Lecture
Content theories of motivation
These theories are based on the identification of those inner motives (called needs) that force people to act this way and not otherwise. The most famous theories in this category include the work of Abraham Maslow, David McClelland and Frederick Herzberg
Maslow's hierarchy of needs . A. Maslow's classification is based on priorities, according to which, in his opinion, needs are met.
· Primary needs.
· Physiological needs (for example, in food, water, sleep).
· Security needs, i.e. in the environment, not. containing threats to life, health, etc.
· Social needs.
· The need for belonging to a particular social group, for love and affection, i.e. the need for approval by other people and a warm relationship with members of their group.
· The need for respect (the need for credibility, self-esteem, self-esteem).
· The need for self-expression (the need for full use of their capabilities, achievement of goals and personal growth).
Maslow argues that any person satisfies his needs, starting with the primary and, rising up the hierarchy, and the system of priorities eliminates conflicts between motives. This does not mean, however, that lower needs must be fully satisfied before other needs become important. According to Maslow, a person attaches importance to higher needs only over the years, so it is unlikely that the need for self-expression becomes dominant earlier than in middle age.
Some people, according to Maslow, cannot surpass a certain level in their development and choose a lifestyle that meets only the needs of lower levels.
Despite the fact that Maslow’s hierarchy is outwardly very attractive, it causes a number of criticisms:
Maslow's categories are unsuitable for solving practical problems. We can not unconditionally explain the observed behavior of one or another motive. Hence, considering Maslow’s hierarchy as a hypothesis, it is difficult to figure out what research needs to be done in order to disprove it. This criticism applies to all kinds of motifs. A motive cannot always be logically deduced from behavior, since there is no one-to-one correspondence between them: one motive can be satisfied with various actions. Thus, consistent behavior and competing behaviors can be caused by the same motive.
You can point to behavior that is not consistent with Maslow’s theory. So, assuming that debt belongs to one of the higher levels, the hierarchy ignores the fact that people are willing to die while fulfilling duty, and often put pride above safety or physiological need. In any case, intentional action is governed not only by “needs,” but also by the convictions of a person.
Although this hierarchy has the form of a process model, the mechanism of transition from one level to another is not revealed.
The hierarchy theory is perhaps best seen as an organizational concept, rather than an explanatory model. Some of its appeal, and, in a sense, its vagueness contributed to the widespread acceptance of this theory. There is reason to believe that such hierarchies of needs operate among workers and among management personnel, and that the latter often do not have needs for self-expression and respect. But the main provisions of Maslow remain unproven. (For example, the proposition that the satisfaction of an individual need can reach a level beyond which it ceases to be an incentive for action; that people begin to meet the needs of the next level only when the needs of the previous levels are satisfied to some extent). Nevertheless, these provisions serve as the basis for many of the conclusions of modern organization theory.
Hierarchy A. Maslow for a long time was taken as an axiom.
But several modern scholars have refuted this position. In their work, they refer to the research of OS Anisimova [31 He divided human needs into primary material (food, water, need to breathe, etc.), secondary social (need for communication, good relations in a team), and tertiary spiritual (need for cultural creativity, for raising the legal awareness of society and etc.). It is obvious that the concept of A. Maslow reflects only primary and secondary needs.
Attempt to consider the last level in Maslow's pyramid as corresponding to spiritual needs, in the opinion of the authors, is unfounded. The fact is that self-expression or self-actualization can take many different forms and sometimes even useless for society (for example, graphomania). Such types of self-expression can not claim to be the highest level of needs and refer to secondary needs (for example, self-expression as self-affirmation in any circle of people). In addition, as the eminent philosopher Hegel noted in his time, spiritual needs are continuously linked with universal aspirations. The need for self-expression can only be considered a spiritual need if this self-expression becomes an instrument of translation of supra-situational values of society and “sows sensible, good, eternal”.
Let us sum up the critical result: the Maslow human needs pyramid does not reflect the cultural, individual level of development of needs (including spiritual aspirations).
The second disadvantage is the heterogeneity of the layers according to the degree of abstract specificity (or generic relations). So, social needs include the need for respect, and many others, and in Maslow’s pyramid, the need for a person to respect him by others is highlighted in a special layer. In this regard, the authors of the article propose an improved version of the hierarchy of needs, which, in their opinion, is devoid of the above-mentioned shortcomings.
However, the carried out differentiation of motivational factors, which led to an increase in the number of layers, can complicate an already difficult analysis of the real motivations of the organization’s employees. Psychological categories: individual, subject and personality, critically divided by Anisimov O. S., allow to get away from the details and more closely consider the hierarchical structure of needs.
Individual manifestations of a person in an activity are characterized by the focus of a person’s actions on satisfying their needs and considering the whole environment as objects of their need.
The subject manifestations of a person in an activity are actions that meet the requirements of the activity norm. The main focus of his activity is performance.
Personal manifestations of a person in an activity are actions based on social values or values of an activity. Many people combine all three types of manifestations, but each of the types is characteristic of its range of regulatory requirements.
Such a generalization makes it possible to single out in the planning a motivational strategy and in the development of the incentive system only 3 main types of human behavior that are essential for the organization. The authors of the article argue that only taking into account all 3 possible “characters” of actors, types of behavior, attitudes and responses allows implementing a systematic approach in the development of an optimal system of motivation and stimulation of personnel.
Ignoring any of the three accents will inevitably lead to negative consequences in the motivational mood on the work of employees.
When an employee is personally oriented, the main motivation accents are made to stimulate creative activity, delegate problem solving, stimulate initiative to analyze and improve activity, support in communicating effective ideas and ways to implement them in a team.
The system of optimal labor motivation should take into account the stage at which the organization is located (formation, functioning, development). It is at the stage of development of the organization that the following are motivationally significant:
· moral and material incentives for employees to search for new, promising, original, etc. ideas to improve their activities and the organization as a whole;
· creating a system of incentives for informal leaders who have realized the need for organizational changes and explaining this need to others (mainly for personal orientation).
The theory of CEC Alderfer , Alderfer in his theory combines human needs into separate groups: the needs of existence; communication needs; growth needs.
The needs groups of this theory are quite clearly related to the needs groups of Maslow’s theory.
Alderfer associates the need for existence with physiological and safety needs. The need for communication reflects the sociological nature of man, the desire of man to be a member of the family, to have colleagues, friends, enemies, bosses and subordinates. Growth needs include the needs of self-expression, recognition and self-assertion.
The difference between Alderfere and Maslow is that he understands movement in the hierarchy differently, i.e. it goes both ways. Up, if the need of the lower level is not satisfied, and down, if the need of a higher level is not satisfied. For example, if a person could not meet the needs of growth in any way, he again needs communication needs, and this causes a regression process from the upper level to the lower level. According to theory, the hierarchy of needs reflects an ascent from more specific to less specific needs.
The process of moving up the levels of needs Alderfer calls the process of satisfying needs, and the process of moving down is called the process of frustration, defeat in an effort to satisfy the need. Two directions of movement in meeting the needs opens up additional possibilities in motivating people in the organization.
This theory does not have much evidence of its correctness, but knowledge of this theory is useful for management practice, as it opens up for managers the prospects for finding effective forms of motivation that correspond to a lower level of needs if it is not possible to create conditions to meet the needs of a higher level. .
Theory X and Wu Mak Gregor . In the 60s, psychologist Douglas MacGregor formulated a certain set of postulates underlying the reasoning of most managers, and called it “theory X”:
· the average person is naturally lazy - he works as little as possible;
· he lacks ambition, he does not like responsibility and prefers to be led;
Typology of motivation factors (needs, motives, systems of expectation, value attitudes, external conditions and incentives, etc.)
|
INDIVIDUAL |
INDIVIDUAL-SUBJECT |
||
|
Physiological needs |
Physiological-psychological |
Psychological and social |
|
|
organic food, warmth, water, sleep, cleanliness, housing, physical rest, means of satisfying primary needs |
safety, security, hygiene, salary to meet primary needs, housing, the need for psychological rest, a sense of territory, the inviolability of property, the ability to stay at a “distance”, your own well-being |
moral reinforcement, rewarding (bonuses, promotions, dividends from profits), evaluation of employee’s personal contribution, attention, convenience of a workplace, salary, need for social benefits, a sense of belonging to a team, need for respect, recognition from colleagues and management |
self-affirmation, career growth, confidence in the future of the company, interesting work, competitive effect, the need for success, the desire for power, status, prestige, individually significant self-expression, family comfort |
|
SUBJECT |
PERSONALITY |
||
|
Social |
Functioning activities |
Development activities |
Cultural and Creative Expression |
|
social recreation (sports, cultural), the need for communication, club interactions, joint celebrations, good team relationships, a sense of their usefulness in the team, the need for joint decision making, interesting work, competitive effect, the need for harmonization, justice, legal security, social equality, maintaining social principles, the need to live by the laws, the rules of society |
pleasure from work, pride in their work, a sense of belonging to the firm’s business, the need for compliance with professional standards, opportunities for continuing education, the need for complicating problems to be solved, increased responsibility, the development of will, a sense of its usefulness in the company’s business, everything necessary for effective work information, interesting work, competitive effect, the need to get clear goals and objectives, the need to approve a job well done, the value of self-realization |
the need for creativity relevant to the activity, the need for the development of professional standards, the value of developing activities, the value of self-development, the desire for novelty and experimentation, the possibility of improving the company's activities, the competitive effect, the expectation of trust in professionalism, the desire to improve the corporate culture, increasing the prestige of the company, increasing the utility of the company to society |
the need for creativity relevant to the sociocultural sphere, the value of developing the sociocultural sphere, the development of its spiritual culture, the need to create culturally significant standards, the value of cultural transmission, active participation in improving the laws of society based on universal values, the desire to raise the level of legal awareness of society, the cultivation principles of humanity and democracy |
"Theory of U" adheres to the following view of man:
If the administration shares the views of theory X, it pays special attention to the methods of external control, whereas when using theory V, self-control is emphasized with periodic performance reports. It is assumed that self-control arises when workers perceive the goals of the organization as their own, and then the probability of achieving the goals of the company is high. Mack Gregor considered the method of employee participation in decision making to be a means of achieving a high degree of involvement.
Theory X and Theory Y reflect polar positions and views. But it does not follow from the above that a leader who discovers a tough, despotic behavior must adhere to the provisions of theory X; there is no such unambiguous position between behavior and views.
Mack Gregor argues that people become what they are, because they are treated like this: “The sociologist does not deny that the behavior of people in an industrial organization is about how it is perceived by management. He really studied and researched it fully enough. But he is well aware that this behavior is not a consequence of human nature. It is rather a consequence of the nature of industrial organizations, management philosophy, policies and practices. The generally accepted approach of theory X is based on erroneous notions of causes and effects. ” Mac Gregor in this passage assumes that people's behavior must be either a cause or a consequence of management methods. This is a clear misconception. Both management practices and people's behavior can change and influence each other.
Contrasting theory X and theory V, MacGregor reminds us of how our prejudices influence our choice of decision. If the administration and the workers, because of their views, do not come to friendly cooperation, whose message should change first? Of course, the behavior of a manager who is more likely to be unfair.
Following the theory of Y can give a lot for the development of cooperation with subordinates.
He describes the future development of human relations. Managers who adhere to theory 2 believe that if workers have a sense of community and belonging to a team, they will rather work conscientiously and with great enthusiasm try to achieve the best end result. The theory covers all levels of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, which is a big plus. Also, theory 2 is often called the Japanese control method.
. Another theory of motivation that has influenced scientists engaged in the study of organizations is the theory put forward by D. McClelland. He began his research not with how a person acts, but with how he thinks. In this case, McClelland uses the so-called projective technique, based on the fact that the subject describes the picture shown to him in words. The basic premise is that the more ambiguous and unclear the drawing is, the more likely it is that the subject's motives will appear in the subject's story. McClelland argues that the thoughts expressed in such stories can be grouped so that they express three categories of human motives:
The need to achieve a goal may be related to several needs in Maslow's hierarchy; in essence, it is the need to do something (that in which the individual compares himself to others) better than what has been done before.
McClelland argues that a leader, in order to be a leader, must have a high need for power (i.e., essentially, an interest in having a strong influence over others), and that a high need to achieve goals is characteristic of those executives who prefer to work alone.
A high need for affiliation (i.e., the need for friendship, mutual understanding and closeness) can lead in some cases to ineffectiveness of the employee, caused by the fear of worsening the relationship. Some believe that a manager should select a job for subordinates, taking into account the motivation of the latter. There is an opinion, however, that this is not enough for high efficiency, that the system of remuneration (or compensation) should be developed with the participation of the remunerated and should be considered in direct connection with labor efficiency.
While McClelland's work can be used to improve the organizational climate, of which staff motivation is an integral part, there is much to be disputed about his theory, including the research methodology and the oversimplified classification of motives.
Another popular theory of motivation, which had, in particular, a significant impact on the concept of "development of the organization" is the "motivational and hygienic" model of F. Herzberg.
The model was the result of a series of interviews with 200 engineers and accountants, who were asked to describe in detail the events that made them feel complete satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their work. According to Herzberg's findings, the responses received fall into 2 broad categories, which he called "hygiene factors" and "motivation."
Hygiene factors are associated with the environment in which the work is carried out, and motivation - with the very nature and essence of the work. According to Herzberg, in the absence or insufficient degree of presence of hygienic factors, a person develops dissatisfaction with work. However, if they are sufficient, then by themselves they do not cause job satisfaction and cannot motivate a person to do anything. In contrast, lack or inadequacy of motivation does not lead to job dissatisfaction. But their presence is fully satisfying and motivates employees to improve their performance.
This theory proceeds from the fact that human behavior is determined by the goals that he sets for himself, since in order to achieve the goals set for himself, he performs certain actions.
The level of work performance depends on 4 characteristics of the goals:
The theory shows that if, as a result of an action, a positive result for the subject is obtained, then he receives satisfaction, if negative, then a disorder.
As you can see, each of the above theories has something special, distinctive, which gave it the opportunity to gain widespread recognition of theorists and practitioners and make a significant contribution to the development of knowledge about motivation. However, despite the fundamental differences, all the above theories have something in common (with the exception of McGregor's theory), which makes it possible to establish certain parallels between them. A characteristic feature of these models is that they study needs and give their classification, which allows one to draw conclusions about the mechanism of human motivation. Digressing from the differences and commonalities that are characteristic of the considered concepts, we can point to two common characteristics inherent in them,
First, these concepts in a very visual form, clearly and clearly state a certain view of motivation - a view confirmed by empirical research and has been used in management practice for a long time.
Secondly, all these theories focus on the analysis of the factors underlying motivation, and at the same time pay little attention to the process of motivation.
As a result, we can conclude that if you are a leader, then you need to carefully monitor your subordinates in order to decide what active needs are driving them.
Subsequently, it became clear to researchers that in order to explain the mechanism of motivation, it is necessary to consider numerous behavioral aspects and parameters of the environment. The implementation of this approach led to the creation of procedural theories of motivation.
Substantial theories of motivation are based on needs and related factors that determine human behavior. Procedural theories view motivation in a different way. They analyze how a person distributes efforts to achieve various goals and how he chooses a specific type of behavior. Procedural theories do not dispute the existence of needs, but they believe that human behavior is determined not only by them. According to procedural theories, the behavior of a person is also a function of his perception and expectations associated with a given situation, and the possible consequences of his chosen type of behavior.
There are 3 main procedural theories of motivation: the theory of expectations, the theory of justice, and the Porter-Lawler model.
The theory of expectations, often associated with the work of Viktor Vroom, is based on the proposition that the presence of an active need is not the only necessary condition for motivating a person to achieve a certain goal. A person should also hope that the type of behavior chosen by him will really lead to the satisfaction or acquisition of what he wants.
Expectations are considered as an assessment by a given personality of the likelihood of a certain event. When analyzing motivation to work, the theory of expectations emphasizes the importance of three relationships: labor costs - results; results - remuneration and valence (satisfaction with the remuneration).
Expectations in relation to labor input - results (3-P) - this is the ratio between the effort expended and the results obtained. If people feel that there is no direct connection between the effort expended and the results achieved, then, according to the theory of expectation, motivation will weaken. A lack of communication can be due to an employee's inappropriate self-esteem, poor training or inappropriate training, or because the employee has not been given sufficient rights to complete the task at hand.
Expectations in relation to results - rewards (R-B) are expectations of a certain reward or reward in response to the achieved level of results. If a person does not feel a clear connection between the achieved results and the desired encouragement or reward, the motivation to work will weaken.
The third factor that determines motivation in the theory of expectation is the valence or value of the reward or reward. Valence is the perceived degree of relative satisfaction or dissatisfaction resulting from the receipt of a certain reward. Since different people have different needs and wants for reward, the specific reward offered in response to the results achieved may not be of any value to them. If the valence is low, i.e. the value of the received remuneration for a person is not too great, then the theory of expectations predicts that the motivation for work will weaken in this case.
If the importance of any of these three critical factors for determining motivation is small, then there will be weak motivation and low performance.
To effectively motivate, the manager must establish a solid balance between performance and reward. In this regard, it is necessary to give remuneration only for effective work. Managers must formulate a high, but realistic level of results to be expected from their subordinates, and inspire them with what they can achieve if they exert themselves. How employees assess their strength depends largely on what management expects of them. It should be remembered that employees will be able to achieve the level of performance required to receive valuable remuneration if the delegated level of authority, their professional skills are sufficient to complete the task.
The theory of justice postulates that people subjectively determine the attitude of the remuneration received to the effort expended and then relate it to the remuneration of other people who do the same job. If the comparison shows imbalance and injustice, i.e. a person believes that his colleague received a greater reward for the same work, then he is under psychological stress. As a result, it is necessary to motivate this employee, relieve tension, and, to restore justice, remove the imbalance.
People can restore balance or a sense of justice, either by changing the level of effort expended, or by trying to change the level of rewards they receive. Thus, those employees who believe that they are underpaid compared to others may either start working less intensively or seek to increase remuneration. Those employees who believe that they are being overpaid will strive to maintain labor intensity at the same level or even increase it.
The main conclusion of the theory of justice for management practice is that until people start to think that they receive a fair reward, they will strive to reduce the intensity of labor.
L. Porter and E. Lawler developed a comprehensive procedural theory of motivation, including elements of the theory of expectation and the theory of justice. In their model, there are 5 variables: effort, perception, results obtained, remuneration, degree of satisfaction. The results achieved by the employee, depend on three variables: the effort, abilities and characteristics of the person, as well as the awareness of his role in the labor process. The level of effort spent, in turn, depends on the value of the reward and how much the person believes in the existence of a strong link between effort and possible reward. Achieving the required level of performance can entail internal rewards, such as a sense of job satisfaction, a sense of competence and self-esteem, as well as external rewards, such as executive praise, bonuses, and promotion.
One of the most important findings of Porter and Lawler is that productive work leads to satisfaction, and high performance is the cause of complete satisfaction, and not the result of it. As a result, this model has made a major contribution to the understanding of motivation. She showed, in particular, that motivation is not a simple element in the chain of causation. This model also shows how important it is to combine such notions as efforts, abilities, results, rewards, satisfaction and perception within a single interconnected system.
Different theories of motivation, in general, do not contradict each other, but complement each other, reflecting the versatility and non-standard nature of the motivation process itself and predetermining the need for an integrated approach to solving this complex problem.
Comments
To leave a comment
Psychology of management
Terms: Psychology of management