Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications Chapter 6 PDF

CHAPTER 6 Motivational Needs,...

CHAPTER 6 Motivational Needs, Processes, and Applications LEARNING OBJECTIVES S All rights reserved. May not be reproduced in any form without permission from the publisher, except fair uses permitted under U.S. or applicable copyright law. Define the motivation process. F Identify the primary and secondary needs. Discuss the major theories of work motivation. O Present the motivational application of job design. Describe the motivational application of goal setting. O Motivation is a basic psychological process. Few would deny that it is the most important R 1 focus in the micro approach to organizational behavior. In fact, a data-based comprehensive 2 analysis concluded that “America’s competitiveness problems appear to be largely motiva- P tional in nature.”1 Many people equate the causes of behavior with motivation; however, as 0 evidenced in this book, the causes of organizational behavior are much broader and more P 2 complex than can be explained by motivation alone. Along with many other psychological constructs, motivation is presented here as a very IA © important process in understanding behavior. Motivation interacts with and acts in conjunc- tion with other mediating processes and the environment. It must also be remembered that, like the other cognitive processes, motivation cannot be seen. All that can be seen is behav- ior. Motivation is a hypothetical construct that is used to help explain behavior; it should not be equated with behavior. In fact, while recognizing the “central role of motivation,” many of today’s organizational behavior theorists “think it is important for the field to reempha- size behavior.”2 This chapter first presents motivation as a basic psychological process. The more applied aspects of motivation on job design and goal setting are covered in the last part of the chapter. The first section of this chapter clarifies the meaning of motivation by defining the relationship among its various parts. The need–drive–incentive cycle is defined and ana- lyzed. The next section is devoted to an overview of the various types of needs, or motives: both primary and secondary. The next section of the chapter presents both the historical and more complex contemporary theories of work motivation. Finally, the two major motiva- tion applications of job design and goal setting are given attention. Copyright 2021. Information Age Publishing. THE BASIC MOTIVATION PROCESS Today, virtually all people—practitioners and scholars—have their own definitions of moti- vation. Usually one or more of the following words are included: desires, wants, wishes, aims, goals, needs, drives, motives, and incentives. Technically, the term motivation can be traced to the Latin word movere, which means “to move.” This meaning is evident in the EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT AN: 2527726 ; Fred Luthans.; Organizational Behavior: An Evidence-Based Approach Fourteenth Edition Account: s3563253.main.eds  132 PART 2 COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR FIGURE 6.1. The Basic Motivation Process NEEDS DRIVES INCENTIVES following comprehensive definition: motivation is a process that starts with a physiological or psychological deficiency or need that activates a behavior or a drive that is aimed at a goal or incentive. Thus, the key to understanding the process of motivation lies in the meaning of, and relationships among, needs, drives, and incentives. Figure 6.1 graphically depicts the motivation process. Needs set up drives aimed at goals or incentives; this is what the basic process of motivation is all about. In a systems sense, motivation consists of these three interacting and interdependent elements: S 1. Needs. Needs are created whenever there is a physiological or psychological imbal- F ance. For example, a need exists when cells in the body are deprived of food and water or when the personality is deprived of other people who serve as friends or companions. Although psychological needs may be based on a deficiency, sometimes O they are not. For example, an individual with a strong need to get ahead may have a history of consistent success. R O 1 2. Drives. With a few exceptions,3 drives, or motives (the two terms are often used inter- P changeably), are set up to alleviate needs. A physiological drive can be simply 2 defined as a deficiency with direction. Physiological and psychological drives are 0 action oriented and provide an energizing thrust toward reaching an incentive. They P 2 are at the very heart of the motivational process. The examples of the needs for food A and water are translated into the hunger and thirst drives, and the need for friends I © becomes a drive for affiliation. 3. Incentives. At the end of the motivation cycle is the incentive, defined as anything that will alleviate a need and reduce a drive. Thus, attaining an incentive will tend to restore physiological or psychological balance and will reduce or cut off the drive. Eating food, drinking water, and obtaining friends will tend to restore the balance and reduce the corresponding drives. Food, water, and friends are the incentives in these examples. These basic dimensions of the motivation process serve as a point of departure for the rest of the chapter. After discussion of primary and secondary motives, the work-motiva- tion theories and applications that are more directly related to the study and application of organizational behavior and human resource management are examined. Primary Motives Psychologists do not totally agree on how to classify the various human motives, but they would acknowledge that some motives are unlearned and physiologically based. Such motives are variously called physiological, biological, unlearned, or primary. The last term is used here because it is more comprehensive than the others. However, the use of the term primary does not imply that these motives always take precedence over the learned secondary motives. Although the precedence of primary motives is implied in some moti- vation theories, there are many situations in which the secondary motives predominate over primary motives. Common examples are celibacy among priests and fasting for a reli- EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  CHAPTER 6 MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 133 gious, social, or political cause. In both cases, learned secondary motives are stronger than unlearned primary motives. Two criteria must be met in order for a motive to be included in the primary classifi- cation: It must be unlearned, and it must be physiologically based. Thus defined, the most commonly recognized primary motives include hunger, thirst, sleep, avoidance of pain, sex, and maternal concern. Although these very basic physiological requirements have been equated with primary needs over the years, just like personality traits discussed in the last chapter, in recent years recognition is given to the role that the brain may play in peo- ple’s motives.4 The “hard-wiring” of emotional needs would meet the primary criteria of being unlearned and physiologically based. Neuropsychologists are just beginning to do research on the role the brain plays in motivation, but potential applications to the work- place are already being recognized. For example, Coffman and Gonzalez-Molina note: S “What many organizations don’t see—and what many don’t want to understand—is that F employee performance and its subsequent impact on customer engagement revolve around a motivating force that is determined in the brain and defines the specific talents and the O emotional mechanisms everyone brings to their work.”5 However, even though the brain pathways will be developed in different ways and people develop different appetites for the O various physiological motives because people have the same basic physiological makeup, 1 they will all have essentially the same primary needs, but not the learned secondary needs. P R 2 0 Secondary Motives P 2 Whereas the primary needs are vital for even survival, the secondary drives are IA © unquestionably the most important to the study of organizational behavior. As a human society develops economically and becomes more complex, the primary drives give way to the learned secondary drives in motivating behavior. With some glaring exceptions that have yet to be eradicated, the motives of hunger and thirst are not dominant among people living in the economically developed world. In addition, further breakthroughs in neuro- psychology may receive more deserved attention.6 But for now, the learned secondary motives dominate the study and application of the field of organizational behavior. Secondary motives are closely tied to the learning concepts that are discussed in Chap- ter 12. In particular, the learning principle of reinforcement is conceptually and practically related to motivation. The relationship is obvious when reinforcement is divided into pri- mary and secondary categories and is portrayed as incentives. Some discussions, however, regard reinforcement as simply a consequence serving to increase the motivation to per- form the behavior again,7 and they are treated separately in this text. Once again, however, it should be emphasized that although the various behavioral concepts can be separated for study and analysis, in reality, concepts like reinforcement and motivation do not operate as separate entities in producing human behavior. The interactive effects are always present. A motive must be learned in order to be included in the secondary classification. Numerous important human motives meet this criterion. Some of the more important ones are power, achievement, and affiliation, or, as they are commonly referred to, n Pow, n Ach, and n Aff. In addition, especially in reference to organizational behavior, security and status are important secondary motives. Table 6.1 gives examples of each of these important secondary needs. EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  134 PART 2 COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR TABLE 6.1. Examples of Key Secondary Needs Need for Achievement Need for Security Doing better than competitors Having a secure job Attaining or surpassing a difficult goal Being protected against loss of income or economic disaster Solving a complex problem Having protection against illness and disability Carrying out a challenging assignment successfully Being protected against physical harm or hazardous conditions Developing a better way to do something Avoiding tasks or decisions with a risk of failure and blame Need for Power Need for Status Influencing people to change their attitudes or behavior Having the right car and wearing the right clothes Controlling people and activities Working for the right company in the right job Being in a position of authority over others Having a degree from the right university Gaining control over information and resources Living in the right neighborhood and belonging to the country club Defeating an opponent or enemy Having executive privileges Need for Affiliation Being liked by many people S Being accepted as part of a group or team F Working with people who are friendly and cooperative Maintaining harmonious relationships and avoiding conflicts Participating in pleasant social activities O Source: Adapted from Gary Yukl, Skills for Managers and Leaders, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J., 1990, p 41. The examples of need for status were not covered by Yukl. R O Intrinsic Versus Extrinsic Motives P 21 P 0 Motives can be thought of as being generated not only by the primary and learned sec- 2 ondary needs, but also by two separate but interrelated sets of sources. One method to char- A I © acterize these two sources is to label them as being either intrinsic or extrinsic motives. Extrinsic motives are tangible and visible to others. They are distributed by other people (or agents). In the workplace, extrinsic motivators include pay, benefits, and promotions. Chapter 4 covered these commonly recognized extrinsic motivators and, especially in tough economic times, low-or no-cost extrinsic alternatives include food (from doughnuts to gourmet meals), games (e.g., one CPA firm holds a “mini-Olympics” with games such as who can pack a suitcase to take to an audit assignment the fastest for a prize), or bring in someone to do manicures or at-desk massages.8 Extrinsic motives also include the drive to avoid punishment, such as termination or being transferred. In each situation, an external individual distributes these items. Further, extrinsic rewards are usually contingency based. That is, the extrinsic motivator is contingent on improved performance or perfor- mance that is superior to others in the same workplace. Extrinsic motivators are necessary to attract people into the organization and to keep them on the job. They are also often used to inspire workers to achieve at higher levels or to reach new goals, as additional payoffs are contingent on improved performance.9 They do not, however, explain every motivated effort made by an individual employee. There is growing research evidence on how to enhance intrinsic motivation (e.g., providing choices).10 Another study found that when intrinsic motivation accompanies other types, for example, prosocial motivation, there will be a more positive impact on desired outcomes such as persistence, performance, and pro- ductivity.11 Intrinsic motives are internally generated. In other words, they are motivators that the person associates with the task or job itself. Intrinsic rewards include feelings of responsi- bility, achievement, accomplishment, that something was learned from an experience, feel- EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  CHAPTER 6 MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 135 ings of being challenged or competitive, or that something was an engaging task or goal. Performing meaningful work has long been associated with intrinsic motivation.12 As Manz and Neck noted, “Even if a task makes us feel more competent and more self-controlling, we still might have a difficult time naturally enjoying and being motivated by it if we do not believe in its worthiness. Most of us yearn for purpose and meaning.”13 It is important to remember that these two types of motivators are not completely dis- tinct from one another. Many motivators have both intrinsic and extrinsic components. For example, a person who wins a sales contest receives the prize, which is the extrinsic moti- vator. At the same time, however, “winning” in a competitive situation may be the more powerful, yet internalized, motive. To further complicate any explanation of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, cognitive evaluation theory suggests a more intricate relationship. This theory proposes that a task may be intrinsically motivating, but that when an extrinsic motivator becomes associated S with that task, the actual level of motivation may decrease.14 Consider the world of motion F pictures, where an actor often strives for many years to simply be included in a film. The intrinsic motive of acting is enough to inspire the starving artist. Once, however, the same O actor becomes a star, the extrinsic motivators of money and perks would, according to cog- nitive evaluation theory, cause the individual to put less effort into each performance. In O other words, according to this theory, extrinsic motivators may actually undermine intrin- sic motivation. This may seem like a confusing outcome, but there is some research that R 1 supports this theoretical position.15 However, as the meta-analytically based principle at 2 the end of the chapter notes, there is considerable research evidence that extrinsic rewards P may not detract from intrinsic motivation, and at least for interesting, challenging tasks, 0 extrinsic rewards may even increase the level of intrinsic motivation (see the end of the P 2 chapter OB Principle).16 The seemingly contradictory findings make more sense when the concept of negative IA © extrinsic motives is included. That is, threats, deadlines, directives, pressures, and imposed goals are likely to be key factors that diminish intrinsic motivation. For example, consider the difference between writing a book for fun versus writing a book that must be completed by a certain deadline in order to receive payment.17 There are also a series of criticisms of the cognitive evaluation theory, including that it was built on studies largely using students as subjects rather than workers in the workplace setting and that actual decrements in intrinsic motivation were relatively small when extrinsic rewards were introduced.18 Chapter 7 will extend this discussion into social cognitive variables such as self-effi- cacy, and Chapter 12 will use an extended reinforcement theory–based approach to behav- ioral performance management. WORK-MOTIVATION THEORIES So far, motivation has been presented as a basic psychological process consisting of pri- mary, general, and secondary motives; drives such as the n Pow, n Aff, and n Ach motives; and intrinsic and extrinsic motivators. In order to understand organizational behavior, these basic motives must be recognized and studied. However, these serve as only background and foundation for the more directly relevant work-motivation theories. Figure 6.2 graphically summarizes the various theoretical streams for work motiva- tion. In particular, the figure shows three historical streams. The content theories go as far back as the turn of the twentieth century, when pioneering scientific managers such as Frederick W. Taylor, Frank Gilbreth, and Henry L. Gantt proposed sophisticated wage EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  136 PART 2 COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR FIGURE 6.2. The Theoretical Development of Work Motivation 1900 Scientific Management wage incentives Human Relations economic security, Lewin and Tolman working conditions expectancy concerns Maslow Vroom hierarchy of needs valence/expectancy Festinger and Homans cognitive dissonance/exchange Herzberg Porter and Lawler Heider, de Charmes, and Bem motivators and hygiene performance-satisfaction cognitive evaluation/self-perception factors F S Alderfer Lawler Adams Kelley and Rotter ERG needs E P and P O expectancies equity/justice attribution/locus of control O Present CONTENT THEORIES PROCESS THEORIES CONTEMPORARY THEORIES R WORK MOTIVATION O P 21 incentive models to motivate workers. Next came the human relations movement, and then P 0 the content theories of Maslow, Herzberg, and Alderfer. Following the content movement 2 were the process theories. Based mainly on the cognitive concept of expectancy, the pro- A cess theories are most closely associated with the work of pioneering social psychologists I © Kurt Lewin and Edward Tolman and then organizational behavior scholars Victor Vroom, Lyman Porter, and Ed Lawler. Finally, with roots in social psychology, equity and its derivative procedural/organizational justice, and attribution theories have received atten- tion in work motivation. Figure 6.2 purposely shows that at present there is a lack of integration or synthesis of the various theories. In addition to the need for integration, a comprehensive assessment of the status of work-motivation theory also noted the need for contingency models and group/social processes.19 At present the content and process theories have become estab- lished explanations for work motivation, and there is continued research interest in equity and organizational justice theories, but no agreed-upon overall theory exists. Moreover, unlike most of the other constructs in organizational behavior, reviews conclude that there has been relatively little new theory-building and research in work motivation in recent years.20 As Steers concluded, “over the past decade little will be found focusing on genuine theoretical development in this area.”21 The rest of the chapter gives an overview of the widely recognized historical and contemporary theories of work motivation. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: An Important Historical Contribution Although the first part of the chapter mentions the most important primary and second- ary needs of humans, it does not relate them to a theoretical framework. Abraham Maslow, in a classic paper, outlined the elements of an overall theory of motivation.22 Drawing EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  CHAPTER 6 MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 137 FIGURE 6.3. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs SELF- AC TUALIZATION ESTEEM NEEDS LOVE NEEDS SAFETY NEEDS S PHYSIOLOGICAL NEEDS O F chiefly from humanistic psychology and his clinical experience, he thought that a person’s O motivational needs could be arranged in a hierarchical manner. In essence, he believed that once a given level of need is satisfied, it no longer serves to motivate. The next higher level R 1 of need has to be activated in order to motivate the individual. 2 Maslow identified five levels in his need hierarchy (see Figure 6.3). They are, in brief, P the following: 1. P 2 0 Physiological needs. The most basic level in the hierarchy, the physiological needs, generally corresponds to the unlearned primary needs discussed earlier. The needs of IA © hunger, thirst, sleep, and sex are some examples. According to the theory, once these basic needs are satisfied, they no longer motivate. For example, a starving person will strive to obtain a carrot that is within reach. However, after eating his or her fill of carrots, the person will not strive to obtain another one and will be motivated only by the next higher level of needs. 2. Safety needs. This second level of needs is roughly equivalent to the security need. Maslow stressed emotional as well as physical safety. The whole organism may become a safety-seeking mechanism. Yet, as is true of the physiological needs, once these safety needs are satisfied, they no longer motivate. 3. Love needs. This third, or intermediate, level of needs loosely corresponds to the affection and affiliation needs. Like Freud, Maslow seems guilty of poor choice of wording to identify his levels. His use of the word love has many misleading connota- tions, such as sex, which is actually a physiological need. Perhaps a more appropriate word describing this level would be belongingness or social needs. 4. Esteem needs. The esteem level represents the higher needs of humans. The needs for power, achievement, and status can be considered part of this level. Maslow carefully pointed out that the esteem level contains both self-esteem and esteem from others. 5. Needs for self-actualization. Maslow’s major contribution, he portrays this level as the culmination of all the lower, intermediate, and higher needs of humans. People who have become self-actualized are self-fulfilled and have realized all their poten- tial. Self-actualization is closely related to the self-concepts discussed in Chapter 7. In effect, self-actualization is the person’s motivation to transform perception of self into reality. EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  138 PART 2 COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR FIGURE 6.4. A Hierarchy of Work Motivation SELF- AC TUALIZATION Personal growth, realization of potential ESTEEM NEEDS Titles, status symbols, promotions, banquets SOCIAL NEEDS Formal and informal work groups or teams S SECURITY NEEDS F Seniority plans, union, health insurance, employee assistance plans, severance pay, pension R O 1 BASIC NEEDS Pay O P P 0 2 2 Maslow did not intend that his needs hierarchy be directly applied to work motivation. In A I © fact, he did not delve into the motivating aspects of humans in organizations until about 20 years after he originally proposed his theory. Despite this lack of intent on Maslow’s part, others, such as Douglas McGregor in his widely read book The Human Side of Enterprise, popularized the Maslow theory in management literature. The needs hierarchy has tremen- dous intuitive appeal and is widely associated with work motivation. In a very rough manner, Maslow’s needs hierarchy theory can be converted into the content model of work motivation shown in Figure 6.4. If Maslow’s estimates are applied to an organization example, the lower-level needs of personnel would be generally satis- fied, but only a minority of the social and esteem needs, and a small percent of the self- actualization needs, would be met. On the surface, the content model shown in Figure 6.4 and the estimated percentages given by Maslow seem logical and still largely applicable to the motivation of employees in today’s organizations. Maslow’s needs hierarchy has often been uncritically accepted by writers of management textbooks and by practitioners. Unfortunately, the limited research that has been conducted lends little empirical support to the theory. About a decade after publishing his original paper, Maslow did attempt to clarify his position by saying that gratifying the self-actualizing need of growth-motivated individuals can actually increase rather than decrease this need. He also hedged on some of his other original ideas, for example, that higher needs may emerge after lower needs that have been unfulfilled or sup- pressed for a long period are satisfied. He stressed that human behavior is multidetermined and multimotivated. Research findings indicate that Maslow’s is certainly not the final answer in work motivation. Yet the theory does make a significant contribution in terms of making man- agement aware of the diverse needs of employees at work. As one comprehensive analysis EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  CHAPTER 6 MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 139 concluded, “Indeed, the general ideas behind Maslow’s theory seem to be supported, such as the distinction between deficiency needs and growth needs.”23 However, the number and names of the levels are not so important, nor, as the studies show, is the hierarchical concept. What is important is the fact that employees in the workplace have diverse motives, some of which are “high level.” There is also empirical and experiential evidence supporting the importance of Maslow’s various needs (e.g., Gallup survey research clearly indicates that Maslow’s third level social needs are the single most important contribution to satisfaction with life24 and a lot of, if not most, high-achieving people feel unfulfilled because they have not reached self-actualization25). In other words, such needs as social and self-actualization are important to the content of work motivation. The exact nature of these needs and how they relate to motivation are not clear. At the same time, what does become clear from contemporary research is that layoffs and terminations (i.e., downsizing) can reduce employees to have concerns about S basic-level needs such as security. Organizations that endeavor to reduce fears and other F strong emotional responses during these moments through severance pay programs and outplacement services may be able to lessen the impact of individual terminations and lay- O offs, especially for those who remain with the company.26 In recent years there has been a resurgence of interest in humanistic psychology27 and O as will be discussed in the next chapter, positive psychology, of which Maslow was one of the pioneers. Throughout the years there have been attempts to revitalize and make his R 1 hierarchy of needs more directly applicable to work motivation. In particular, Herzberg’s 2 two-factor theory covered next is based on Maslow’s concept, and a number of others use P 0 Maslow for constructing various hierarchies or pyramids. One example is Aon Consult- ing’s Performance Pyramid that starts with safety and security and moves up through P 2 rewards, affiliation, growth, and work and life harmony.28 There is little question that Maslow’s theory has stood the test of time and still makes a contribution to the study and IA © application to work motivation. Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of Motivation Another historically important contribution to work motivation is the content theory of Frederick Herzberg. Unlike Maslow, Herzberg many years ago conducted a widely reported motivational study on about 200 accountants and engineers employed by firms in and around Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He used the critical incident method of obtaining data for analysis. The professional subjects in the study were essentially asked two ques- tions: (1) When did you feel particularly good about your job—what turned you on; and (2) When did you feel exceptionally bad about your job—what turned you off? Responses obtained from this critical incident method were interesting and fairly con- sistent. Reported good feelings were generally associated with job experiences and job content. An example was the accounting supervisor who felt good about being given the job of installing new computer equipment. He took pride in his work and was gratified to know that the new equipment made a big difference in the overall functioning of his depart- ment. Reported bad feelings, on the other hand, were generally associated with the sur- rounding or peripheral aspects of the job—the job context. An example of these feelings was related by an engineer whose first job was routine record keeping and managing the office when the boss was gone. It turned out that his boss was always too busy to train him and became annoyed when he tried to ask questions. The engineer said that he was frus- trated in this job context and that he felt like a flunky in a dead-end job. EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  140 PART 2 COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR TABLE 6.2. Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory Hygiene Factors Motivators Company policy and administration Achievement Supervision, technical Recognition Salary Work itself Interpersonal relations, supervisor Responsibility Working conditions Advancement Tabulating these reported good and bad feelings, Herzberg concluded that job satis- fiers are related to job content and that job dissatisfiers are allied to job context. Herzberg labeled the satisfiers motivators, and he called the dissatisfiers hygiene factors. The term S hygiene refers (as it does in the health field) to factors that are preventive; in Herzberg’s theory the hygiene factors are those that prevent dissatisfaction. Taken together, the moti- F vators and the hygiene factors have become known as Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation. Relation to Maslow’s Need Hierarchy R O 1 O P 2 Herzberg’s theory is closely related to Maslow’s need hierarchy. The hygiene factors are preventive and environmental in nature (see Table 6.2), and they are roughly equivalent P 0 to Maslow’s lower-level needs. These hygiene factors prevent dissatisfaction, but they do 2 not lead to satisfaction. In effect, they bring motivation up to a theoretical zero level and A are a necessary “floor” to prevent dissatisfaction, and they serve as a platform or takeoff I © point for motivation. By themselves, the hygiene factors do not motivate. Only the motiva- tors, Herzberg asserted, motivate employees on the job. They are roughly equivalent to Maslow’s higher-level needs. According to Herzberg’s theory, an individual must have a job with a challenging content in order to be truly motivated. Contribution to Work Motivation Herzberg’s two-factor theory provided a new light on the content of work motivation. Up to this point, management had generally concentrated on the hygiene factors. When faced with a morale problem, the typical solution was higher pay, more fringe benefits, and better working conditions. However, as has been pointed out, this simplistic solution did not really work. Management are often perplexed because they are paying high wages and salaries, have an excellent fringe-benefit package, and provide great working conditions, but their employees are still not motivated. Herzberg’s theory offered an explanation for this problem. By concentrating only on the hygiene factors, management were not really motivating their personnel. There are probably very few workers or associates who do not feel that they deserve the raise they receive. On the other hand, there are many dissatisfied associates and man- agers who feel they do not get a large enough raise. This simple observation points out that the hygiene factors seem to be important in preventing dissatisfaction but do not lead to sat- isfaction. Herzberg would be the first to say that the hygiene factors are absolutely neces- sary to maintain the human resources of an organization. However, as in the Maslow sense, once “the belly is full” of hygiene factors, which is the case in most modern organizations, EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  CHAPTER 6 MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 141 dangling any more in front of employees will not really motivate them. According to Her- zberg’s theory, only a challenging job that has the opportunities for achievement, recogni- tion, responsibility, advancement, and growth will motivate personnel. Critical Analysis of Herzberg’s Theory Herzberg’s two-factor theory remains important in a historical sense and a popular textbook explanation of work motivation and it still makes intuitive sense to practitioners. However, it also is true that from an academic perspective, Herzberg’s theory oversimpli- fies the complexities of work motivation. When researchers deviate from the critical inci- dent methodology used by Herzberg, they do not get the two factors. Further, there is always a question regarding the samples used by Herzberg: Would he have obtained the results from low-complexity jobs such as truck drivers and third-shift factory workers or S waitstaff personnel? Presumably both the hygiene factors and satisfiers could be substan- F tially different when comparing these groups. Factors that affect research results include the age of the sample and other variables that are not held constant or under control. In O international settings, older workers in an Israeli kibbutz preferred jobs that had better physical conditions and convenience. Also, Caribbean hotel workers reported being more O interested in wages, working conditions, and appreciation for their work as key motiva- tors.29 These findings suggest that sample and setting may affect preferences for motiva- R 1 tors and hygiene factors. P 2 Finally, there seem to be job factors such as pay that lead to both satisfaction and dis- 0 satisfaction. For example, pay can be dissatisfying if not high enough, but, as pointed out in Chapter 4, also satisfying as a form of achievement and recognition. These findings indi- P 2 cate that a strict interpretation of the two-factor theory is not warranted by the evidence. IA © In spite of the obvious limitations, few would question that Herzberg has contributed substantially to the study of work motivation. He extended Maslow’s needs hierarchy con- cept and made it more applicable to work motivation. Herzberg also drew attention to the importance of job content factors in work motivation, which previously had been badly neglected and often totally overlooked. However, even the context can be made to better fit the jobholder. For example, many Internet businesses never have employees directly inter- act with customers so their dress, appearance, and work space can be highly informal and designed according to personal choice.30 The job design technique of job enrichment is also one of Herzberg’s contributions. Job enrichment is covered in the last part of the chapter. Overall, Herzberg added much to the better understanding of job content factors and satisfaction, but, like his predecessors, he fell short of a comprehensive theory of work motivation. His model describes only some of the content of work motivation; it does not adequately describe the complex motivation process of organizational participants that will now be given attention in the more complex theories of work motivation. The Porter-Lawler Expectancy Theory of Work Motivation Comments in Chapter 5 on job satisfaction refer to the controversy over the relationship between satisfaction and performance that has existed since the beginnings of the human relations movement. The Maslow and Herzberg content theories implicitly assume that sat- isfaction leads to improved performance and that dissatisfaction detracts from performance. In particular, the Herzberg model is really a theory of job satisfaction, but still it does not EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  142 PART 2 COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR FIGURE 6.5. The Porter-Lawler Motivation Model 1 4 Value Abilities Perceived 8 of reward and traits equitable rewards 7A Intrinsic rewards 9 3 6 Satisfaction Performance Effort (accomplishment) 7B Extrinsic rewards S Perceived 2 5 Role F effort reward perceptions probability R O 1 O P 2 adequately deal with the relationship between satisfaction and performance. It was not until P 0 Porter and Lawler that the relationship between satisfaction and performance was dealt with 2 directly by a motivation theory. They start with the premise that motivation (effort or force) A does not equal satisfaction or performance. Motivation, satisfaction, and performance are I © all separate variables and relate in ways different from what was traditionally assumed. Figure 6.5 depicts the multivariable model used to explain the complex relationships that exist among motivation, performance, and satisfaction. As shown, boxes 1, 2, and 3 are basically drawn from earlier cognitive concepts from pioneering social psychologists such as Kurt Lewin and Edward Tolman and from the recognized seminal work motivation theory of Victor Vroom.31 It is important to note, however, that Porter and Lawler point out that effort (force or motivation) does not lead directly to performance. It is moderated by abilities and traits and by role perceptions. More important in the Porter-Lawler model is what hap- pens after the performance. The rewards that follow and how these are perceived will deter- mine satisfaction. In other words, the Porter-Lawler model suggests—and this is a significant turn of events from conventional wisdom—that performance leads to satisfaction. The model has had research support over the years. For example, a field study found that effort level and direction of effort are important in explaining individual performance in an organization.32 Also, a comprehensive review of research verifies the importance of rewards in the relationship between performance and satisfaction. Specifically, it was con- cluded that performance and satisfaction will be more strongly related when rewards are made contingent on performance than when they are not.33 Implications for Practice Although the Porter-Lawler model attempts to be more applications oriented than the earlier expectancy theories, it is still quite complex and has proved to be a difficult way to bridge the gap to actual human resource management practice. To Porter and Lawler’s EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  CHAPTER 6 MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 143 credit, they were very conscientious of putting their theory and research into practice. They recommended that practicing managers go beyond traditional attitude measurement and attempt to measure variables such as the values of possible rewards, the perceptions of effort-reward probabilities, and role perceptions. These variables, of course, can help man- agers better understand what goes into employee effort and performance. Giving attention to the consequences of performance, Porter and Lawler also recommended that organiza- tions critically reevaluate their current reward policies. They stressed that management should make a concentrated effort to measure how closely levels of satisfaction are related to levels of performance, and in a practitioner-oriented article emphasized that the accu- racy of role perceptions may be the missing link in improving employee performance.34 The inference here is that employees need to better focus their efforts on high-impact behaviors and activities that result in higher performance. However, both studies35 and comprehensive analyses36 continue to point out the complex impact that the cognitive pro- S cess has in relation to rewards and other outcomes in organizations. F Contributions to Work Motivation O The Porter and Lawler model has definitely made a significant contribution to the bet- ter understanding of work motivation and the relationship between performance and satis- O faction, but has not had much impact on the actual practice of human resource 1 management. Yet this expectancy theory provides certain guidelines that can be followed R by human resource management. For example, on the front end (the relationship between P 2 motivation and performance), it has been suggested that the following barriers must be 0 overcome: P 2 1. Doubts about ability, skill, or knowledge IA © 2. The physical or practical possibility of the job 3. The interdependence of the job with other people or activities 4. Ambiguity surrounding the job requirements37 To overcome these barriers, it is helpful to understand the role other psychological variables such as self-efficacy (covered in the next chapter) play in effort-performance relationships. A series of successes combined with positive feedback build the employee’s sense of self-efficacy, which can, in turn, lead to a heightened sense that “I can do this.” Greater effort may often be the result.38 In addition to psychological constructs such as self-efficacy, there are also pragmatic considerations such as that the opportunity must be present to actually perform. For example, there are many second-string players in pro sports that have stepped in for an injured starter to take the team to the championship. The back-up probably had sufficient valance (pay plus the bonus check paid to the winners), instrumentality or effort-performance calculations (ability combined with self-efficacy), and expectancy or performance-reward calculations (the belief that goal achievement would result in additional pay and recognition), yet still could not succeed until he was allowed to play due to the injury of the first-string player. In addition, on the back end (the relationship between performance and satisfaction), guidelines such as the following have been suggested: 1. Determine what rewards each employee values 2. Define desired performance 3. Make desired performance attainable 4. Link valued rewards to performance39 EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  144 PART 2 COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR The last point was given attention in Chapter 4 on the importance of pay for perfor- mance. At the same time, managers should be advised that an employee in a way calculates expectancies regarding future employment possibilities when seeking to leave an organiza- tion, and more importantly, often sees a connection between performance and reward that invites less effort in a group or team situation. The reduced value is based on the belief that the person’s own efforts are not sufficient to raise group performance levels, and that group incentives are less valuable than individualized rewards. Also brought out in Chapter 4, managers may also take advantage of this process moti- vational approach by considering the use of nonfinancial rewards for performance. Many times workers may be inspired by being given first choice in selecting weeks for vacation, being allowed to choose when they will go to lunch (ahead of lower performers), being awarded certificates or “employee of the month” parking spaces or, as the accompanying OB in Action: Nice Work If You Can Get It describes, new rewards such as sabbaticals. Recognition as a valence can be a powerful reward within the expectancy theory frame- S work and was discussed in Chapter 4 and is given further detailed attention in Chapter 12. Equity Theory of Work Motivation O F Equity theory has been around just as long as the expectancy theories of work motiva- R O in the organizational 1 tion. However, equity has received relatively more recent attention P behavior field. As Figure 6.2 indicates, its roots can be traced back to cognitive dissonance 2 theory and exchange theory. As a theory of work motivation, credit for equity theory is 0 usually given to social psychologist J. Stacy Adams. Simply put, the theory argues that a P major input into job performance and satisfaction is the degree of equity (or inequity) that 2 people perceive in their work situation. In other words, it is another cognitively based moti- A I © vation theory, and Adams depicts how this motivation occurs. Inequity occurs when a person perceives that the ratio of his or her outcomes to inputs and the ratio of a relevant other’s outcomes to inputs are unequal. Schematically, this is represented as follows: person's outcomes other's outcomes -------------------------------------------  ---------------------------------------- person's inputs other's inputs person's outcomes  other's ------------------------------------------- outcomes- --------------------------------------- person's inputs other's inputs Equity occurs when person's outcomes other's outcomes ------------------------------------------- = ---------------------------------------- person's inputs other's inputs Both the inputs and the outputs of the person and the other are based on the person’s per- ceptions. Age, sex, education, social status, organizational position, qualifications, and how hard the person works are examples of perceived input variables. Outcomes consist primarily of rewards such as pay, status, promotion, and intrinsic interest in the job. In essence, the ratio is based on the person’s perception of what the person is giving (inputs) and receiving (outcomes) versus the ratio of what the relevant other is giving and receiving. This cognition may or may not be the same as someone else’s observation of the ratios or the same as the actual reality. There is also recent recognition that the cultural context may affect the entire equity process.40 EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  CHAPTER 6 MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 145 Equity as an Explanation of Work Motivation If the person’s perceived ratio is not equal to the other’s, he or she will strive to restore the ratio to equity. This “striving” to restore equity is used as the explanation of work moti- vation. The strength of this motivation is in direct proportion to the perceived inequity that exists. Adams suggests that such motivation may be expressed in several forms. To restore equity, the person may alter the inputs or outcomes, cognitively distort the inputs or out- comes, leave the field, act on the other, or change the other. It is important to note that inequity does not come about only when the person feels cheated. For example, Adams has studied the impact that perceived overpayment has on equity. His findings suggest that workers prefer equitable payment to overpayment. Work- ers on a piece-rate incentive system who feel overpaid will reduce their productivity in order to restore equity. More common, however, is the case of people who feel underpaid S (outcome) or overworked (input) in relation to others in the workplace. In the latter case, F there would be motivation to restore equity in a way that may be dysfunctional from an organizational standpoint. For example, the owner of an appliance store in Oakland, Cali- O fornia, allowed his employees to set their own wages. Interestingly, none of the employees took an increase in pay, and one service technician actually settled on lower pay because O he did not want to work as hard as the others. R 1 Research Support for Equity in the Workplace P 0 2 To date, research that has specifically tested the validity of Adams’s equity theory has P 2 been fairly supportive. A comprehensive review found considerable laboratory research support for the “equity norm” (people review the inputs and outcomes of themselves and IA © others, and if inequity is perceived, they strive to restore equity) but only limited support from more relevant field studies.41 One line of field research on equity theory used baseball players. In the first study, players who played out their option year, and thus felt they were inequitably paid, performed as the theory would predict.42 Their performance decreased in three of four categories (not batting average) during the option year, and when they were signed to a new contract, the performance was restored. However, a second study using the same type of sample, only larger, found the opposite of what equity theory would predict.43 Mainly, performance improved during the option year. The reason, of course, was that the players wanted to look especially good, even though they felt they were inequitably paid, in order to be in a stronger bargaining position for a new contract. In other words, individuals faced with undercompensation may choose to decrease performance, but only to the extent that doing so will not affect the potential to achieve future rewards.44 In any event, there are no easy answers nor is there 100 percent predictive power when applying a cognitive process theory such as equity. Despite some seeming inconsistencies, more recent studies using sophisticated statis- tical techniques to estimate pay equity among ballplayers45 and focusing more sharply on subsequent performance and other outcomes are more in line with equity theory predic- tions. For example, one study found a significant relationship between losing final-offer salary arbitration and postarbitration performance decline. The ballplayers who were losers in arbitration were also significantly more likely to change teams or leave major league baseball.46 In another study of baseball and basketball players, it was found that the under- rewarded players behaved less cooperatively.47 This type of equity theory development and research goes beyond expectancy theory as a cognitive explanation of work motivation EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  146 PART 2 COGNITIVE PROCESS OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOR and serves as a point of departure for more specialized areas of current interest such as organizational justice. The Relationship Between Equity Theory and Organizational Justice Recent theory development specifies that equity theory can be extended into what is now commonly known as organizational justice.48 Although procedural justice has received the most attention, there is now research evidence that in addition there is concep- tual and measurement independence (i.e., construct validity) for distributive, interpersonal, and informational justice dimensions as well.49 Equity theory serves as the foundation for the common thread of perceived fairness among these dimensions of justice. For example, equity theory explains conditions under which decision outcomes (pay levels, pay raises, S promotions) are perceived as being fair or unfair. Persons engaged in this type of thinking examine the results as opposed to how those results were achieved. Equity theory supports F a perception of distributive justice, which is an individual’s cognitive evaluation regarding whether or not the amounts and allocations of rewards in a social setting are fair. In simple O terms, distributive justice is one’s belief that everyone should “get what they deserve.” Culturally, the Judeo-Christian ethic is based, in part, on the notion that divine rewards R O while here are on earth. 1 accrue to those who lead good lives and behave appropriately, even P This reflects the distributive justice and equity perspectives. Importantly, meta-analytic 2 results have demonstrated that employee perceptions of distributive justice are related to 0 desirable outcomes such as job satisfaction, organizational commitment, organizational P citizenship behavior, turnover, and performance.50 A 2 Procedural justice is concerned with the fairness of the procedure used to make a deci- I © sion. For example, a pay raise may be based on a sales representative selling more units of, for example, automobiles or houses. Some coworkers may consider this procedure to be unfair, believing management should instead base pay raises on dollar volume. This con- clusion may be reached because selling 10 houses or cars for a low amount of money each contributes very little to company profits and they are, at the same time, easier to sell. Sell- ing high-priced cars or houses may take much longer to finalize, but the profits garnered for the company are also higher. In this case it is not the outcome in dispute, which is the amount of the pay received. Instead, it is the perceived justice (fairness) of the procedure used to reach the outcome. Like distributive justice, employee perceptions of procedural justice have been shown through meta-analysis to be related to all the desirable organiza- tional outcomes.51 Indeed, in another meta-analysis, procedural justice was found to be a better predictor of job performance than was distributive justice52 and procedural justice seems to be particularly important to successfully implementing organizational changes.53 Procedural justice can raise issues of equality as opposed to equity. Equality means that in a promotion situation, males and females and all races would have equal opportuni- ties to be selected, and that the criteria used would not discriminate. Equity would mean that the actual choice was fair, and that the criteria were correctly applied and therefore the most-qualified individual was promoted. Unlike the traditional content and process theories of work motivation, research con- tinues to refine and extend equity theory in general and procedural justice in particular. For example, in support of equity theory, a recent study found that managers who perceive effort-reward fairness perform better and are more satisfied than those who feel underre- warded and unfairly treated.54 Another study used social exchange theory to differentiate interactional justice from procedural justice. Whereas procedural justice is the exchange EBSCOhost - printed on 7/2/2022 3:36 PM via LOUISIANA STATE UNIVERSITY AT SHREVEPORT. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use  CHAPTER 6 MOTIVATIONAL NEEDS, PROCESSES, AND APPLICATIONS 147 between the employee and the employing organization, interactional justice is between individuals (e.g., the employee and the supervisor). The research supported the exchange theory predictions.55 There is also some evidence that such interactional justice may not be as predictive as other justice perceptions. For example, a recent study found that manager trustworthiness was more predictive of organizational citizenship behaviors (covered in the last chapter) than was interactional justice.56 Other recent studies focusing on procedural justice have found importance in being allowed the opportunity to voice an opinion on per- ceptions of fairness57 and in the effects of group membership and status (i.e., one’s social standing) on perceptions of fairness.58 In particular, it was found in this latter study that procedural injustice was not perceived by all who observed it (in this case judges and attor- neys did not perceive bias against female attorneys). Finally, a recent study moved to the level of overall justice climate (procedural, informational, and interpersonal) and found it related to various work outcomes (commitment, satisfaction, and citizenship behaviors).59 S In total, with equity theory serving as the foundation, the various dimensions of orga- nizational justice play an important role in many dynamics and outcomes of organizational F behavior. Organizational justice can help explain why employees retaliate against both inequitable outcomes and inappropriate processes. For example, retaliation in the form of O theft, sabotage, forged time cards, and even violence toward the boss or owner can be explained using the principles of organizational ju