Motivation Stephen Robbins defines motivation as The willingness

Motivation Stephen Robbins defines motivation as “The willingness to exert high level of effort toward goals, conditioned by the effort’s ability to satisfy individual need” The Motivation Process Physiological / Psychological deficiency (NEED) • Needs • Drives • Incentives Individual behaves in a certain manner (DRIVE) Achieves a particular goal (INCENTIVE)

Classification of Motives Primary Motives General Motives • • The curiosity, manipulation and activity motives The affection motives Secondary Motives • • The power motives The achievement motives > Moderate degree of risk taking > Need for prompt and precise feedback > Satisfaction with accomplishment than material rewards > Total dedication towards the task > The affiliation motive > The security motive > The status motive

The Content Theories of Work Motivation Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs • Physiological needs • • Self Safety needs actualization (Challenging projects, Love needs opportunities for Esteem needs innovation, creativity Self-actualization needs (important projects training) recognition, prestigious office location) Social needs (Good coworkers, peers, superiors, customers) Safety or Security needs (Job security, benefits like Life Insurance, Safety Reg) Physiological Need (Basic pay, workplace, heat, water, company cafeteria)

Herzberg’s Two –Factor Theory of Motivation Herzberg asked 200 accountants and engineers two basic questions pertaining their job: 1. 2. When did you feel particularly good about your job – what were the incidents to your job that made you feel satisfied? What did you feel exceptionally bad about your job- what were the incidents in your job that made you dissatisfied? After detail analysis it emerged • Job satisfiers were associated with the job content, and job dissatisfiers were related to job context • The satisfiers were termed as motivators, while dissatisfiers were termed as hygiene factors • While hygiene factors were responsible for preventing dissatisfactions, motivators were essential to keep the employees satisfied Thus, Motivators and Hygiene Factors are two factors in Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory

Application of Herzberg’s Theory of Motivation in today’s world Application of Hergberg’s theory in real life is not an easy task. In order to make employees satisfied and motivated, Hygiene Factors are to be created. • Administrative policies of the organization • Presence of able supervisors • Fair pay • Good interpersonal relations • Conducive working conditions Once the hygiene factors have been addressed, organization should attempt the motivating factors • The work itself • Clear achievable goals • Appreciation for good work • Giving adequate responsibility to employees • Career growth

Contribution of Herzberg’s theory to work motivation Critical evaluation of Herzberg’s theory Alderfer’s ERG Theory According to Alderfer, there are three basic groups of core needs: 1. Existence needs – These are associated with the survival and physiological well-being of an individual 2. Related needs – These needs emphasize the significance of social and inter personal relationships 3. Growth needs – These needs are related to person’s inner desire for personal growth and development

The relationships between Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs, Hergberg’s Hygiene Theory and Alderfer’s ERG Theory MASLOW HERGBERG ADLERFER Work itself, achievement Self – actualization possibility of growth Growth and fulfillment MF responsibility Advancement, recognition Esteem and Status Belonging & social needs Relation with superv. peers, subordinates quality of supervision Relatedness HF Safety and security Company policy and admn. Job security Physiological needs Working conditions Pay Existence

The Process Theories of Work Motivation Vroom’s Expectancy Theory of Motivation Person possessing preference among Among various outcomes Expectancy Motivational force = walence* Expectancy Goals and associated outcomes ( Direct & Correlated) 1 st level 2 nd Level Outcomes Action Outcome 1 1 a Outcome 1 b Outcome 1 c Feedback ( modification of preferences) Net valence or values of all outcomes (Satisfaction – dissatisfaction Walence = Σ Valence x Instrumentality (Valence denotes the strength of an individual’s preference for a particular outcome. Other terms of valence are value, incentive etc) Cont.

If the person prefers attaining a particular outcome but do not attain it, then the valence is positive. The valence is said to be zero when the person is not interested about the outcome, and it is negative when the person prefers not attaining it. Instrumentality refers to the degree to which a first-level outcome would help in attaining the desired second –level outcome. Instrumentality serves as input for valence. Vroom’s VIE Expectancy Theory EFFORT EXPECTANCY Belief that if I try hard I can do better PERFORMANCE INSTUMENTALITY Belief that if I do better, I get a better reward 1. Effort-performance relationship 2. Performance- reward relationship 3. Rewards-personal goals relationship OUTCOME VALENCE Value of the outcome to the person vs indifference or aversion M O T I V A T I O N

The Porter-Lawler Model – This models hold that performance in an organization is dependent on three factors: 1. An employee should have the desire to perform, i. e. he must feel motivated to accomplish the task. 2. Motivation alone cannot ensure successful performance of a task. The employee should also have the abilities and skills required to successfully perform the task. 3. The employee should have a clear perception of his role in the organization and an accurate knowledge of the job requirements This will enable him to focus his efforts on accomplishing the assigned tasks The important variables in the model are: • Efforts • Performance • Rewards • Satisfaction

The Porter-Lawyer Motivation Model 8. Perceived Equitable Rewards 4. Abilities & Traits 1. Value of Reward 7 a. Intrinsic Rewards 3. Efforts 6. Performance 2. Perceived Effort Satisfaction 5. Role Perception 7 b. Extrinsic Rewards

The Contemporary Theory of Motivation J Stacy Adams propounded the equity theory of Motivation Equity is represented schematically as: Person’s outcomes = Other’s outcomes Person’s inputs Other’s inputs Inequity is represented as follows: Person’s outcomes < Other’s outcomes Person’s inputs Other’s inputs OR Person’s outcomes > Other’s outcomes Person’s inputs Other’s inputs The various referent comparisons used by an employee are: • Self-inside • Self-outside • Other-inside • Other-outside

If an employee perceives (after comparing his position with that of his referent) that there exists an inequity, he is likely to make as below: • • • Change in inputs Change in outcomes Distort perceptions of self Distort perceptions of others Choose a different referent Leave the field However, equity theory proposes four methods by which employees overcome perceived inequity 1. When payment is made on an hourly basis and rewards match with their inputs 2. W hen payment is made on piece rate basis, employees produce more quality products 3. When payment is based on an hourly basis, under rewarded employees will restore equity 4. When payment is made on the basis of numbers of units produced, under rewarded employees tend to produce more.