Motivation

• Motivation is a general term applying to the entire class of drives,

desires, needs, wishes, and similar forces.
• To say that managers motivate their subordinates is to say that
they do things which they hope will satisfy these drives and
desires and induce the subordinates to act in a desired manner.
McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y
• McGregor suggests that managing must start with the basic question of
how managers see themselves in relation to others.
• This viewpoint requires some thought on the perception of human
nature.
• Theories X and Y are two sets of assumptions about the nature of people.
• The “traditional” assumptions about the nature of people, according to
McGregor, are included in Theory X:
• Average human beings have an inherent dislike of work and will avoid it if
they can.
• Because of this human characteristic of disliking work, most people must
be coerced, controlled, directed, and threatened with punishment to get
them to put forth adequate effort toward the achievement of organizational
objectives.
• Average human beings prefer to be directed, wish to avoid responsibility,
have relatively little ambition, and want security above all.
McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y
• Assumptions under Theory Y:
• The expenditure of physical and mental effort in work is as natural as play or rest.
• External control and the threat of punishment are not the only means for producing effort
toward organizational objectives. People will exercise self-direction and self-control in
the service of objectives to which they are committed.
• The degree of commitment to objectives is in proportion to the size of the rewards
associated with their achievement.
• Average human beings learn, under proper conditions, not only to accept responsibility,
but also to seek it.
• The capacity to exercise a relatively high degree of imagination, ingenuity, and creativity
in the solution of organizational problems is widely, not narrowly, distributed in the
population.
• Under the conditions of modern industrial life, the intellectual potentialities of the
average human being are only partially utilized.
McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y
• Theory X is pessimistic, static, and rigid. Control is primarily external, imposed on
the subordinate by the superior.
• In contrast, Theory Y is optimistic, dynamic, and flexible, with an emphasis on self-
direction and the integration of individual needs with organizational demands.
• Theories X and Y assumptions are just that: they are assumptions only. They are
not prescriptions or suggestions for managerial strategies.
• Theories X and Y do not imply “hard” or “soft” management.
• Theories X and Y are not to be viewed as being on a continuous scale, with X and
Y on opposite extremes.
• The discussion of Theory Y is not a case for consensus management nor is it an
argument against the use of authority
 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory
• Maslow saw human needs in the form of a hierarchy, ascending from the lowest to the
highest, and he concluded that when one set of needs is satisfied, this kind of need
ceases to be a motivator.

Physiological needs. These are the basic needs for

sustaining human life itself, such as food, water, warmth,
shelter, and sleep.
Security or safety needs. People want to be free of
physical danger and fear of losing a job, property, food, or
shelter.
Affiliation or acceptance needs. Since people are social
beings, they need to belong, to be accepted by others.

Esteem needs. This kind of need produces satisfactions

such as power, prestige, status, and self-confidence.
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
Need for self-actualization. It is the desire to become what
one is capable of becoming — to maximize one’s potential
and to accomplish something.
Alderfer’s ERG Theory
• The ERG theory by Clayton Alderfer is similar to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.
• However, the ERG theory has only three categories: existence needs (similar to
Maslow’s basic needs), relatedness needs (pertaining to satisfactorily relating to
others), and growth needs (referring to self development, creativity, growth, and
competence).
• Thus, ERG refers to the three categories of existence, relatedness, and growth.
• Alderfer suggests that one may be motivated by needs on several levels at the
same time.
• For example, one may go to work to make a living (existence needs satisfaction)
and at the same time one may be motivated by good relations with coworkers.
• Also, according to Alderfer, when people experience frustration on one level, they
may focus on the needs at a lower-level needs category.
Herzberg's Motivation-Hygiene Theory
• Frederick Herzberg and his associates purports to find a two-factor theory of motivation.
• In one group of needs are things such as company policy and administration,
supervision, working conditions, interpersonal relations, salary, status, job security, and
personal life.
• These were found by Herzberg to be only dissatisfiers and not motivators.
• Their existence does not motivate in the sense of yielding satisfaction; their lack of
existence would, however, result in dissatisfaction.
• Herzberg calls them maintenance, hygiene, or job context factors.
• In the second group, Herzberg lists certain satisfiers—and therefore motivators—all
related to job content.
• They include achievement, recognition, challenging work, advancement, and growth in
the job.
• Their existence will yield feelings of satisfaction or no satisfaction (not dissatisfaction).
Herzberg's Motivation-Hygiene Theory

Comparison of Maslow’s and Herzberg’s theories of motivation

The Expectancy Theory of Motivation
• Vroom’s expectancy theory: People will be motivated to do things to reach a goal if they
believe in the worth of that goal and if they can see that what they do will help them in
achieving it.
• Vroom’s theory is that people’s motivation toward doing anything will be determined by
the value they place on the outcome of their effort (whether positive or negative)
multiplied by the confidence they have that their effort will materially aid in achieving a
goal.
• In his own terms, Vroom’s theory may be stated as: Force = Valence X Expectancy,
where force is the strength of a person’s motivation, valence is the strength of an
individual’s preference for an outcome, and expectancy is the probability that a
particular action will lead to a desired outcome.
• One of the great attractions of the Vroom theory is that it recognizes the importance of
individual needs and motivations.
• It fits the concept of harmony of objectives: individuals have personal goals that are
different from organizational goals, but these can be harmonized.
The Expectancy Theory of Motivation
• When a person is indifferent about achieving a certain goal, a valence of zero occurs;
there is a negative valence when the person would rather not achieve the goal.
• The result of either would be, of course, no motivation.
• Likewise, a person would have no motivation to achieve a goal if the expectancy were
zero or negative.
• The force exerted to do something will depend on both valence and expectancy.
• Moreover, a motive to accomplish some action might be determined by a desire to
accomplish something else.
• For example, a person might be willing to work hard to produce a product for a valence
in the form of pay.
• Or a manager might be willing to work hard to achieve company goals in marketing or
production for a promotion or pay valence.
Equity Theory
• An important factor in motivation is whether individuals perceive the reward structure as
being fair.
• Equity theory: Motivation is influenced by an individual’s subjective judgment about the
fairness of the reward he or she gets relative to the inputs (which include many factors,
such as effort, experience, and education), compared with the rewards of others.

• There should be a balance of the outcomes/inputs relationship for one person in

comparison with that for another person.
• If people feel that they are inequitably rewarded, they may be dissatisfied, they may
reduce the quantity or quality of output, or they may even leave the organization.
• If people perceive the rewards as equitable, they probably will continue at the same level
of output.
• If people think the rewards are greater than what is considered equitable, they may work
harder.
Equity Theory

It is also possible that some may discount the rewards.

Goal Setting Theory of Motivation
• For objectives to be meaningful, they must be clear, attainable, and verifiable.
• Clear goals, if accepted, are motivating.
• People want to know what is expected of them.
• However, several conditions must be met, including that the objectives must be
verifiable, which means that at the end of the period one must be able to measure
whether the objectives have been achieved and to what extent.
• Objectives such as “getting the best grades possible in school” are not verifiable but
graduating with a 3.8 grade point average is.
• The objectives must be challenging, yet they must also be reasonable.
• Completely unrealistic objectives that cannot be achieved are demotivating rather than
motivating.
• To gain commitment to achieving the goals, true participation in setting them is
essential. In the proper environment, individuals should be encouraged to set them.
Goal Setting Theory of Motivation

• Objective setting for

motivation
Urwick’s Theory Z
• Much after the propositions of theories X and Y by McGregor, the three theorists
Urwick, Rangnekar, and Ouchi- propounded the third theory labeled as Z theory.
• The two propositions in Urwicks’s theory are that:
1. Each individual should know the organisational goals precisely and the amount of
contribution through his efforts towards these goals.
2. Each individual should also know that the relation of organisational goals is going to
satisfy his/her needs positively.
• In Urwick’s view, the above two make people ready to behave positively to accomplish
both organisational and individual goals.
• Theory Z has attracted the lot of attention of management practitioners as well as
researchers. It must be noted that Z does not stand for anything, is merely the last
alphabet in the English Language.
Urwick’s Theory Z
• Theory Z is based on the following four postulates:
1. Strong Bond between Organisation and Employees
2. Employee Participation and Involvement
3. No Formal Organisation Structure
4. Human Resource Development
• Theory Z represents the adoption of Japanese management practices (group decision
making, social cohesion, job security, holistic concern for employees, etc.) by the
American companies.
• In India, Maruti-Suzuki, Hero-Honda, etc., apply the postulates of theory Z.
Porter and Lawler’s Expectancy Theory
• Porter and Lawler’s theory is an improvement over Vroom’s expectancy theory.
• They posit that motivation does not equal satisfaction or performance.
• The model suggested by them encounters some of the simplistic traditional
assumptions made about the positive relationship between satisfaction and
performance.
• They proposed a multi-variate model to explain the complex relationship that exists
between satisfaction and performance.
• The main point in Porter and Lawler’s model is that effort or motivation does not lead
directly to performance. It is mediated by abilities and traits and by role perceptions.
Ultimately, performance leads to satisfaction.
Porter and Lawler’s Expectancy Theory
Porter and Lawler’s Expectancy Theory
• Effort: Effort refers to the amount of energy an employee exerts on a given task.
• How much effort an employee will put in a task is determined by two factors -
(i) Value of reward and
(ii) Perception of effort-reward probability.
• Performance: One’s effort leads to his/her performance. Both may be equal or may not
be.
• However the amount of performance is determined by the amount of labour and the
ability and role/task perception of the employee.
• Thus, if an employee possesses less ability and/or makes wrong role/task perception,
his/her performance may be low in spite of his putting in great efforts.
Porter and Lawler’s Expectancy Theory
• Satisfaction:
• Performance leads to satisfaction.
• The level of satisfaction depends upon the amount of rewards one achieves.
• If the amount of actual rewards meet or exceed perceived equitable rewards, the
employee will feel satisfied.
• On the country, if actual rewards fall short of perceived ones, he/she will be dissatisfied.
• Rewards may be of two kinds—intrinsic and extrinsic rewards.
• Examples of intrinsic rewards are such as sense of accomplishment and self-
actualisation.
• As regards extrinsic rewards, these may include working conditions and status.
• A fair degree of research support that, the intrinsic rewards are much more likely to
produce attitudes about satisfaction that are related to performance.
Carrot and Stick Theory
• The carrot and stick theory says that there are two different approaches to controlling
someone’s behavior.
• We can either encourage someone by providing a reward for favorable behavior.
• We can also encourage someone by providing punishment for an unfavorable behavior.
• The philosophy of this approach comes from the old story that the best way to make a
donkey move is to put a carrot out in front of it or jab it with a stick from behind.
• Carrot refers to rewards, which are offered or promised to individuals to act in the desired
way; while stick refers to punishments which are to be inflicted on individuals, for not acting
in the desired way.
• In a way, carrot refers to positive motivation; and stick refers to negative motivation.
Carrot and Stick Theory
• Implications of Carrot and Stick Approach:
• An overdose of ‘Carrot’ element, in the system of motivation invites laziness and fewer
attitudes towards work on the part of individuals. This happens, specially, because
many- a-times, people get carrot i.e. rewards regardless of their performance e.g. salary
increase, seniority-based promotions, etc.
• An overdose of ‘stick’ element, in the system of motivation leads to retaliatory behaviour
on part of people, strong organisation of labour unions against management atrocities,
poor quality workmanship etc.