept of self-actualisation, involving a challenge, an opportunity to extend oneself to the fullest, to taste the pleasure of accomplishment, and to be recognised as having done something worthwhile. Hygienes are simply factors that describe the conditions of work rather than the work itself. Herzberg's point is that if you want to motivate people, you have to be concerned with the job itself and not simply with the surroundings. In a medical sense, growth, healing and development occur as natural internal processes. They are the result of proper diet, exercise, sleep etc. Hygienic procedures simply prevent disease from occurring. They do not promote growth per se. Herzberg says that we should focus our attention on the individuals in jobs, not on the things that we surround them with. He maintains that we tend to think that growth and development will occur if we provide good working conditions, status, security and administration, whereas in fact what stimulates growth (and motivation to grow and develop) are opportunities for achievement, recognition, responsibility and advancement.

2. The factors that lead to job satisfaction (the motivators) are: • achievement • recognition • work itself • responsibility

• challenges • job advancement • growth prospects

3. The factors which may prevent dissatisfaction (the hygienes) are: • company policy and administration • working conditions • supervision • interpersonal relations • money

• status • personal life • salary • security

11

Motivation

Recent research has found results that are consistent with Herzberg’s theory. Smith and Burgin conducted a survey to examine the factors that motivated employees to attend training programs (Smith & Burgin, 1991). A total of 731 individuals ranging from professional librarians to paraprofessionals participated in this survey by returning the completed forms. What Smith and Burgin found was that the top two motivators for attending training sessions, were to improve professional competence and to provide better customer service. These two motivators are intrinsic factors related to a sense of achievement that gives self-confidence. These intrinsic factors are also very similar to Maslow’s esteem needs, which Stueart and Moran believed to be "a potent and reliable source of motivation" (Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 204). Besides the discovery of the top two factors that motivate library personnel to participate in further training, Smith and Burgin also found the lowest ranked motivator was an increase in salary (Smith & Burgin, 1991). This again supports Herzberg’s theory, where external factors such as money and tenure fulfil the requirement of the hygiene factors, but over time are poor motivators. Smith and Burgin’s findings are also consistent with McGregor’s Theory Y. McGregor believed that the assumptions held by Theory Y of human nature were more valid then Theory X. In times of rapid technological changes in public libraries, managers can ease the change by giving their employees the chance to participate and add their inputs into the changes that will directly affect them. Having input will give the employees a sense of control over the changes and allow them to better adapt. When given the opportunity, many employees may accept further responsibilities to ensure the success of the technological changes because they understand and believe in the reasons for the need to change. Once again, this theory has a basic attraction. As Joe Kelly puts it, however: "It is always as well to bear in mind that academics, who place considerable value on autonomy and inner direction, have an obsession about making work meaningful. The notion that it is possible to realise man's true nature through creative work which is its own reward is an exceedingly attractive proposition to the learned don which is rarely fully shared by his wife". Herzberg goes further than Maslow, cutting the hierarchy off near the top and maintaining that motivation results only from some elements of esteem needs and self-actualisation. F) Clayton Alderfer’s "ERG Theory": An extension of the Herzberg and especially the Maslow content theories of work motivation comes from the work of Clayton Alderfer. Clayton Alderfer reworked Maslow’s need hierarchy to align it with the empirical research. His revised need hierarchy is labeled ERG theory i.e. Existence – Relatedness – Growth Existence (E) needs are concerned with the physiological well being. They are concerned mainly with providing basic material existence. The existence group provides our basic material existence requirements. They include Maslow’s physiological and safety needs. Relatedness (R) is concerned with the desire we have for maintaining important interpersonal relationships with other members in the group. These social and status desires require interaction with others. They align with Maslow’s social need and the external component. Growth (G) needs are the desire to be creative, to make a useful contribution and to have opportunities for personal growth. It is an intrinsic desire for personal development. These include the intrinsic component from Maslow’s esteem category and the characteristics included under self-actualisation. Alderfer viewed these needs as a continuum rather than as discrete categories arranged in a hierarchical manner. According the ERG theory, different needs can emerge simultaneously and people can move forward and backward through the continuum as the circumstances change. There is every possibility that a higher level need emerges before a lower level need, given the right circumstances. In addition to collapsing Maslow’s five into three, Alderfer’s ERG theory also differs from Maslow’s in that more than one need may be operative at the same time. If the gratification of a higher-level need is stifled, the desire to satisfy a lower-level need increases. ERG theory does not assume that there exists a rigid hierarchy. A person can be working on growth even though existence or relatedness needs are unsatisfied, or all three need categories could be operating at the same time. The ERG theory also contains a frustration-regression dimension. Maslow argued that an individual would stay at a certain need level until that need was satisfied. The theory argues that multiple needs can be operating as motivators at

12

Motivation

the same time. When a higher-order need level is frustrated, the individual’s desire to increase a lower-level need takes place. The 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 would be consistent with ERG theory. The major conclusions of this theory are : • In an individual, more than one need may be operative at the same time. • If a higher need goes unsatisfied then the desire to satisfy a lower need intensifies. • It also contains the frustration-regression dimension. A comparison of the three theories can be depicted as below:

Fredrick Herzberg Abraham Maslow Clayton Alderfer

Self Actualisation Growth

Self Esteem Motivators

Social Needs Relatedness

Security Needs Hygiene Factors

Physiological Needs Existence

G) Douglas McGregor's "Theory X and Theory Y": McGregor, in his book, "The Human side of Enterprise" states that people inside the organisation can be managed in two ways. The first is basically negative, which falls under the category X and the other is basically positive, which falls under the category Y. After viewing the way in which the manager dealt with employees, McGregor concluded that a manager’s view of the nature of human beings is based on a certain grouping of assumptions and that he or she tends to mould his or her behaviour towards subordinates according to these assumptions. Under the assumptions of Theory X : • Employees inherently do not like work and whenever possible, will attempt to avoid it. • Because employees dislike work, they have to be forced, coerced or threatened with punishment to achieve goals. • Employees avoid responsibilities and do not work till formal directions are issued. • Most workers place a greater importance on security over all other factors and display little ambition. In contrast under the assumptions of Theory Y : • Physical and mental effort at work is as natural as rest or play. • People do exercise self-control and self-direction if they are committed to those goals. • Average human beings are willing to take responsibility and exercise imagination, ingenuity and creativity in

solving the problems of the organisation. • That the way things are organised, the average human being’s brainpower is only partly used. On analysis of the assumptions it can be detected that Theory X assumes that lower-order of needs dominate individuals and Theory Y assumes that higher-order of needs dominate individuals. An organisation that is run on Theory X lines tends to be authoritarian in nature, the word "authoritarian" suggests such ideas as the "power to enforce obedience" and the "right to command." In contrast, Theory Y organisations can be described as "participative", where the aims of the organisation and of the individuals in it are integrated; individuals can achieve their own goals best by directing their efforts towards the success of the organisation. Whereas Maslow’s hierarchy is concerned with fulfilling the needs of the employees, Theory X concerns itself with using the threat of removing the factors that fulfil those needs. For example, instead of using salary increases and job safety to motivate employees, Theory X would use the threat of job loss and salary cuts to motivate employees. The problem with following Theory X is that over a period of a few years, managers will soon find themselves unable to effectively motivate employees. Using coercion and punishment, as suggested by Theory X, will only incite fear in the employees who will only put forth the effort to work under the watchful eye of the manager. The manager, however, cannot be present at all times, and hence fear is a bad motivator. In the absence of the manager, employees will not be motivated and will not strive for the organisation’s goals.

13

Motivation The assumptions of Theory Y about human nature are more optimistic than Theory X. Theory Y assumes that work, like play or rest is natural for human beings. We can all learn to commit ourselves to responsibilities when we believe in the goals. In addition, Theory Y assumes that everyone is capable of making good decisions, not just managers. In the framework of Maslow’s theory, Theory Y assumes that it is social, esteem and self-actualisation needs that are the driving forces that motivate employees. In this respect, managers who hold the assumptions of Theory Y have a wide range of alternatives they can utilise to motivate employees. For example, praise, and recognition by the manager, their co-workers, and customers can all be wonderful motivators for employees, especially those who are already at the highest level of pay for their position. Besides recognition, managers can give their employees the opportunity to participate in special committees which can provide friendships and a feeling of belonging for employees. The above are some examples of internal rewards that can serve as effective motivators. However, this theory has been criticised widely for generalisation of work and human behaviour. H) David McClelland’s "Theory of Needs": The one single motivating factor which has received the most attention in terms of research, is the need for achievement (n-achievement). As a result, we know more about n-achievement than any other motivational factor. Much of this knowledge is due the work of David McClelland of Harvard University. To illustrate what he means by the need for achievement, McClelland cites the following example: "Several years ago, a careful study was made of 450 workers who had been thrown out of work by a plant shutdown in Erie, Pennsylvania. Most of the unemployed workers stayed at home for a while and then checked with the employment service to see if their old jobs or similar ones were available. But a small minority among them behaved differently; the day they were laid off, they started job hunting. They checked both national and local employment offices; they studied the Help Wanted sections of the papers; they checked through their union, their church and various fraternal organisations; they looked into training courses to learn a new skill; they even left town to look for work, while the majority when questioned said they would not under any circumstances move away to obtain a job. Obviously the members of the active minority were differently motivated". David McClelland has developed a theory on three types of motivating needs, the need for achievement (n-achievement) the need for affiliation (n-affiliation) and the need for power (n-power). His testing procedure is concerned with the application of what is known as the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), a series of pictures which are presented to a subject, one at a time. The individual is asked to tell a story about each picture. The underlying assumption of the TAT procedure is that it will reveal the dominant thoughts and attitudes of subjects. For instance, an individual with high n-achievement will formulate stories concerned with getting things done, challenging situations, feelings of satisfaction at having done a good job and so on. The individual with a high n-affiliation will reflect sensitivity to the feelings of others, a desire for friendly relationships and a reference to situations which involve human interactions. High n-power subjects will relate stories reflecting the process of influencing others, controlling and manipulating others. 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, i.e, 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.

• Need for Achievement (n-achievement): Individuals with a high n-achievement have a number of distinctive characteristics which separate them from their peers. First of all, they like situations where they can take personal responsibility for finding solutions to problems. This allows them to gain personal satisfaction from their achievements. They do not like situations where success or failure results from chance. The important thing is that the outcome be the result of their own skill and effort. A second characteristic of high n-achievement people is that they like to set moderately high goals for themselves. These goals are neither so low that they can be achieved with little challenge, nor so high that they are impossible. High n-achievement individuals prefer goals that require all-out effort and the exercise of all their abilities. Once again, the achievement of this type of objective results in greater personal satisfaction. This phenomenon can be observed in very young children. A child may be given a game of ring toss, told that he or she scores whenever a ring lands over the peg and then left alone to play the game. McClelland comments: "Obviously children who stand next to the peg can score a ringer every time; but if they stand a long distance away, they will hardly ever get a ringer. The curious fact is that children with a high concern for achievement quite consistently stand at moderate

14

Motivation

distances from the peg where they are apt to get achievement satisfaction ... The ones with low n-achievement, on the other hand, distribute their choices of where to stand quite randomly over the entire distance. In other words, people with high n-achievement prefer a situation where there is a challenge, where there is some real risk of not succeeding, but not so great a risk that they might not overcome it by their own efforts". A third distinctive characteristic of high achievers is that they want concrete feedback on their performance. Only certain types of jobs provide this kind of feedback, however, and so some kinds of jobs are unattractive to high achievers. For instance, teachers receive only imprecise, hazy feedback as to the effectiveness of their efforts while production managers have a daily output chart to look at with either joy or disappointment. There are some additional minor characteristics possessed by high achievers. They tend to enjoy travel, are willing to give up a bird in the hand for two in the bush and prefer experts to friends as working partners. The image is clear; the high achiever is a personality type suited admirably to certain jobs and not others. It would be wrong to treat all individuals as high achievers and attempt to motivate them by offering them challenging jobs, rapid and objective feedback on performance and personal responsibility for success or failure. Achievement oriented people thrive on pursuing and attaining goals. People with a high need for achievement have an intense desire for success, are driven by the challenge of success and the fear of failure. They typically seek competitive situations in which they can achieve results through their own efforts and can receive relatively immediate feedback on their performance. They take a realistic approach to risk. They are characterised by restlessness and willingness to work for long hours. They do not worry too much about failure if it does not occur. Individuals with a high need for achievement can be a valuable source of creativity and innovative ideas in organisations. They are analytical in nature and take calculated risks. Such people are motivated to perform when they see at least some chances of success. Managers who want to motivate achievement oriented individuals need to set them challenging but attainable goals that provide an immediate feedback about their performance.

• Need for Affiliation (n-affiliation): The need for affiliation is similar to Maslow's need to belong. Affiliation refers to the desire to maintain warm, friendly relationships with others. In its most straightforward form, a need for affiliation manifests itself in a desire to be liked by others, to be part of a group, to enter into warm, personal relationships. In this category are the people who are social in nature. They try to affiliate themselves with individuals and groups. They are driven by love and faith. They experience pain when they are rejected. They like to build a friendly environment around themselves. It can be a dominant motivating force affecting behaviour and may manifest itself in many different ways. The novelist John O'Hara was supposedly obsessed with the fact that, not having a college degree, he was excluded from membership of certain clubs and societies. At the other end of the spectrum, James Coyne, a former Governor of the Bank of Canada, was described as the most unclubbable man in the country, as he held an aversion to joining groups. High n-affiliation people value relationships over accomplishments, and friendship over power. To move people with a high need for affiliation, managers should provide them with a congenial and supportive work environment in which they can meet both personal and organisational goals by working with others since social recognition and affiliation with others provides them motivation. They will prove to be assets in situations that require a high level of cooperation with and support of others, including clients and customers.

• Need for Power: Power refers to the desire to be influential and to have an impact in a group. Power motivated individuals see almost every situation as an opportunity to seize control, or dominate others. Basically people with a high need for power are inclined towards influence and control. They like to be at the centre and are good orators. They are demanding in nature, forceful in manners and ambitious in life. They can be motivated to perform if they are given key positions or power positions. They are willing to assert themselves when a decision has to be made. The power motive has significant implications for organisational leadership and for the informal, political aspects of organisations.

In studying the motivational profiles of North American managers, McClelland noticed that many of those who reach the top of organisations and are rated as highly effective in their positions, demonstrate a concern for influencing people. This is, in McClelland's terms, a need for power. This need is not simply seen as the raw desire to control others or simply to exert authority. McClelland makes the point that: "... this need must be disciplined and controlled so that it is directed toward the benefit of the institution as a whole and not toward the manager's personal aggrandisement. Moreover, the top manager's need for power ought to be greater than his or her need for being liked by people." Power motivation refers not to autocratic, tyrannical behaviour but to a need to have some impact, to be influential and effective in achieving organisational goals. The need for power has two forms: Personal and Institutional. People with a high need for personal power try to dominate others and to demonstrate their ability to wield power. They run into difficulties as managers because they often attempt to use the efforts of others for their own benefit. In contrast, individuals with a high need for institutional power focus on working with others to solve institutional problems and to further institutional goals. McClelland's work suggests that individuals with a high need for institutional power make the best managers because they are oriented toward co-ordinating the efforts of others to achieve long-term organisational goals. McClelland examined the motivational needs of a large group of managers whose units demonstrated varying degrees of morale. The most important factor, in predicting whether a manager's subordinates would exhibit high morale, turned

15

Motivation out to be how their need for power related to their need for affiliation. Teams which exhibited higher morale were those in which the manager's need or power exceeded their desire to be liked. McClelland puts forward the following explanation: "Sociologists have long argued that, for a bureaucracy to function effectively, those who manage it must be universalistic in applying rules. That is, if they make exceptions for the particular needs of individuals, the whole system will break down. The manager with a high need to be liked is precisely the one who wants to stay on good terms with everybody and therefore is the one most likely to make exceptions in terms of in terms of particular needs. .Sociological theory and our data both argue that the person whose need for affiliation is high does not make a good manager." Power-motivated managers, like achievement orientated managers and the affiliators, demonstrate distinct characteristics: • They are highly organisation-minded. They feel responsible for building organisations to which they belong. They

believe strongly in centralised authority. • They like to work. This is different from the high achiever who likes to minimise work by becoming more efficient.

While the high achiever minimises effort and maximises output, the power-motivated manager enjoys work for its own sake.

• They are willing to sacrifice some of their own self-interest for the good of the organisation. • They have a strong sense of justice, feeling that hard work and sacrifice should be rewarded. The picture of McClelland's power-motivated manager is reminiscent of the organisation man caricatured by William Whyte. The message seems to be that if one is dedicated to the institution, committed to the work ethic and unflagging in energy and devotion, success will follow. However, the increasing popularity of switching jobs as a method of rapid advancement and the rapidity of change in organisations somewhat contradicts this type of thinking. 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. McClelland observed that with the advancement in hierarchy the need for power and achievement increased rather than affiliation. He also observed that people who were at the top, later ceased to be motivated by these drives. The need profile of successful managers, in competitive environments, seem to indicate a moderate to high need for institutional power, a moderate need for achievement to facilitate individual contributions, a desire for the organisation to sustain a competitive edge and at least a minimum need for affiliation to maintain pleasant social relationships. While the need for achievement and power can be developed through training, it is difficult, in the short run, to develop the need for affiliation through training alone. I) "Goal Setting Theory" of Edwin Locke:

The Goal Setting Theory examines the effect that goal specificity, challenge and feedback have on performance and the impact of each of these on the motivation of the person. Instead of giving vague tasks to people, specific and pronounced objectives, help in achieving them faster. As the clarity is high, goal orientation also avoids any misunderstandings in the work of the employees. The goal setting theory states that when the goals to be achieved are set at a higher standard, then in that case employees are motivated to perform better and put in maximum effort. It revolves around the concept of "Self-efficacy" i.e. individual’s belief that he or she is capable of performing a hard task.

In the late 1960’s, Edwin Locke proposed that intentions to work towards a goal are a major source of work motivation. The goal tells the employee what needs to be done and how much effort will need to be expended. The evidence of

16

Motivation

empirical research strongly supports the value of goals. Specific goals increase performance, difficult goals, when accepted, result in higher performance than easy goals and feedback leads to higher performance than the absence of feedback.

Specific challenging goals produce higher levels of output than a generalised statement like “Do your best”. The specificity of the goal itself acts as an internal stimulus. For instance, when a truck driver agrees to make 12 round trips between two places each week, the intention gives him a specific objective to try and attain. All things being equal, the person with specific, challenging goals with outperform the person without such goals but who tries to do his/her best.

If factors such as ability and acceptance of the goals are held constant we can also state that the more challenging the goal, the higher the level of performance. However it is logical to assume that easier goals are more likely to be accepted, particularly in a work situation. If the employee accepts a challenging task, he or she will exert a higher level of effort till it is achieved, lowered or abandoned.

People do better when they get feedback on their progress and performance in the course of the achievement of the goals. Feedback helps the employee to identify discrepancies between what has been achieved and what is expected from the task and hence the feedback is a source of guidance in the achievement of the goal. However all feedback is not equally potent. Self generated feedback - ______for the employee is able to monitor his or her own progress – has been shown to be a more powerful motivator than externally generated feedback.

If employees have the opportunity to participate in the setting of their own goals, will they try harder? The evidence is mixed regarding the superiority of participative over assigned goals. In some cases, participatively set goals elicited superior performance, while in other cases, individuals performed best when assigned goals by their boss. But a major advantage of participation may be in increasing acceptance of the goal itself as a desirable one toward which to work. As we noted, resistance is greater when goals are difficult. If people participate in goal setting, they are more likely to accept even a difficult goal than if they are arbitrarily assigned it by their boss. The reason is that individuals are more committed to choices in which they have a part. Thus, although participative goals may have no superiority over assigned goals when acceptance is taken as a given, participation does increase the probability that more difficult goals will be agreed to and acted on.

Are there any contingencies in goal-setting theory or can we take it as a universal truth that difficult and specific goals will always lead to higher performance? In addition to feedback, four other factors have been found to influence the goal performance relationship. These are goal commitment, adequate self- efficacy, task characteristic and national culture. Goal-setting theory presupposes individual is committed to the goal; that is, is determined not to lower or abandon the goal. This is most likely to occur when goals are made public, when has an internal locus of control, and when the goals are self-set rather than assigned. Self-efficacy refers to an individual’s belief that he or she is capable of performing a task. The higher a person’s self-efficacy, the more confidence the person has in his or her ability to succeed in a task. So, in difficult situations, we find that people with low self-efficacy are more likely to lessen their effort or give up altogether while those with high self-efficacy will try harder to master thje challenge. In addition, individuals high in self-efficacy seem to respond to negative feedback with increased effort and motivation while those low in self-efficacy are likely to lessen their effort when given negative feedback.

Research indicates that individual goal setting does not work equally well on all tasks. The evidence suggests that goals seem to have a more substantial effect on performance when tasks are simple rather than complex, well learned rather than novel and independent rather than interdependent. On interdependent tasks, group goals are preferred. Finally goal setting theory is culture bound. It is well adapted in countries where individual accomplishment is favoured like the US and Canada. Hence in these countries, one can assume that employees will be reasonably independent (not too high a score on power distance), that managers and employees will seek and set challenging goals (low on uncertainity avoidance) and that performance is considered important by both (high in quality of life).

Hence intentions, as articulated in terms of challenging and specific goals, are a potent motivating force. Under the proper conditions, they can lead to higher performance. However, there is no evidence that such goals are associated with increased job satisfaction. J) Victor Vroom’s "Valence Expectancy Theory": Victor Vroom, of Carnegie-Mellon in Pittsburgh, has challenged the assertion of the human relationists that job satisfaction leads to increased productivity. (This theory has been called the contented cow approach to management.) The assumption is that if management keeps employees happy, they will respond by increasing productivity. Herzberg, in a delightful film of motivation, highlights the fallacy of this assumption with an interview between a manager and a secretary. The secretary is complaining about the job, and the manager lists all the things that have been done for the secretary - increases salary, new typewriter, better hours, status and so on - at the end of which she looks straight at him and asks, "So what have to done for me lately"? The point may be made that satisfied needs do not motivate people. Hygienes simply keep employees quiet for a time. For an individual to be motivated to perform a certain task, he or she must expect that completion of the task will lead to achievement of his or her goals. The task is not necessarily the goal itself but is often the means of goal attainment.

17

Motivation The most widely accepted explanations of motivation has been propounded by Victor Vroom. His theory is commonly known as the Expectancy Theory. Vroom defines motivation as a process governing choices from among alternative forms of voluntary behaviour. We may envisage an individual, occupying a role in an organisation, faced with a set of alternative voluntary behaviours, all of which have outcomes attached. If the person chooses behaviour 1, outcome A results; if 2 then outcome B results. The traditional view is that the choice reflects the strength of the individual's desire or indeed avoidance of a specific outcome at a certain time. Knowing that individuals choose behaviours in order to obtain certain outcomes is nothing new. The question is why they choose one outcome over another. The answer provided by the motivational theories above (Maslow, Herzberg, McClelland) is that the choice reflects the strength of the individual's desire or need for a specific outcome at a certain time. However, Vroom makes the point that task goals (productivity, quality standards or similar goals attached to jobs) are often means to an end, rather than the end in itself. There is a second level of outcomes which reflect the real goals of individuals and these may be attained, in varying degrees, through task behaviour. The Expectancy Theory, Vroom's innovation, brought in the concept of a chain of goals. Vroom maintains that we do things in our jobs in order to achieve second level rewards: "If a worker sees high productivity as a path leading to the attainment of one or more of his or her personal goals, he or she will tend to be a high producer. Conversely, if he or she sees low productivity as path to the achievement of his or her goals, he or she will tend to be a low producer". Vroom held that someone would be motivated to achieve something if - the need for that achievement was greater than for other that for other things; the expectation that the goal could be achieved; and the expectation that the achievement would lead to desired rewards. In other words, motivation can be indirect as well as direct and 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. Hence an employee will be motivated to exert a high level of effort when he/she believes that: • Effort will lead to a good performance appraisal. • That a good appraisal will lead to organizational rewards. • That the rewards will satisfy his/her personal goals. 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. The theory focuses on three key relationships: • Effort – Performance relationship: The probability perceived by the individual that exerting a given amount of

effort will lead to performance • 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 • 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 An individual is motivated to behave in a certain manner because (a) he or she has a strong desire for a certain task outcome and a reasonable expectation of achieving that outcome and (b) because he or she also expects that the achievement of the task outcome will result in reward in terms of pay, promotion, job security, or satisfaction of individual needs - physiological, safety, esteem and so on. Let us suppose a salesperson. The attainment of over-target results is a task goal for the individual. Why should a salesperson seek such attainment? Well, increased earnings through commission may be a goal but it may be that the salesperson sees achievement of over-target results as the route towards promotion to sales manager. Thus, in Vroom's terms, the salesperson is acting in the expectancy that (a) the over-target results can be achieved and (b) that they will lead to promotion. He contends that individuals consider three main issues before they expend the effort necessary to perform at a given level. The theory argues that the strength of a tendency to act in a specific 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. To make this simple, expectancy theory states that an employee can be motivated to perform better when there is a belief that better performance will lead to good performance appraisal and that this shall result into realisation of personal goal in form of some reward. Unlike the content theories, Victor Vroom's Expectancy Theory does not have a simplistic approach. It tries to analyse the complex motivational process. It does not strive to describe how motivational decisions are actually made or to solve actual motivational problems faced by a manager. Valence: Valence refers to the preference people have among various rewards for work. It is the importance the person attaches to the potential outcome or result or reward that can be achieved or the strength of a desire for something. It is the individual's assessment of the value of the outcome or result or reward. Valence arises out of the person's self as conditioned by his experience.

18

Motivation

THE PROCESS OF MOTIVATION

individuals will be motivated to reach

ertain outcomes. The

in a given situation and then combine the elements according to the general formula given by the expectancy theory

al will be motivated to perform at a desired level. None of the three elements should be zero or negative in

as a task goal, receive good ratings for internal

• tion that the achievement of this task goal will lead to desired rewards - promotion, increased security

r. We work with a chain of goals and rewards,

process of task, achievement, dividual and their personal goals.

nd Edward E. Lawler developed a more comprehensive version of motivation depending upon

individuals, leads to satisfaction. Hence, satisfaction th

intrinsic and

• ucture through careful planning, clear definition of duties and responsibilities and a good organisation structure.

Expectancy: Expectancy refers to the probability of getting a certain outcome with a certain set of actions. It is the probability that a particular set of actions will lead to a desired outcome. For individuals to exert an effort towards a goal, he/she must see a positive probability of the effort leading to that goal. All

Effort Performance Outcome

Expectancy E

Instrum talityenI

Valence V

the goal only if they see a connection between their effort and the performance. Instrumentality: Instrumentality is the probability that successful performance will lead to cmajor outcomes we consider are potential rewards such as incentives, bonuses, promotions, etc. The expectancy theory holds that individuals consider all three elements – valence, expectancy and instrumentality – in deciding whether or not to put forth the effort in a particular direction. People are likely to make global judgements about each of the three elements

: Motivation = Valence x Expectancy x Instrumentality.

The crux of the expectancy theory is that all three elements should be present, at last to a minimum level, before an individunature. Let us take a look at how the model works. Imagine a manager has customer service. The choice of this task goal reflects three things: • The strength of the need for good ratings versus some other goal. • The expectation that this goal can be achieved.

The expectaand so on.

Certainly Vroom has hit on an important aspect of motivation. We do not attempt simply to satisfy a need or even a set of needs in a straightforward, "If I do this, then I will achieve that" mannewhere goals in one area are only a means of achieving goals in another. As a contingency model, expectancy theory recognizes that there is no universal principle for explaining everyone’s motivations. For management, Vroom's insights mean that motivation is not a simplereward but depends upon an understanding of each inK) The Porter and Lawler Model of Motivation: Lyman W. Porter aexpectancy theory. The assumption that satisfaction always lead to performance, as in Victor Vroom's theory is not always true. In fact the opposite is often true. Performance can lead to satisfaction through the reward process. Actual performance in a job is primarily determined by the effort spent. But it is also effected by the person’s ability to do the job and also by individuals perception of what the required task is. So performance is the responsible factor that leads to intrinsic as well as extrinsic rewards. These rewards, along with the equity ofof e individual depends upon the fairness of the reward. Hence:

Performance is depende• nt on and is mediated by the abilities, traits, perceptions, etc. and the rewards that follow determine satisfaction. Rewarding performan• ce is an important component of motivation. The rewards should have an extrinsic component.

• Poor performance should not be rewarded as this leads to low instrumentality and low motivation. Managers should carefully assess their reward str

19

Motivation

L) J. Stacey Adam's "Equity Theory":

John Stacey Adams, workplace and behavioural psychologist, put forward his Equity Theory on job motivation in 1963. There are similarities with Charles Handy's extension and interpretation of previous simpler theories of Maslow, Herzberg and other pioneers of workplace psychology, in that the theory acknowledges that subtle and variable factors affect each individual's assessment and perception of their relationship with their work, and thereby their employer. Awareness and cognisance feature more strongly than in earlier models, as does the influence of colleagues and friends, etc, in forming cognisance, and in this particular model, 'a sense of what is fair and reasonable'. According to the Equity Theory of J. Stacey Adams, people are motivated by their beliefs about the reward structure as being fair or unfair, relative to the inputs. We each seek a fair balance between what we put into our job and what we get out of it. Adams calls these inputs and outputs. We form perceptions of what constitutes a fair balance or trade of inputs and outputs by comparing our own situation with other 'referents' (reference points or examples) in the market place. We are also influenced by colleagues, friends, partners in establishing these benchmarks and our own responses to them in relation to our own ratio of inputs to outputs. People have a tendency to use subjective judgement to balance the outcomes and inputs in the relationship for comparisons between different individuals. The inputs could cover a wide range of elements like education, experience, status, skills, performance, background, effort, etc. Outcomes could be pay, incentives, recognition, bonuses, work assignments, appreciation, status symbols, etc. Accordingly this theory states that employees will compare the ratio of what they put in (for example, experience, education, competence and effort) and get out of a job (for example, increases in salary, recognition and promotions) with what others are getting in a similar job. If a person perceives that the ratio of their input-outcome is inequitable relative to others, then dissatisfaction occurs. Humans like to enforce equity, so employees will attempt to correct the situation by either increasing performance or output when the perception is that they are over-rewarded, or decreasing performance or output when they feel they are under-rewarded. If people perceive that they are rewarded higher, they may be motivated to work harder. If people feel are that inputs are fairly and adequately rewarded by outputs (the fairness benchmark being subjectively perceived from market norms and other comparables references) then they are happy in their work and motivated to continue inputting at the same level. If they feel that their inputs out-weigh the outputs then they become demotivated in relation to their job and employer. If people feel that they are not equally rewarded they either reduce the quantity or quality of work or migrate to some other organisation. People respond to this feeling in different ways: generally the extent of demotivation is proportional to the perceived disparity between inputs and expected outputs. Some people reduce effort and application and become inwardly disgruntled, or outwardly difficult, recalcitrant or even disruptive. Other people seek to improve the outputs by making claims or demands for more reward, or seeking an alternative job. The referent that the employee selects adds to the complexity of the Equity Theory. Evidence indicates that the referent chosen is an important variable in the Equity Theory. There are four referent comparisons that an employee can use:

1.Self-inside: An employee’s experience in a different position inside his/her current organisation. 2.Self-outside: An employee’s experience in a situation or position outside his/her current organisation. 3.Other-inside: Another individual or group of individuals inside the organisation. 4.Other-outside: Another individual or group of individuals outside the organisation.

Employees might compare themselves to friends, neighbours, co-workers or colleagues in other organisations or compare their present job with past jobs they themselves 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 focussing on four moderating variables – gender, length of tenure, level in the organisation and amount of education or professionalism. Research shows that both men and women prefer same-gender comparisons. The research also demonstrates that women are typically paid less than men in comparable jobs and they have lower pay expectations

20

Motivation

than men for the same work. So a woman who uses another woman as a referent tends to calculate a lower comparative standard. This leads us to conclude that employees in jobs that are not gender-segregated will make more cross-gender comparisons than those in jobs that are either male or female dominated. This also suggests that if women are tolerant of lower pay it may be due to the comparative standard they use. Employees with a short tenure in their current organisation tend to have little information about others inside the organisation, so they rely on their own personal experience. In contrast, employees with long tenure rely more on their co-workers for comparison. Upper level employees, those in professional ranks and those with higher amounts of education tend to be more cosmopolitan and have better information about people in other organisations. Therefore, these types of employees will make more other-outside comparisons. Based on the Equity Theory, when employees experience inequity, they tend to make one of six choices: 1. Change their inputs – reduce the amount of effort. 2. Change their outcomes – individuals paid on a piece rate may increase their output to earn more. 3. Distort perceptions of self – “I used to think I worked at a moderate pace but now I realise that I work a lot harder

than everyone else”. 4. Distort perceptions of others – “A’s job is not as desirable as I previously thought it was”. 5. Choose a different referent – “I may not make as much as my brother but I am doing a lot better than my father

when he was my age”. 6. Leave the field – quit the job.

In light of the equity theory, an employee should be rewarded based on performance, and not length of service. What this means is that instead of promoting an employee based on seniority or length of service, all jobs should be posted and every employee having the specified qualifications should have an equal opportunity to compete for the job. Another example is that instead of automatically receiving a salary increase at the end of the year, salary increases should be based on job performance. Having rewards based on performance (meeting the required goals and objectives) rather than on length of service would be seen as being more equitable by most employees. The Equity Theory establishes the following propositions relating to inequitable rewards:

• Given payment by time, over-rewarded employees will produce more than equitably paid employees. Hourly and salaried employees will generate high quantity or quality of production in order to increase the input side of the ratio and bring about equity

• Given payment by quantity of production, over-rewarded employees with produce less quantity but higher quality of production than equitably paid employees. Individuals paid on a piece rate basis will increase efforts to achieve equity, which would result in greater quality or quantity. However increases in quantity will not increase inequity since every unit produced results in further over payment. Hence effort is directed toward increasing quality rather than increasing quantity.

• Given payment by time, under-rewarded employees will produce less or poorer quality of output. Effort will be decreased which will bring about lower productivity, poorer quality output than equitably paid employees.

• Given payment by quantity of production, under-rewarded employees will produce a large number of low-quality units in comparison with equitably paid employees. Employees paid on a piece rate basis can bring about equity because trading quality of output for quantity will result in an increase in rewards with no increase in their contribution.

These propositions have generally been supported with a few minor qualifications. Firstly, inequities created by overpayment do not seem to have a very significant impact on behaviour in most work situations. Apparently people have a great deal more tolerance of overpayment equities than of underpayment inequities or are better able to rationalise them. Second, not all people are equity sensitive. For example, it is a small part of the working population

21

Motivation who actually prefer that the output-input ratio be less than the referent comparison, Predictions from the equity theory are not likely to be very accurate with these tolerant types. It is also important to note that while most research on the Equity Theory focussed on pay, employees seem to look for equity in the distribution of other organizational rewards. Studies have shown that the use of high status titles as well as large, lavishly appointed offices may function as outcomes for some employees in their equity equation. 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. The evidence indicates that distributive justice has a greater influence on employee satisfaction than procedural justice, while procedural justice tends to affect an employee’s organizational commitment, trust in his or her boss, and intention to quit. A manager should consider openly sharing information on how allocations are made, following consistent and unbiased procedures and engage in similar practices to increase the perception of procedural justice. By increasing the perception of procedural fairness, employees are likely to view their bosses and the organisation as positive even if they are dissatisfied with pay, promotions, and other personal outcomes. Organisational citizenship behaviour is significantly influenced by perceptions of fairness. So the evidence indicates that although distributive justice issues such as pay are important, perceptions of procedural justice are particularly important and relevant to organisational citizenship behaviour. So another advantage from employee perception of fair treatment is that they will be more satisfied and reciprocate by volunteering for extra job activities and helping others and engaging in similar positive behaviour. 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. Despite limitations like lack of concrete guidance on the methods to restore equity, research on the equity theory supports its primary contentions. The theory highlights the importance of the social comparison process and goes beyond the expectancy theory as a cognitive explanation of work motivation. M) B. F. Skinner's "Reinforcement Theory": B. F. Skinner, who propounded the reinforcement theory, holds that by designing the environment properly, individuals can be motivated. Instead of considering internal factors like impressions, feelings, attitudes and other cognitive behaviour, individuals are directed by what happens in the environment external to them. Skinner states that work environment should be made suitable to the individuals and that punishments actually leads to frustration and de-motivation. Hence, the only way to motivate is to keep on making positive changes in the external environment of the organisation. Skinner’s theory is based on reinforcing or punishing observable behaviours which can be measured. Instead of looking at the internal needs, drives, emotions and attitudes, B. F. Skinner believed in studying the external observable behaviours to determine what motivates people. According to the reinforcement theory, there are four ways to modify behaviour. The first and most effective way is positive reinforcement, which refers to rewarding a desirable behaviour to strengthen the likelihood that it will occur again in the future. What this means is that it is the consequences of our behaviour that provide us with motivation. For example, in an organisation where customer service is a top priority, if a manager wanted to motivate the staff to give excellent customer service, then praise and recognition should be given by the manager for employees who go above and beyond their responsibilities in customer service. The second way a manager can modify behaviour is negative reinforcement which is defined as removing a negative stimulus in the environment after a behaviour occurs. For example, a clerk who has respect and admiration for his or her manager will view a lecture for being late to work as a negative stimulus. In the future, in order to avoid more lectures, the clerk would strive to go to work on time. It is the removal of the lectures that serves as motivation in this situation. According to Skinner, a third way to modify behaviour is punishment which decreases the probability that a behaviour will occur. This works on the principle that punishment is something unpleasant that humans will try to avoid. Punishment can include criticism, reprimands, and demotions for behaviours that hinder the achievement of the organisation’s goals. The last method of behaviour modification is the lack of reinforcement, the idea being that if a behaviour is not reinforced in any way, then it would decrease in frequency and then get eliminated. For example, if a person is constantly making jokes and funny faces in an effort to gain attention, and the aim of such tactics are ignored, then very soon this behaviour will cease.

The Reinforcement Theory is a counterpoint to the Goal Setting Theory. The Goal Setting Theory is a cognitive approach while the Reinforcement Theory takes a behavioural approach which argues that reinforcement conditions behaviour. The two are clearly at odds in philosophy. Reinforcement theorists see behaviour as being environmentally caused. One need not be concerned with internal cognitive events. What controls behaviour are reinforcers, i.e. any consequence that when immediately following a response, increases the probability that the behaviour will be repeated.

22

Motivation

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. Since it does not concern with what initiates behaviour, it is not, strictly speaking, a theory of motivation. But it does provide a powerful means of analysis of what controls behaviour and it is for this reason that it ism typically considered to be a theory of motivation.

Although the primary function of reinforcers is to condition behaviour and the theory ignores feelings, attitudes, expectations and other cognitive variables that are known to have an impact on behaviour, it has a role as a motivational tool. Often the findings of research on reinforcers are used to interpret the findings in a cognitive framework. Though reinforcement has an important influence on behaviour, few scholars are prepared to argue that it is the only or most important influence. The behaviour one engages in at work and the amount of time allocated in each task are affected primarily by the consequences that follow or are expected to follow from one’s behaviour. If one is constantly reprimanded for outperforming ones colleagues, the person will be likely to reduce the productivity. But the lower productivity could also be explained in terms of goals, inequity or expectancies. N) Cognitive Evaluation Theory: According to this theory, a shift from external rewards to internal rewards results in motivation. It believes that even after the stoppage of external stimulus, internal stimulus survives. It relates to the pay structure in the organisation. Instead of treating external factors like pay, incentives, promotion etc. and internal factors like interests, drives, responsibility etc. separately, they should be treated as contemporary to each other. The cognition is to be such that even when external motivators are not there, internal motivation continues. However, in practice extrinsic rewards are given much more weightage.

In the late 1960’s, one researcher proposed that the introduction of extrinsic rewards, such as pay for work effort that had been previously intrinsically rewarded due to the pleasure associated with the content and impact of the work would tend to decrease the overall level of motivation. This proposal, which has since been called the Cognitive Evaluation Theory, has been extensively researched and a large number of studies have supported the proposal. The major implication of this theory relate to the way people are rewarded in organisations.

Traditionally, motivation theorists have assumed that intrinsic motivation such as achievement, responsibility and competence were independent of extrinsic motivators such as high pay, promotions, good inter-personal relations and a positive working environment. Consequently, stimulation in the former would not have an appreciable effect on the latter. But the Cognitive Evaluation Theory suggests otherwise. The theory argues that when extrinsic rewards like payoffs for superior performance are used by an organisation the intrinsic rewards which are derived from the individuals doing what is acceptable and pleasurable for them are reduced. In other words, when extrinsic rewards are given to someone for performing an interesting task, it causes the intrinsic interest in the task itself to decline.

The popular explanation for this observed phenomenon is that the individual experiences a loss of control over his or her own behaviour so that the previous intrinsic motivation diminishes. Additionally. The elimination of extrinsic rewards can produce a shift from an external to an internal explanation in an individual’s perception of the cause as to why he or she works on a task. If one reads a novel a week because the formal course of study prescribes it, the reading behaviour is externally controlled. However, after the completion of the course, if the person continues reading a novel a week because he or she likes reading novels, the behaviour is internally controlled.

The Cognitive Evaluation Theory has major implications for managerial practices. Compensation specialists have, over the years, opined that if pay or other extrinsic rewards are to be effective motivators, hey should be made contingent on an individual’s performance. However, Cognitive Evaluation theorists argue that this would only tend to decrease the internal satisfaction that is intrinsic in the job. Hence it would make sense to make an individual’s pay and compensation non-contingent on performance in order to avoid decreasing motivation.

The Cognitive Evaluation Theory has been supported by numerous studies and empirical research findings. However, it has also been attacked, primarily on the methodology used for such studies and the interpretation of the findings. Hence further research is imperative to determine the interdependence of extrinsic and intrinsic rewards. However their impact on motivation may be less than originally thought. Most of the studies testing the theory were done on students and not in an organisational work setting. The researchers would study the impact of a reward on student behaviour and what happens when the reward is withdrawn. Although this is interesting, it does not reflect a typical work situation in an organisation where the withdrawal of rewards is equated with a sense of belongingness with the organisation. Secondly, the evidence indicates that very high intrinsic motivation jobs are strongly resistant to the detrimental effects of extrinsic rewards. Even when a job is inherently interesting, there still exists a powerful norm for extrinsic motivation. At the other extreme, on dull and uninteresting tasks extrinsic rewards appear to increase basic motivation. Therefore the theory may have a limited applicability to work situations because most low-level jobs are not inherently satisfying enough to sustain high intrinsic interest and many managerial and professional positions offer extrinsic rewards. Cognitive Evaluation Theory may be relevant to that set of organisational jobs that fall in between the above two – those that are neither extremely dull and uninteresting nor are extremely interesting.

23

Motivation O) Flow and Intrinsic Motivation Theory

Often in life, one is so engrossed in an activity that one looses track of time. Most often this occurs when one is doing something that one enjoys. Athletes refer to this as being “in the zone” Motivation researchers refer to this stage of absolute concentration as “Flow”

A key element of this experience is that it is unrelated to goals. The activity that people are pursuing when they achieve the timeless feeling of flow comes from the process of the activity itself rather than from trying to reach a goal. Hence when a person experiences flow he or she is completely intrinsically motivated.

Surprisingly, people who are experiencing flow need not feel happy while in the process. However, once the flow task is completed and the person looks back on what has happened, he or she is flooded with feelings of gratitude for the experience. It is then that the feeling of satisfaction is realised. And it is the desire to repeat the experience that creates continued motivation.

People who have experienced flow motivation have described common characteristics in the kinds of tasks they were doing. The tasks were challenging and required using a high level of skills. The tasks were goal directed and the persons had feedback on their performance as well as the expectations. The task required such high levels of concentration, and creativity that the persons had no attention left over to think about anything irrelevant or unconnected with the task or to worry about problems. Although the tasks were goal directed, it was not the goal that provided the motivation but the task itself.

A surprising finding of research on flow motivation is that it is rarely experienced with activities associated with leisure and it is more likely to be experienced at work than at home. Often people link leisure with happiness and think that with more free time they would be happier. However, many studies have shown that when at home or doing leisure activities, people lack purpose and clear goals, don’t know how well they are doing things, get distracted and feel that their skills are not adequately used. They often describe themselves as feeling bored. However work has many characteristics that stimulate flow – i.e. clear goals, feedback either from then process itself or through evaluations of some kind and the person’s skills are typically matched to their jobs which provides challenge. Such jobs usually encourage concentration and prevent distraction and promote the experience of flow.

A clearer understanding of flow has been offered in Ken Thomas’s model of Intrinsic Motivation. This extension of the flow concept identifies key elements that create intrinsic motivation.

Thomas describes employees as intrinsically motivated when they genuinely care about their work, look for better ways to do it and are energised and fulfilled by doing it well. As with flow, the rewards an employee gets from intrinsic motivation comes from the work itself rather than from external factors like increases in pay or compliments for the superiors. The model proposes that intrinsic motivation is achieved when people experience feelings of choice, competence, meaningfulness and progress. He defines these components as follows: • Choice is the opportunity to be able to select tasks and activities that make sense to you and to perform them in

ways that seem appropriate. • Competence is the accomplishment you feel in skilfully performing tasks and activities. • Meaningfulness is the opportunity to pursue a worthy task purpose that matters in the larger scheme of things. • Progress is the feeling that you are making significant advancement in achieving the task’s purpose.

Thomas reports a number of studies demonstrating that these four components of intrinsic motivation are significantly related to improved job satisfaction and increased performance as rated by supervisors. However, almost all the studies reported by Thomas were done with professional and managerial employees. Whether these four components will predict intrinsic motivation with the rank and file blue-collar workers is unclear.

Thomas’s model of Intrinsic Motivation links with the concept of Flow. When a task in meaningful, people resent the time they have to spend on other less meaningful tasks. They are totally absorbed in the intrinsic task, thinking about it all the time. We should even expect them to borrow time from other activities in order to devote more time to something that is meaningful. When a task provides a flow experience, a person is typically free to choose to work on that task in contrast to others. Competence also stimulates the flow experience. We tend to be most engaged in a task when we are performing activities competently, having all our attention on meeting the challenge of the activities we are performing. Finally, progress enhances feelings that our time and efforts are paying off. You feel enthusiastic about the task and are eager to keep investing your time and effort in it.

24

Motivation

P) Rensis Likert's Four Systems of Management: Rensis Likert developed a refined classification, breaking down organisations into four management systems based on the style of management used in the organisation with reference to task orientation and people orientation as a bi-polar construct: 1st System – Primitive Authoritarian: This represents a dictatorial behaviour with all decisions made by the individual and very little employee participation. The individuals are highly autocratic, have little trust in subordinates, motivate people through fear and reprisal and limit decision making to the top. 2nd System – Benevolent Authoritarian: Its individuals have a patronising confidence and trust in subordinates, solicit some ideas and opinions from subordinates, motivate them with rewards and some fear and punishment and allow for a limited degree of decision making with close policy control. 3rd System – Consultative: Individual in this system have substantial but not complete confidence in their subordinates. They solicit ideas and advice from their subordinates while retaining the right to make the final decision. It involves using rewards for motivation, occasional punishment for non-performance, some participation, upward and downward communication flow, acting consultatively in general and making broad policy and general decisions at the top while allowing specific decisions to be made at lower levels. 4th System – Participative: Individuals in this system have complete trust and confidence in their subordinates in all matters. They use them always to get ideas and opinions and use the advice and opinions constructively. They encourage decision making throughout the organisation and engage in much upward and downward communication and with peers. They operate among themselves and with their subordinates as a group. According to Likert, the system 4 is the best, not only for profitable organisations, but also for non-profit making firms since they were most effective in setting goals and achieving them and were generally more productive. High productivity is also associated with system 3 while systems 1 and 2 are characterised by a significantly lower output.

25

Motivation

CASE STUDY: PIKETON RESEARCH AND EXTENSION CENTRE AND ENTERPRISE CENTRE: The purpose of this case study was to describe the importance of certain factors in motivating employees at the Piketon Research and Extension Centre and Enterprise Centre. Specifically, the study sought to describe the ranked importance of the following ten motivating factors: 1.Job security 2.Sympathetic help with personal problems 3.Personal loyalty to employees 4.Interesting work 5.Good working conditions

6.Tactful discipline 7.Good wages 8.Promotions and growth in the organisation 9.Feeling of being in on things 10.Full appreciation of work done.

A secondary purpose of the study was to compare the results of this study with the study results from other populations. Methodology The research design for this study employed a descriptive survey method. The target population of this study included employees at the Piketon Research and Extension Centre and Enterprise Centre (centres). The sample size included all 25 employees of the target population. Twenty-three of the 25 employees participated in the survey for a participation rate of 92%. The centres are in Piketon, Ohio. The mission of the Enterprise Centre is to facilitate individual and community leader awareness and provide assistance in preparing and accessing economic opportunities in southern Ohio. The Enterprise Centre has three programs: alternatives in agriculture, small business development, and women's business development. The mission of the Piketon Research and Extension Centre is to conduct research and educational programs designed to enhance economic development in southern Ohio. The Piketon Research and Extension Centre has five programs: aquaculture, community economic development, horticulture, forestry, and soil and water resources. From a review of literature, a survey questionnaire was developed to collect data for the study (Bowen & Radhakrishna, 1991; Harpaz, 1990; Kovach, 1987). Data was collected through use of a written questionnaire hand-delivered to participants. Questionnaires were filled out by participants and returned to an intra-departmental mailbox. The questionnaire asked participants to rank the importance of ten factors that motivated them in doing their work: 1=most important . . . 10=least important. Face and content validity for the instrument were established using two administrative and professional employees at The Ohio State University. The instrument was pilot tested with three similarly situated employees within the university. As a result of the pilot test, minor changes in word selection and instructions were made to the questionnaire. Results and Discussion: The ranked order of motivating factors were: 1.Interesting work 2.Good wages 3.Full appreciation of work done 4.Job security 5.Good working conditions

6.Promotions and growth in the organisation 7.Feeling of being in on things 8.Personal loyalty to employees 9.Tactful discipline 10.Sympathetic help with personal problems.

A comparison of these results to Maslow's need-hierarchy theory provides some interesting insight into employee motivation. The number one ranked motivator, interesting work, is a self-actualising factor. The number two ranked motivator, good wages, is a physiological factor. The number three ranked motivator, full appreciation of work done, is an esteem factor. The number four ranked motivator, job security, is a safety factor. Therefore, according to Maslow (1943), if managers wish to address the most important motivational factor of Centres employees, interesting work, physiological, safety, social, and esteem factors must first be satisfied. If managers wished to address the second most important motivational factor of centres employees, good pay, increased pay would suffice. Contrary to what Maslow's theory suggests, the range of motivational factors are mixed in this study. Maslow's conclusions that lower level motivational factors must be met before ascending to the next level were not confirmed by this study. The following example compares the highest ranked motivational factor (interesting work) to Vroom's expectancy theory. Assume that a Centres employee just attended a staff meeting where he/she learned a major emphasis would be placed on seeking additional external program funds. Additionally, employees who are successful in securing funds will be given more opportunities to explore their own research and extension interests (interesting work). Employees who do not secure additional funds will be required to work on research and extension programs identified by the director. The employee realises that the more research he/she does regarding funding sources and the more proposals he/she writes, the greater the likelihood he/she will receive external funding. Because the state legislature has not increased appropriations to the centres for the next two years (funds for independent research and extension projects will be scaled back), the employee sees a direct relationship between performance (obtaining external funds) and rewards (independent research and Extension projects). Further, the employee went to work for the centres, in part, because of the opportunity to conduct independent research and extension projects. The employee will be motivated if he/she is successful in obtaining external funds and given the

26

Motivation

opportunity to conduct independent research and extension projects. On the other hand, motivation will be diminished if the employee is successful in obtaining external funds and the director denies the request to conduct independent research and Extension projects. The following example compares the third highest ranked motivational factor (full appreciation of work done) to Adams's equity theory. If an employee at the centres feels that there is a lack of appreciation for work done, as being too low relative to another employee, an inequity may exist and the employee will be demotivated. Further, if all the employees at the centres feel that there is a lack of appreciation for work done, inequity may exist. Adams (1965) stated employees will attempt to restore equity through various means, some of which may be counter- productive to organisational goals and objectives. For instance, employees who feel their work is not being appreciated may work less or undervalue the work of other employees. This final example compares the two highest motivational factors to Herzberg's two-factor theory. The highest ranked motivator, interesting work, is a motivator factor. The second ranked motivator, good wages is a hygiene factor. Herzberg, Mausner, & Snyderman (1959) stated that to the degree that motivators are present in a job, motivation will occur. The absence of motivators does not lead to dissatisfaction. Further, they stated that to the degree that hygienes are absent from a job, dissatisfaction will occur. When present, hygienes prevent dissatisfaction, but do not lead to satisfaction. In our example, the lack of interesting work (motivator) for the centres employees would not lead to dissatisfaction. Paying centres employees lower wages (hygiene) than what they believe to be fair may lead to job dissatisfaction. Conversely, employees will be motivated when they are doing interesting work and but will not necessarily be motivated by higher pay. The discussion above, about the ranked importance of motivational factors as related to motivational theory, is only part of the picture. The other part is how these rankings compare with related research. A study of industrial employees, conducted by Kovach (1987), yielded the following ranked order of motivational factors: (a) interesting work, (b) full appreciation of work done, and (c) feeling of being in on things. Another study of employees, conducted by Harpaz (1990), yielded the following ranked order of motivational factors: (a) interesting work, (b) good wages, and (c) job security. In this study and the two cited above, interesting work ranked as the most important motivational factor. Pay was not ranked as one of the most important motivational factors by Kovach (1987), but was ranked second in this research and by Harpaz (1990). Full appreciation of work done was not ranked as one of the most important motivational factors by Harpaz (1990), but was ranked second in this research and by Kovach (1987). The discrepancies in these research findings supports the idea that what motivates employees differs given the context in which the employee works. What is clear, however, is that employees rank interesting work as the most important motivational factor. Implications for Piketon Research and Extension Centre and Enterprise Centre The ranked importance of motivational factors of employees at the centres provides useful information for the centres director and employees. Knowing how to use this information in motivating centres employees is complex. The strategy for motivating centres employees depends on which motivation theories are used as a reference point. If Herzberg's theory is followed, management should begin by focusing on pay and job security (hygiene factors) before focusing on interesting work and full appreciation of work done (motivator factors). If Adams' equity theory is followed, management should begin by focusing on areas where there may be perceived inequities (pay and full appreciation of work done) before focusing on interesting work and job security. If Vroom's theory is followed, management should begin by focusing on rewarding (pay and interesting work) employee effort in achieving organisational goals and objectives. Regardless of which theory is followed, interesting work and employee pay appear to be important links to higher motivation of centres employees. Options such as job enlargement, job enrichment, promotions, internal and external stipends, monetary, and non-monetary compensation should be considered. Job enlargement can be used (by managers) to make work more interesting (for employees) by increasing the number and variety of activities performed. Job enrichment can used to make work more interesting and increase pay by adding higher level responsibilities to a job and providing monetary compensation (raise or stipend) to employees for accepting this responsibility. These are just two examples of an infinite number of methods to increase motivation of employees at the centres. The key to motivating centres employees is to know what motivates them and designing a motivation program based on those needs. The results presented in this paper also have implications for the entire Co-operative Extension System. The effectiveness of Extension is dependent upon the motivation of its employees (Chesney, 1992; Buford, 1990; Smith, 1990). Knowing what motivates employees and incorporating this knowledge into the reward system will help Extension identify, recruit, employ, train, and retain a productive workforce. Motivating Extension employees requires both managers and employees working together (Buford, 1993). Extension employees must be willing to let managers know what motivates them, and managers must be willing to design reward systems that motivate employees. Survey results, like those presented here, are useful in helping Extension managers determine what motivates employees (Bowen & Radhakrishna, 1991). If properly designed reward systems are not implemented, however, employees will not be motivated.

27

Motivation References Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology. New York: Academic Press. Baker, B., & Sandore, B. (1991). Motivation in turbulent times: In search of the epicurean work ethic. Journal of Library Administration, 14(4), 37-50. Bedeian, A. G. (1993). Management (3rd ed.). New York: Dryden Press. Blessing, B. (1986). The muscles behind the smiles. Training, 23(10), 85-92. Bowen, B. E., & Radhakrishna, R. B. (1991). Job satisfaction of agricultural education faculty: A constant phenomena. Journal of Agricultural Education, 32 (2). 16-22. Buford, J. A., Jr., Bedeian, A. G., & Lindner, J. R. (1995). Management in Extension (3rd ed.). Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Extension. Buford, J. A., Jr. (1990). Extension management in the information age. Journal of Extension, 28 (1). Buford, J. A., Jr. (1993). Be your own boss. Journal of Extension, 31 (1). Chesney, C. E. (1992). Work force 2000: is Extension agriculture ready? Journal of Extension, 30 (2). Dickson, W. J. (1973). Hawthorne experiments. In C. Heyel (ed.), The encyclopaedia of management, 2nd ed. (pp. 298-302). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Harpaz, I. (1990). The importance of work goals: an international perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 21. 75-93. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to work. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Higgins, J. M. (1994). The management challenge (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan. Kovach, K. A. (1987). What motivates employees? Workers and supervisors give different answers. Business Horizons, 30. 58-65. Kreitner, R. (1995). Management (6th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, July 1943. 370-396. Robbins, S. P., & Stuart-Kotze, R. (1990). Motivating employees. Management concepts and applications (2nd ed., pp. 368-397). Scarborough, Ontario: Prentice-Hall Canada. Rothstein, S. (1986). Professional staff in Canadian university libraries. Library Journal, 111(18), November 1, 31-34. Sever, S., & Westcott, F. (1983). Motivational basis for compensation strategies in a library environment. College & Research Libraries, 44(3), 228-235. Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and Human Behavior. New York: Free Press. Smith, D., & Burgin, R. (1991). The motivations of professional and paraprofessional librarians for participating in continuing education programs. Library & Information Science Research, 13, 405-429 Smith, G. P. (1994). Motivation. In W. Tracey (ed.), Human resources management and development handbook (2nd ed.). Smith, K. L. (1990). The future of leaders in Extension. Journal of Extension, 28 (1). Stueart, R. D., & Moran, B. B. (1993). Directing. Library and information centre management (4th ed., pp. 193-211). Englewood, Colorado: Libraries Unlimited. Terpstra, D. E. (1979). Theories of motivation: borrowing the best. Personnel Journal, 58. 376. Thapisa, A. P. N. (1991). The motivation syndrome: Job satisfaction through the pay nexus. International Library Review, 23(2), 141-158). Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.

28

Motivation

CASE STUDY: MOTIVATION AND ITS PRACTICAL APPLICATION IN PUBLIC LIBRARIES By Janice Cheung Introduction The success of every organisation depends on the ability of managers to provide a motivating environment for its employees. Motivated employees are more productive, happier and stay with the organisation longer. Good managers need to find out what motivates their staff. This paper will explore the many different theories of motivation and their practical applications in a public library. Hierarchy Of Needs Theory Human beings are motivated by many different things that are related to our various needs, desires and drives. Many theories of motivation have been proposed over the years to try to explain why employee A is a punctual hard worker and employee B is often late and performs just the minimal requirements of the job. There are three early theories of motivation that are still very well known today. The first theory, called the hierarchy of needs theory, was proposed by Abraham Maslow (Robbins & Stuart-Kotze, 1990, p. 371; Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 202). Maslow believed that within every individual, there exists a hierarchy of five needs and that each level of need must be satisfied before an individual pursues the next higher level of need. As an individual progresses through the various levels of needs, the preceding needs loses their motivational value. The five levels of needs, according to Maslow are: 1. Physiological needs. These needs include food, water and shelter which are essential for us to survive. If these

needs are not met, then all other needs will not be a source of motivation. 2. Safety needs. This refers to the need to feel safe from physical and emotional harm. 3. Social needs. These needs are concerned with social interactions with others. The individual needs to feel a sense

of belonging, affection, acceptance, and friendship. 4. Esteem needs. Esteem is concerned with the feelings of self-confidence derived from achieving something, and the

recognition and prestige that comes with that achievement. 5. Self-actualisation needs. This level of needs is concerned with achieving one’s full potential and dreams. If we were to apply Maslow’s theory to a public library, then we can assume that newly hired library assistants will start at the bottom of Maslow’s hierarchy. Managers should use salary increases as a reward for good job performance. The underlying assumption is that an increase in salary will help new library assistants pay for their food, rent and help them to start their own families. This is analogous to fulfilling their physiological needs. After their physiological needs are meet, a manager should then look at using the safety needs to motivate library assistants. What can be assumed is that the library will have already provided a physically safe environment in which to work. In addition to a physically safe environment, the library can also address the concerns for future safety. (Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 203). For example, managers may offer job security such as protection by seniority. This allows the library assistants to feel reasonably secure that their physiological needs will be met in the future - that they will have money to buy food and pay rent. According to Maslow’s theory, after the safety needs are met, social needs become a strong force of motivation. For good job performance, managers can offer the opportunity for teamwork on projects for the library. For instance, different public branches can have friendly competition on decorating the library for the different seasons thus encouraging teamwork. This teamwork will satisfy the social needs by promoting feelings of belonging and fostering friendships between the employees. Once the first three needs are met, managers can use the esteem needs of their employees to motivate them. There are many ways for managers to provide their employees with both self-esteem and the esteem of others. (Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 204). For example, managers can involve interested staff with both the policy and decision making of the library. This gives staff the control over changes made, as well as pride at what they have accomplished towards the success of the library. Along with the involvement of staff in decision-making, managers can also compliment the library assistants for their extra efforts made towards achieving the library’s goals, or have their achievements published in a newsletter that is distributed to all employees. The recognition of their accomplishments by themselves and others gives them self-confidence and the feelings of prestige. According to Stueart & Moran, "esteem needs are rarely completely filled. . . .[therefore, they] can be a potent and reliable source of motivation" (Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 204). For most library employees who have worked at the same job and library for a long time, it may be the fulfilment of their employees’ esteem needs that managers need to concentrate their efforts on to motivate their employees. The final need is self-actualisation, which is achieving one’s full potential, "to become everything that one is capable of becoming" (Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 202). Self-actualisation includes knowing and accepting oneself, being a socially responsible person, fulfilling one’s dreams, being open to new ideas and change, and many other positive characteristics. This complex stage of development is rarely completely achieved by anyone, but the library can provide opportunities for realisation of some of these positive characteristics. For library assistants, this may mean advancing to the highest level of administration to gain the power and authority to initiate changes or programs that they believe in

29

Motivation and feel deeply about. For others, it may be just as rewarding to teach English as a second language as part of a library program, helping immigrants function in a new country. There have been many people who have criticised Maslow’s hierarchy as being too simple and rigid. Humans are psychologically very complex with needs that overlap each other at different times (Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 204). Others have argued that we have interpreted Maslow’s theory too literally (Baker & Sandore, 1991, p. 42). Instead, even if a level of need has been met in the past, this does not mean that this same level of need will not again become a source of motivation in a different situation. If we consider the rapid technological changes occurring in today’s public libraries, we see that many librarians require computer training to become competent in searching automated catalogues and databases to answer reference questions. Technology and budget cuts have also forced managers to rethink staffing needs. All of these changes can affect the job security and self-confidence of employees. Librarians who were once motivated by esteem needs may go back down the hierarchy to safety needs, worrying about the security of their jobs and their future ability to continue to pay for food and shelter. Managers need to recognise that changes such as technological change can alter their employees' perception of their needs and so motivate them accordingly. By understanding their employees’ needs, managers can understand what rewards would serve to motivate them. Theory X and Theory Y Another early theory of motivation was proposed by Douglas McGregor and is simply called Theory X and Theory Y (Robbins & Stuart-Kotze, 1990, p. 372; Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 196). These two theories are related to the assumptions that managers hold about human nature. As observed by McGregor, these assumptions then determine the behaviour of managers towards their employees. Theory X assumes that people are naturally lazy and will avoid work and responsibilities if possible. This theory also holds the assumption that employees are mostly concerned about their job security above everything else. With these assumptions in mind, Theory X states that in order for managers to motivate their employees, they must use coercion and punishment to ensure that they achieve the goals of the organisation. Whereas Maslow’s hierarchy is concerned with fulfilling the needs of the employees, Theory X concerns itself with using the threat of removing the factors that fulfil those needs. For example, instead of using salary increases and job safety to motivate employees, Theory X would use the threat of job loss and salary cuts to motivate employees. The problem with following Theory X is that over a period of a few years, managers will soon find themselves unable to effectively motivate employees. Using coercion and punishment, as suggested by Theory X, will only incite fear in the employees who will only put forth the effort to work under the watchful eye of the manager. The manager, however, cannot be present at all times, and hence fear is a bad motivator. In the absence of the manager, employees will not be motivated and will not strive for the library’s goals. The assumptions of Theory Y about human nature are more optimistic than Theory X. Theory Y assumes that work, like play or rest is natural for human beings (Robbins & Stuart-Kotze, 1990, p. 372). We can all learn to commit ourselves to responsibilities when we believe in the goals. In addition, Theory Y assumes that everyone is capable of making good decisions, not just managers. In the framework of Maslow’s theory, Theory Y assumes that it is social, esteem and self-actualisation needs that are the driving forces that motivate employees. In this respect, managers who hold the assumptions of Theory Y have a wide range of alternatives they can utilise to motivate employees. For example, praise, and recognition by the manager, their co-workers, and customers can all be wonderful motivators for public library employees, especially those who are already at the highest level of pay for their position. Besides recognition, managers can give their employees the opportunity to participate in special committees which can provide friendships and a feeling of belonging for employees. The above are some examples of internal rewards that can serve as effective motivators. Motivation-Hygiene Theory The third theory is the motivation-hygiene theory proposed by Frederick Herzberg (Baker & Sandore, 1991, p. 43; Robbins & Stuart-Kotze, 1990, p. 373; Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 204). Herzberg and his colleagues were interested in finding out what factors in a job contributed to an employee’s satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Findings from their research showed that there were two groups of factors which contributed to employee satisfaction. The first group of factors are referred to as motivators, which are described as increasing job satisfaction for employees. These factors include being recognised for their work, obtaining the trust of their managers so that they are allowed to work without supervision, having responsibilities, and advancements in their positions. These are all intrinsic factors which the employees attribute to themselves. It is these intrinsic factors that correlates to Maslow’s esteem needs which serve as effective motivators. The other group of factors, which were identified in the research are referred to as hygiene or maintenance factors. These factors include the work environment, management, salaries, and company policies which are all extrinsic factors found in the external environment. The first group of factors are related to the actual job performed by the employees while the second group of factors are related to the environment under which the job was performed. It was found that extrinsic factors were not good motivators and do not provide satisfaction for employees in the long term; however, when these extrinsic factors were inadequate, they resulted in dissatisfaction (Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 206). What this implies is that if managers want to motivate their staff, they need to provide an acceptable environment to work in, as well as the intrinsic motivating factors that provide job satisfaction.

30

Motivation

Recent research has found results that are consistent with Herzberg’s theory. Smith and Burgin conducted a survey to examine the factors that motivated employees to attend training programs (Smith & Burgin, 1991). A total of 731 individuals ranging from professional librarians to paraprofessionals participated in this survey by returning the completed forms. What Smith and Burgin found was that the top two motivators for attending training sessions, were to improve professional competence and to provide better customer service. These two motivators are intrinsic factors related to a sense of achievement that gives self-confidence. These intrinsic factors are also very similar to Maslow’s esteem needs, which Stueart and Moran believed to be "a potent and reliable source of motivation" (Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 204). Besides the discovery of the top two factors that motivate library personnel to participate in further training, Smith and Burgin also found the lowest ranked motivator was an increase in salary (Smith & Burgin, 1991). This again supports Herzberg’s theory, where external factors such as money and tenure fulfil the requirement of the hygiene factors, but over time are poor motivators. Smith and Burgin’s findings are also consistent with McGregor’s Theory Y. McGregor believed that the assumptions held by Theory Y of human nature were more valid then Theory X (Robbins & Stuart-Kotze, 1990, p. 372). In times of rapid technological changes in public libraries, managers can ease the change by giving their employees the chance to participate and add their inputs into the changes that will directly affect them. Having input will give the employees a sense of control over the changes and allow them to better adapt. When given the opportunity, many employees may accept further responsibilities to ensure the success of the technological changes because they understand and believe in the reasons for the need to change. Three-Needs Theory The above early theories of motivation form the foundations for the four contemporary theories that will follow in this paper. The first contemporary theory to be discussed was proposed by David McClelland. It was called the three-needs theory to signify that there are three main needs that serve as motivators in organisations (Robbins & Stuart-Kotze, 1990, p. 375; Sever & Westcott, 1983, p. 229). The first need is the need for affiliation which is similar to Maslow’s social needs. This is the need to belong, to be part of a group, and the need for friendship. The second need is the need for power. This need is concerned with being in control of the situation, and the ability to influence people and their actions. The last need is the need for achievement which refers to the drive to succeed and to obtain better results than the preceding person. People with a high need for achievement will set goals for themselves that are achievable, but not easy. This way, when the goals are finally achieved, they can feel good about having accomplished something. In addition, their success in these goals can lead to recognition for their work which will give them self-confidence. Again, we see Maslow’s influence in the last two needs of McClelland’s theory, which is very similar to Maslow’s esteem needs; with power and recognised achievements come self-confidence and prestige. Reinforcement Theory The second theory of motivation, called the reinforcement theory, comes from a behaviourist approach. Instead of looking at the internal needs, drives, emotions and attitudes, B. F. Skinner believed in studying the external observable behaviours to determine what motivates people (Robbins & Stuart-Kotze, 1990, p. 377; Sever & Westcott, 1983, p. 231; Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 208). According to the reinforcement theory, there are four ways to modify behaviour. The first and most effective way is positive reinforcement, which refers to rewarding a desirable behaviour to strengthen the likelihood that it will occur again in the future. What this means is that it is the consequences of our behaviour that provide us with motivation. For example, in a public library, customer service should be a top priority. If a manager wanted to motivate the staff to give excellent customer service, then praise and recognition should be given by the manager for employees who go above and beyond their responsibilities in customer service. The second way a manager can modify behaviour is negative reinforcement which is defined as removing a negative stimulus in the environment after a behaviour occurs (Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 209). For example, a library clerk who has respect and admiration for his or her manager will view a lecture for being late to work as a negative stimulus. In the future, in order to avoid more lectures, the library clerk may go to work on time. It is the removal of the lectures that serves as motivation in this situation. According to Skinner, a third way to modify behaviour is punishment which decreases the probability that a behaviour will occur. This works on the principle that punishment is something unpleasant that humans will try to avoid. Punishment in a library setting can include criticism, reprimands, and demotions for behaviours that hinder the achievement of the library’s goals. The last method of behaviour modification is the lack of reinforcement. The idea behind this method is that if a behaviour is not reinforced in any way, then it would decrease in frequency and then become eliminated (Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 209). For example, if a student page is constantly making jokes and funny faces in an effort to gain attention, but the aim of such tactics are ignored, then very soon this behaviour will cease. Skinner’s theory is based on reinforcing or punishing observable behaviours which can be measured. In the public library, checking books in and issuing new library cards can easily be observed and monitored to determine if any errors had been made. Behaviour techniques like lectures can be used to modify the rate of error. On the other hand, the work done by librarians is often intellectual. It is difficult to measure the thinking processes that librarians go through and so they are difficult to reinforce. Caution should also be used in the implementation of negative reinforcement and

31

Motivation punishment in the work place because they can have drawbacks. The behaviour change may be temporary, dysfunctional behaviour may develop, and there could be an increase in absenteeism and staff turnover rates (Robbins & Stuart-Kotze, 1990, p. 378; Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 209). For example, if a manager criticises a staff member for socialising too much, then that staff member may stop socialising when the manager is around, but the behaviour continues in the manager’s absence. Equity Theory The third theory of motivation is the equity theory proposed by J. Stacey Adams (Robbins & Stuart-Kotze, 1990, p. 379; Thapisa, 1991, p. 151). This theory states that employees will compare the ratio of what they put in (for example, experience and effort) and get out of a job (for example, increases in salary and promotions) with what others are getting in a similar job. If a person perceives that the ratio of their input-outcome is inequitable relative to others, then dissatisfaction occurs. Humans like to enforce equity, so employees will attempt to correct the situation by either increasing performance or output when the perception is that they are over-rewarded, or decreasing performance or output when they feel they are under-rewarded. In light of the equity theory, an employee should be rewarded based on performance, and not length of service. What this means for the public library is that instead of promoting an employee based on seniority or length of service, all jobs should be posted and every employee having the specified qualifications should have an equal opportunity to compete for the job. Another example is that instead of automatically receiving a salary increase at the end of the year, salary increases should be based on job performance. Having rewards based on performance (meeting the required goals and objectives) rather than on length of service would be seen as being more equitable by most employees. Expectancy Theory The last theory of motivation this paper will look at is the expectancy theory proposed by Victor Vroom. Unlike the reinforcement theory which focused on observable behaviour, this theory is concerned with the internal processes that an individual undergoes in order to decide whether they want to put forth the effort to strive towards a specific goal (Robbins & Stuart-Kotze, 1990, p. 381; Sever & Westcott, 1983, p. 230; Stueart & Moran, 1993, p. 207). The expectancy theory states that motivation depends on individuals' desire to achieve a goal, and their perceptions of their ability to fulfil this goal through their efforts. According to Vroom, there are three important elements to consider when determining motivation. The first element is "valence," which refers to the desire that an individual has to achieve a goal or to fulfil a need. The second element is "instrumentality," which is the belief that performance is linked to reward. If an individual gives a certain level of performance, then a desirable outcome is expected. The third element is "expectancy," which is the belief an individual has about the relationship between effort and performance; if one exerts a high level of effort, then one can expect good performance. In determining motivation, if any one of the above elements is valued at zero, then the motivation towards that goal is lost. This theory also recognises that people are motivated by many different things, so there is no one theory which can explain everyone’s motivation (Robbins & Stuart-Kotze, 1990, p. 383). What motivates people depends on their perceptions of the attractiveness of the goal and its attainability. According to Vroom’s theory of motivation, if the public library has a history of promoting internally, then a library assistant would perceive his or her goal to be promoted to the position of children’s librarian attainable. This goal will provide the motivation for the assistant to work hard to produce results that the manager will be proud of and recognise. This recognition of the assistant’s competency and creativeness by the manager will increase the assistant’s chances of obtaining the job and would therefore motivate the employee. Conclusion The above theories all offer a different perspective of what motivation consists of and how we perceive it. However, there does seem to be an agreement among the theories that it is the internal or intrinsic factors which are the most effective motivators. In a public library, intrinsic motivators can be applied to all levels of employees. For example, for librarians who are at the top to their pay scale with no room for advancement, managers can offer job enlargement by giving librarians more responsibilities and the power to make decisions along with the responsibilities (Baker & Sandore, 1991, p. 45; Rothstein, 1986, p. 34). In a public library, this could mean that instead of just being responsible for the reference materials in a library, the librarian would also be on a committee to improve customer service. Job enlargement can give librarians a sense of accomplishment. It can also be perceived as recognition from the manager that they have done their job well and are therefore being trusted with more responsibilities. This sense of accomplishment, trust and recognition leads to self-esteem. These are all related to Maslow’s esteem needs, McClelland’s need for power and achievement, and the intrinsic motivators described by Herzberg. If we look at McGregor’s Theory Y, the above are also factors that a manager would use to motivate their staff. Managers should also encourage the staff to talk to them about any concerns or innovative ideas they may have. In recognising Vroom’s theory, listening to staff members' concerns will help managers to determine the many different motivational factors which are important to the staff. The contribution employees make towards improving the library will fulfil Maslow’s esteem needs, which are intrinsic motivators. Promotions in the library should also be from within. Even if the jobs are posted to the public, all internal applicants should be considered first. This is in agreement with the expectancy theory that states that employees are motivated when they know that their efforts will lead to rewards like promotions.

32

Motivation

For the library support staff who are consistently performing repetitive duties like checking books out to customers or checking books in, job rotations to different stations during the course of a day will help to relieve the boredom. Like librarians, support staff are also motivated by intrinsic factors. According to Blessing, the first step managers should take is to tell the library support staff the truth if there are very few opportunities for advancement (Blessing, 1986, p. 87). This way, there is no illusion of promotions, which could be an unattainable goal. Growth for library support staff can be attained by providing an opportunity for teamwork (like decorating the library for the various holidays), the power to make decisions within the scope of their jobs, and praise when a good job has been done. Staff training to develop the skills necessary to perform the job in times of technological change is also a very good motivator because it gives employees a sense of competence. As managers are putting all the above into practice in their libraries, they should also be aware of giving their employees equal rewards for equal effort. Salary increases and promotions should be based on performance, not length of service. As well, the salary range of all levels of employees in the library should be made available for any interested staff. As suggested by the equity theory, employees will use this information to compare their input-output with other co-workers and colleagues. When the basis for rewards, promotions and salaries are made public to the staff, they can see that the person who put in the extra effort is getting the appropriate rewards (Sever & Westcott, 1983, p. 233). This line of thinking is related to the expectancy theory where "high effort or motivation exists when an employee perceives a link between effort, performance and rewards" (Thapisa, 1991, p. 152). Motivating employees in public libraries is a very complex process in which there are no prescribed methods to follow. Instead, it is up to managers to put the motivation theories into practical use by finding out what motivates their staff. It is also the responsibility of managers to ensure that they implement a motivating environment for their employees to grow. Motivation is an important part of all organisations. All managers should become aware of how the presence or absence of motivational factors can affect the success of their organisation. References Baker, B., & Sandore, B. (1991). Motivation in turbulent times: In search of the epicurean work ethic. Journal of Library Administration, 14(4), 37-50. Blessing, B. (1986). The muscles behind the smiles. Training, 23(10), 85-92. Robbins, S. P., & Stuart-Kotze, R. (1990). Motivating employees. Management concepts and applications (2nd ed., pp. 368-397). Scarborough, Ontario: Prentice-Hall Canada. Rothstein, S. (1986). Professional staff in Canadian university libraries. Library Journal, 111(18), November 1, 31-34. Sever, S., & Westcott, F. (1983). Motivational basis for compensation strategies in a library environment. College & Research Libraries, 44(3), 228-235. Smith, D., & Burgin, R. (1991). The motivations of professional and paraprofessional librarians for participating in continuing education programs. Library & Information Science Research, 13, 405-429. Stueart, R. D., & Moran, B. B. (1993). Directing. Library and information centre management (4th ed., pp. 193-211). Englewood, Colorado: Libraries Unlimited. Thapisa, A. P. N. (1991). The motivation syndrome: Job satisfaction through the pay nexus. International Library Review, 23(2), 141-158).

33

Motivation

MOTIVATION AND MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENTS Few educators would argue with the premise that student motivation is an important influence on learning. Motivation is of particular importance for those who work with young adolescents. Considerable research has shown a decline in motivation and performance for many children as they move from elementary school into middle school (Eccles & Midgley, 1989). Often it has been assumed that this decline is largely caused by physiological and psychological changes associated with puberty and, therefore, is somewhat inevitable. This assumption has been challenged, however, by research that demonstrates that the nature of motivational change on entry to middle school depends on characteristics of the learning environment in which students find themselves (Midgley, 1993). Although it is difficult to prescribe a "one size fits all" approach to motivating students, research suggests that some general patterns do appear to hold true for a wide range of students. This article outlines some suggestions for middle school teachers and administrators for enhancing student motivation, and discusses three theories that are currently prominent and that have particular relevance for young adolescent students and their teachers. ATTRIBUTION THEORY The first point to be emphasised is that students' perceptions of their educational experiences generally influence their motivation more than the actual, objective reality of those experiences. For example, a history of success in a given subject area is generally assumed to lead one to continue persisting in that area. Weiner (1985), however, pointed out that students' beliefs about the reasons for their success will determine whether this assumption is true. Students' attributions for failure are also important influences on motivation. When students have a history of failure in school, it is particularly difficult for them to sustain the motivation to keep trying. Students who believe that their poor performance is caused by factors out of their control are unlikely to see any reason to hope for an improvement. In contrast, if students attribute their poor performance to a lack of important skills or to poor study habits, they are more likely to persist in the future. The implications for teachers revolve around the importance of understanding what students believe about the reasons for their academic performance. Teachers can unknowingly communicate a range of attitudes about whether ability is fixed or modifiable and their expectations for individual students through their instructional practices (Graham, 1990). GOAL THEORY While attribution theory focuses on the reasons students perceive for their successes and failures in school, goal theory focuses on the reasons or purposes students perceive for achieving (e.g., Ames, 1992; Maehr & Midgley, 1991; Midgley, 1993). While different researchers define the constructs slightly differently, two main goal orientations are generally discussed. These are task goals and ability goals. A task goal orientation represents the belief that the purpose of achieving is personal improvement and understanding. Students with a task goal orientation focus on their own progress in mastering skills and knowledge, and they define success in those terms. An ability goal orientation represents the belief that the purpose of achieving is the demonstration of ability (or, alternatively, the concealment of a lack of ability). Students with an ability goal orientation focus on appearing competent, often in comparison to others, and define success accordingly. Studies of students' goal orientations generally find that the adoption of task goals is associated with more adaptive patterns of learning than is the adoption of ability goals, including the use of more effective cognitive strategies, a willingness to seek help when it is needed, a greater tendency to engage in challenging tasks, and more positive feelings about school and oneself as a learner (Anderman & Maehr, 1994; Ryan, Hicks, & Midgley, 1997). If adopting a task goal orientation is related to positive educational outcomes for students, the question then arises as to how such an orientation can be fostered. Recent studies suggest that the policies and practices in classrooms and schools influence students' goal orientations (Ames & Archer, 1988; Maehr & Midgley, 1991). Specific suggestions (Midgley & Urdan, 1992, p. 12) for moving toward a task focus in middle schools include moving away from: 1. Grouping by ability and over-use of standardised tests to grouping by topic, interest, and student choice and to

frequent reformation of groups; 2. Competition between students, and contests with limited winners, to co-operative learning; 3. Using test data as a basis for comparison to using test data for diagnosis and to alternatives to tests such as

portfolios; 4. Normative grading and public display of grades to grading for progress or improvement and involving students in

determining their grades; 5. Recognition for relative performance, honour rolls for high grades, and over-use of praise (especially for easy

tasks) to recognition of progress improvement and an emphasis on learning for its own sake; 6. Decisions made exclusively by administrators and teachers to opportunities for choice and student decision making,

self-scheduling, and self-regulation; 7. Departmentalised approach to curriculum to thematic approaches/interdisciplinary focus, viewing mistakes as a

part of learning, allowing students to redo work, and encouraging students to take academic risks;

34

Motivation

8. Rote learning and memorisation, over-use of worksheets and textbooks, and decontextualised facts to providing challenging, complex work to students, giving homework that is enriching, and encouraging problem solving and comprehension;

9. Pull-out programs and retention to cross-age tutoring, or peer tutoring, and enrichment. SELF-DETERMINATION THEORY A third motivational theory of particular importance for middle school educators is self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985). This theory describes students as having three categories of needs: needing a sense of competence, of relatedness to others, and of autonomy. Competence involves understanding how to, and believing that one can, achieve various outcomes. Relatedness involves developing satisfactory connections to others in one's social group. Autonomy involves initiating and regulating one's own actions. Most of the research in self-determination theory focuses on the last of these three needs. Within the classroom, autonomy needs could be addressed through allowing some student choice and input on classroom decision making. For young adolescent students, with their increased cognitive abilities and developing sense of identify, a sense of autonomy may be particularly important. Students at this stage say that they want to be included in decision making and to have some sense of control over their activities. Unfortunately, research suggests that students in middle schools actually experience fewer opportunities for self-determination than they did in elementary school (Midgley & Feldlaufer, 1987). Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, and Ryan (1991) summarised contextual factors that support student autonomy. Features such as the provision of choice over what types of tasks to engage in and how much time to allot to each are associated with students' feelings of self-determination. In contrast, the use of extrinsic rewards, the imposition of deadlines, and an emphasis on evaluations detract from a feeling of self-determination and lead to a decrease in intrinsic motivation. It is important to recognise that supporting student autonomy does not require major upheaval in the classroom or that teachers relinquish the management of students' behaviour. Even small opportunities for choice, such as whether to work with a partner or independently, or whether to present a book review as a paper, poster, or class presentation, can increase students' sense of self-determination. Finally, it is important to recognise that students' early attempts at regulating their own work may not always be successful. Good decision making and time management require practice. Teachers can help their students develop their self-regulation by providing limited choices between acceptable options, by assisting with breaking large tasks into manageable pieces, and by providing guidelines for students to use in monitoring their own progress. CONCLUSION Middle school teachers often teach many students over the course of a school day, and for a relatively short period of time. Given such brief contact with so many, it is easy to underestimate the influence that one's teaching practices can have on any one individual. Current moves to implement the middle school philosophy may provide a more facilitative schedule for both teachers and students, but even in a highly structured middle school, teachers can take specific steps to provide a learning environment that will promote the motivation of all students. ******** Adapted from: Anderman, L. H., & Midgley, C. (1997). Motivation and middle school students. In Judith L. Irvin (Ed.), WHAT CURRENT RESEARCH SAYS TO THE MIDDLE LEVEL PRACTITIONER (pp. 41-48). Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.

35

Motivation REFERENCES Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 84(3), 261-271. EJ 452 395. Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning strategies and motivation processes. JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY, 80(3), 260-267. EJ 388 054. Anderman, E. M., & Maehr, M. L. (1994). Motivation and schooling in the middle grades. REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, 64(2), 287-309. EJ 488 853. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). INTRINSIC MOTIVATION AND SELF-DETERMINATION IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR. New York: Plenum. Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. U., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST, 26(3/4), 325-346. Eccles, J. S., & Midgley, C. (1989). Stage/environment fit: Developmentally appropriate classrooms for early adolescents. In R. E. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), RESEARCH ON MOTIVATION IN EDUCATION (Vol. 3, pp. 139-186). New York: Academic. Graham, S. (1990). Communicating low ability in the classroom: Bad things good teachers sometimes do. In S. Graham and V. Folkes (Eds.), ATTRIBUTION THEORY: APPLICATIONS TO ACHIEVEMENT, MENTAL HEALTH, AND INTERPERSONAL CONFLICT (pp. 17-36). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Maehr, M. L., & Midgley, C. (1991). Enhancing student motivation: A school wide approach. EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST, 26(3/4), 399-427. Midgley, C. (1993). Motivation and middle level schools. In P. R. Pintrich & M. L. Maehr (Eds.), ADVANCES IN MOTIVATION AND ACHIEVEMENT, VOL. 8: MOTIVATION IN THE ADOLESCENT YEARS (pp. 219-276). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Midgley, C., & Feldlaufer, H. (1987). Students' and teachers' decision-making fit before and after the transition to junior high school. JOURNAL OF EARLY ADOLESCENCE, 7(2), 225-241. Midgley, C., & Urdan, T. C. (1992). The transition to middle level schools: Making it a good experience for all students. MIDDLE SCHOOL JOURNAL, 24(2), 5-14. EJ 454 359. Ryan, A. M., Hicks, L., & Midgley, C. (1997). Social goals, academic goals, and avoiding seeking help in the classroom. JOURNAL OF EARLY ADOLESCENCE, 17(2), 152-171. Weiner, B. (1985). An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 92(4), 548-573. EJ 324 684.

36