Motivation
Eric Ziramba:
The thrust of this essay is to discuss the notion that motivation can only came from within and attempts from other people to motivate have little lasting influence. In order to come up with a best argument, it is important to define the term motivation. Motivation can be defined as the direction and persistence of action. It is concerned with why people choose a particular course of action in preference to others, and why they continue with a chosen action often over a long period of time and in the face of difficulties and problems. Mitchell (1982) identifies four common characteristics of motivation, which underline the definition of motivation, which are: motivation as an individual phenomenon, as intentional, motivation as multifaceted and as a purpose of motivational theories to predict behavior. From the above definition of motivation, it shows that employees are not only motivated from within, but are also other extrinsic motivational factors that help pushing up a person to reach the expectant or set goal.
Maslow (1943) basically proposed that people are wanting beings, they always want more and more, and what they want depends on what they already have. He suggested that human needs are arranged in series of levels, a hierarchy of importance or a hierarchy of needs. Maslow used the terms Physiology, Safety, Belongingness and Love, Esteem and Self-Actualization to describe the pattern that human motivation generally move through.
More so, Maslow suggested that if motivation is driven from the existence of unsatisfied needs, therefore it helps manager to understand the needs which are more important for individual employee. In this case they will be an opportunity to motivate employees through the management style, taking example of the physiological needs, the management can provide break and wages that are sufficient to purchase the essentials of life. From this view employees can be motivated both intrinsically and extrinsically.
While Maslow’s hierarchy makes sense, it is important to note that not all people are driven by the same needs, at any time, different people are may be motivated by entirely different factors. In fact, there is evidence of that contradicts the order of needs specified by the model. For example, some people prefer to place social needs before others. However, drawing from the model, people are mostly motivated from within.
Like Maslow, Alderfer (1972) agrees that individuals progresses through a hierarchy from existence needs to relatedness needs and to growth needs as the lower-level needs became satisfied. However, Alderfer suggests that these needs are more of a continuum than hierarchical levels. He propounds that more that one need maybe activated at the same time. He also came up with a frustration-regression process with an example that if an individual is continually frustrated in attempting to satisfy growth needs, relatedness need may reassume most importance. Like Maslow the theory is more likely to conclude that employees are driven from within. In support Whitmore (2002) suggest that “Self-belief and meaningful work are the fundamental bedrock that underlines business performance. Of course, pay and conditions are important too but we know that. It is these two that we barely recognized…..”
Further more, Herzberg (1959) agues that attempts by other people to motivate only last for a short time. He added on in his hygiene theory that the so-called dissatisfaction factors or the hygiene factors motivates employees to work but his emphasis was that it won’t last long because the motivation factors that determines whether there is satisfaction or no satisfaction are intrinsic to the job itself. Hygiene factors can be roughly related to the Maslow’s lower-level needs and motivators to higher-level needs. To motivate workers to do their best, managers must give proper attention to the motivators and growth factors. However, Herzberg gave good performance as motivator that leads to job satisfaction rather than reverse. Crainer and Dearlove (2001) added that “It is self development, career management and self management learning that can be seen as a motivator drawing from Herzberg’s insight”. In other words Herzberg is giving credits to self motivation.
A person’s effectiveness in certain job functions are influenced by an employees need to achieve, to have affiliation and power, Mc Clelland (1988). People with higher need for achievement seek to excel and thus tend to avoid both low-risk and high-risk situations. In high-risk projects, achievers see the outcome as one of chance rather than one’s own effort. High risk achievers are motivated by other high risk achievers hence motivated by other people. This Mc Clelland’s work originated from the investigations into the relationship between hunger needs and the extent to which imaginary of food dominates thought processes.
More so, people with high need for affiliation needs harmonious relationship with other people, be it other employees or the management, and they need to feel accepted by other people. High need affiliation individuals prefer work that provides significant personal interaction. They perform well in client interaction situation, hence motivated by other people. In addition to Mc Clelland’s theory of needs, people’s need for power can be a motive. Those who need personal power want to direct others, and this need often is perceived as undesirable. In most cases people who need power are self-centered people, people who want to achieve self goals. The first three motives of Mc Clelland’s theory correspond to Maslow’s self-actualization and love needs and they are relatively intrinsic. Drawing from this people are motivated mostly from within in order reach the highest point of the pyramid,
However, some writers like Mc Gregor (1960) assumes that people has no ambition, no wants nor responsibility, and would rather follow than lead. With this alone it shows that people are motivated form outside factors and that they need a push or an external force to pull them up. Mc Gregor an American psychologist in his theory X of 1960 gave a conclusion that are gullible and not particularly intelligent, and also that employees dislike work. Essentially, his theory assumes that people only work for money and security hence he dismissed issues like esteem and self actualization proposed by Maslow. In his work, people are only motivated by money and having security and are not internally motivated since people dislike work.
In contrary, Mc Gregor (1960) however, proposed the Y theory assuming that higher level needs of esteem and self actualization are continuing needs in that they are never completely satisfied. As such, it is these higher-level needs though which employees are motivated or can best be motivated. His Y theory propounds that employees are motivated from within rather than externally, this is because employees actually want to reach the highest level-needs. Employees are self directed to meet their work objectives, from these, people are only working from their heart and they took work natural as play or rest. People will be committed to their work if reward favors to address higher-level of needs such as self actualization. Under those assumptions, there is any opportunity to align personal goals and organizational by using the worker’s own quest for fulfillment as a motivator.
Process theories, or extrinsic theories, attempt to identify the relationships among the dynamic variables that make up motivation and the action required to behavior and actions. They provide a further contribution to the understanding of complex nature of work motivation. Expectancy-based model, equity theory and the goal theory are some of the extrinsic theories that explain the nature of motivation at work. The underlying basis of expectancy theory is that people are motivated by the expected result of their action. Motivation is the function of effort expended and the expectations that rewards. Vroom (1964) propounds that people prefer certain outcomes from their behavior over others. In the expectancy theory, there is a motivational force, and that force is used to reach the desired outcome. However Porter and Lawler (1968) goes beyond motivational force and consider performance as a whole. They pointed out that motivational force does not lead directly to performance but it is by individual ability and traits and by the person’s role perceptions. Hence Porter and Lawler denies extrinsic force as a source of motivation. Porter and Lawler, suggest that effort does not lead directly to performance but it is influenced by individual characteristics. Factors such as intelligence, skills, knowledge and personality affect the ability to perform a given activity.
Equity theory as proposed by Adams (1963) focuses on people’s feelings of how fair they have been treated in comparison with the treatment of others. What the theory is saying in simple is that employees get motivated if they are treated fairly. However if there is a feeling of inequity, it may cause tensions which is an unpleasant experience, but inequity can motivate a person to remove or reduce it.
Another process usually considered under the heading of motivation to work is the goal theory. The theory is based mainly the work of Locke (1975). The basic premise of goal theory is that people goal and intensions play an important in determining behavior. Locke accepts the importance of perceived value, as in directed in expectancy theory. He concluded that setting a goal motivates employees to reach the desired outcome.
To cap it all, Adlar (2006) concluded that fifty percent of motivation comes from within and 50% from the environment, especially from the leadership encountered there. Fifty-fifty rule in motivation does not claim to identify the different proportions in equation exactly. It is more likely a rough and ready rule of the thumb. In effect it says no more than a substantial part of motivation lies with a person while a substantial part lies, so to speak, outside and beyond control. Therefore motivation comes from both sides.
