The important theories of motivation are as follows:
(1) Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory:
According to Maslow, the basic human needs are set in a hierarchy as follows:
(1) Physiological needs—These needs are basic for human survival and include need for food, water, air shelter, sleep, thirst, set etc.
(2) Security or Safety needs-These are needs for physical safety as well as psychological security and include safety of person and property, security of job and need for a predictable, secure and safe environment.
(3) Social needs—These are needs for belongingness, friendship, love, affection, attention and social acceptance.
(4) Esteem or Ego needs—These are needs for self-esteem and need for other esteem. Self-esteem needs include needs for self-respect, self-confidence, competence, autonomy and knowledge. Other esteem needs relate to reputation, prestige, power, status, recognition and respect of others.
(5) Self-actualisation needs—This is the need "to be what one is capable of becoming" and include need for optional development of potential abilities, knowledge and skills, need to be creative and achieve self-fulfillment.
At the lowest level are physiological needs for survival. As one need is reasonably satisfied, the next higher order need becomes operational. This happens because a satisfied need is no longer a motivator, only unsatisfied needs impel people to act. Until physiological needs are satisfied to the degree needed for the efficient operation of the body, other levels will provide him with little satisfaction and motivation. A famous saying, "man can live on bread alone if there is no breads". Suggests that human beings first try to acquire necessitities for their survival. Once the physiological needs are satisfied to a reasonable degree there comes safety needs. An organisation can influence these security needs through job security, insurance and retirement plans, safe and healthy working conditions. After the first two needs are satisfied, social needs become important in the need hierarchy. In a work situation, social needs are concerned with relating to friendly associates, identification with good company and participation in organised social activities. Esteem or ego needs provide management almost unlimited scope to create an environment for their gratification. These needs are more dominant at the level of managers than at the worker level, and therefore, assume considerable significance for managerial motivation. Job title and responsibilities, praise, promotions are all important factors in satisfying the esteem needs. Needs for self- actualisation is the highest order need. In an organisation, a person attempting to satisfy this need seeks challenging work assignments that allow for creativity and opportunities for personal growth and advancement.
(2) Herzberg's two factor theory:
Herzberg's Theory of Motivation is an extension of the need hierarchy model of A.H. Maslow. In 1950's Herzberg and his associates conducted extensive interviews of about 200 engineers and accountants to find the forces which motivate them at work. The conclusions based on this survey is called, "Herzberg's Theory of Motivation". According to this theory, there are two types of factors which affect motivation.These factors are:
Hygiene Factors, and Motivators.
(a) Hygiene Factors—The first group of factors -are called by Herzberg as Extrinsic, Hygiene, Maintenance or Job context factor. They relate to the environment and are external to the job. They include (i) company policy and administration, (ii) technical aspects of supervision, (iii) interpersonal aspects of supervision, (iv) interpersonal relations with peers and subordinates, (v) working conditions, (vi) salary, (vii) status and (viii) job security. The presence of these factors does not cause motivation or positive satisfaction, though their absence causes dissatisfaction. They are, therefore, dissatisfiers and not motivators. They are surrounding physical, administrative and social environmental factors. Hygiene factors make up a continuum ranging from dissatisfaction to no dissatisfaction. These factors are necessary to maintain a reasonable level of satisfaction in employees since any increase in these factors will not affect employee's level of satisfaction, these are of no use for motivating them.
(b) Motivation Factors-The second class of factors are referred as intrinsic, job content or motivation factors or motivators or satisfiers. These factors include (i) achievement, (ii) recognition, (iii) responsibility, (iv) advancement, (v) growth, and (vi) work itself. Their absence does not cause dissatisfaction but their presence has an uplifting effect on employee motivation. They are intimately related with the job and not related to surrounding environment. These factors make up a continuum leading from no job satisfaction to satisfaction and therefore they can be used in motivating them for higher output.
There are many related studies which support the view of Herzberg. Research findings of Ishwar Dayal and Saiyadin are highly supportive of this theory in Indian context. On the other hand, there are various studies, the results of which are against the model given by Herzberg. It has been subjected to following criticisms:
(1) This theory is based on delineation between satisfies (motivators)and dissatisfiers (hygiene). This is obviously doubtful and inaccurate. Pay may be dissatisfier to some individuals and satisfier to others. Hygiene and motivation factors should not be considered as absolute categories.
(2) The theory focuses too much attention on satisfaction or dissatisfaction rather than on the performance level of individual. Numerous research studies have been shown that an employee's productivity does not vary directly with his level of satisfaction. There are highly satisfied workers who are low producers and vice versa.
(3) This theory does not attach much importance to pay, status or inter-personal relationships which are generally held as important contents of satisfaction.
(4) The theory is most applicable to knowledge workers i.e., managers, engineers, accountants etc. Studies of lower level or manual workers are less supportive of the theory.
Inspite of these criticisms, this theory has been applied in the industry and has given several new insights. The theory has focused management's attention to the possibility of increasing productivity by adopting job-enrichment practices.
(3) McGregor's X and Y Theory:
Theory X—Theory X is the traditional theory of human behaviour. According to this theory, workers are inherently lazy, passive and unambitious. Therefore there is a need for control and direction over workers. People at work are to follow the directives of the management and cannot suggest what they think to be correct.
This theory is based on the following assumptions:
(1) The average worker in an organisation basically dislikes work and by nature, he is indolent and avoids work whenever possible.
(2) He is usually self-centered and he cares little for the organisational goals.
(3) He is usually lazy and has no ambition.
(4) He tries to avoid responsibility and only desires security.
(5) The average worker actually prefers to be directed, to being left on his own.
(6) Because of the human nature of dislike for work, most of the worker must be forced, controlled, directed, threatened punished to get them to put adequate efforts towards the achievement of organisational behaviour.
Thus, management should rely more on discipline, punishment, close supervision etc. Suitability of theory X in modern times—The theory X is not suitable in modern times. The theory supports authoritarian view which is quite unwarranted in the present economy. McGregor himself says that this theory does not represent the modern views on management. The assumptions of this theory about the human nature are negative in their approach. Management can gel results by following this theory but only in short run when workers respond to pressures and controls partly out of fear of consequences of not following orders. The recent researches conclude that the most effective way to get results is to work with people rather than through them. Further, governments of most of the countries have stressed that workers must be given an honorable place in the management; they must be regarded as partners in the organisation.
Theory Y—McGregor realised that theory X's assumptions about human behaviour are not always true. As such, he developed an alternate theory of human behaviour, called "Theory Y". This theory represents democratic approach. Theory Y indicates the individual and organisation both and highlights the need for improving and utilising inner motivation. The assumptions of this theory are as follows:
(a) The average human being does not inherently dislike work. Depending upon controllable conditions, work may be a source of satisfaction.
(b) External control and threat of punishment are not the only means for bringing about effort towards organisation objectives.
© Commitment to objectives is a function of the rewards associated with their achievement.
(d) The average human being learns not only to accept but to seek responsibility.
(e) Under conditions of modern industrial life, the intellectual potentialities of the average human being are only partially utilised.
The assumptions of theory Y suggest a new approach in management. It emphasises on the cooperative endeavour of management and employees. The attempt is to get maximum output with minimum amount of control and direction. Generally no conflict is visible between organisational goals and individual goals. Thus the attempts of employees which are in their best interests are also in the interests of organisation.
Both theories X and Y represent diametrically opposite views of human nature, theory "Y" has been advanced to suggest that human beings combine a bit of both according to circumstances. If we relate the above theories to Maslow's hierarchy of needs it may be said that theory X may be more applicable where a man is concerned with the lower level of needs. Once he has an adequate level of satisfaction of the basic physiological and safety needs, theory "Y" may be used for making an appeal ID a higher level needs. McGregor believes that recent researches in the behavioural sciences has shown that the assumptions of what "he calls theory Y may be more valid than the precepts of theory of X.
(4) David McClealland's Three need Motivation Theory:
McClelland's Need for Achievement Theory is one of content theories of motivation emphasising that human needs and incentives cause human behaviour. McClelland has identified three types of basic motivating needs:
(1) Need for Power
(2) Need for Affiliation
(3) Need for Achievement.
(1) Need for Power or Power Motive (n/PWR)-The ability to induce or influence behaviour is power. The individual's life style is characterised by striving to compensate for the feelings of inferiority which are combined with the innate drive for power. People with a high power need have a great concern for exercising influence and control. Such individuals are generally seeking positions of leadership; they are forceful, outspoken, hard headed and demanding.
(2) Affiliation Motive or Need for Affiliation (n/AFF)—Since people are social animals, most individuals are generally like to interact and be with others in situations where they feel they belong and are accepted. According to this theory, people with high need for affiliation usually derive pleasure from being loved and tend to avoid the pain of being rejected. They are concerned with maintaining pleasant social relationships, enjoying a sense of intimacy and understanding, and enjoy consoling and helping others in trouble.
(3) Need for Achievement or Achievement Motive— Some people have an intense desire to achieve. According to this theory, the need for achievement is a distinct human motive that can be distinguished from other needs. This theory has identified four basic characteristics of high achievers.
(a) Moderate risks—Taking moderate risks is the simple most descriptive characteristic of the person possessing high achievement need.
(b) Immediate feedback—Person with high need for achievement desires activities which provide immediate and precise feedback information how he is progressing toward a goal.
© Accomplishment—Person with high need for achievement finds accomplishing a task intrinsically satisfying in and of itself, or he does not expect or necessarily want the accompanying material rewards.
(d) Preoccupation with the tasks—Once a high achiever selects a goal, he tends to be totally preoccupied with the task until it is successfully completed. He will not feel satisfied unless he has put his maximum effort in completing the task.
According to this theory managers show high on achievement and power and low on affiliation. Chief executives of smaller companies show higher achievement motive as compared to those of large companies. Need for achievement can also be developed by training people in the various elements of the achievement syndrome. Managers do not need high achievement motivation.
The implications of McClelland's theory are particularly significant in the sphere of selection, placement and training processes. Every employee or recruit should be placed in a position where the characteristics of his job fit with his needs. An employee who has a high need for achievement can be placed on a job which is neither very easy nor very difficult and which provides to the employee regular and concrete, feed back as to how well he is doing.
(5) Woom's Expectancy Theory:
Vroom's Expectancy Theory is also known as Instrumentality Theory. It was originally proposed by Talman in 1932. He argued that an individual's purpose in behaving must be analysed with respect to the individual's perceived likelihood that an action will lead to a certain outcome or goal. Vroom related this theory to motivation. According to Vroom, motivation is a process governing choices made by persons among alternative forms of voluntary activity. Following are the basic concepts of this theory.
First and second-level outcome: First-level outcome is the job-associated behaviour of an individual which is determined by his preference for a particular goal among several goals known as second- level outcomes. Thus, an individual's preferred second-level outcome may be to get promotion in his job though there can be several other second-level outcomes also such as increase in salary, social approval. Self-esteem, etc. The desire to get promotion will then determine the individual's choice of a first-level outcome. He may have several first-level outcomes available to him such as turnover, absenteeism, joining a group, knowing his boss better, bribery, better performance, etc. The individual will choose that first- level outcome which he thinks is most likely to produce the second-level outcome. In other words he will try to adopt the most appropriate strategy.
2. Valence. Valence means the preference of a person for a particular outcome. This can be positive, negative or zero.
The valence is positive when the person prefers to attain a particular outcome. It is negative when he prefers not to attain it and it is zero when he is indifferent toward it.
The concept of valence applies to both types of outcomes. However, the valence towards the first- level outcome is the combined result of the valence towards the second level outcome and instrumentality.
3. Instrumentality. This is individual's perception of the relationship that exists between two outcomes. In other words, it is his subjective estimate of the probability that a given first-level outcome will lead to a certain second-level outcome. This probability can range between -1 and +1. -1 would indicate a belief that the second-level outcome is certain without the first-level outcome; 0 would indicate a belief that the second-level outcome is impossible with the first-level outcome, and + 1 would indicate a belief that the second-level outcome is certain with the first-level outcome.
4. Expectancy. Expectancy like instrumentality is also a probability estimate. But it differs from instrumentality in that it relates efforts to first-level outcomes whereas instrumentality relates first-and second-level outcomes to each other. Expectancy depends on the requisite skills and abilities of the individual to produce first-level outcome. The individual asks himself "Can I do it?" and makes an estimate of the probability.
Being action-outcome association expectancy takes only positive values ranging from O, indicating complete impossibility that an act will be followed by an outcome, to 1, indicating complete certainty that the act will be followed by the outcome. Negative expectancy has no meaning. This is not so, however, in the case of instrumentality which being an outcome-outcome association can assume even negative values.
The theory gives three major principles
1. Performance by an individual is a multiplicative function of motivation and ability.
2. Motivation is a multiplicative function of the valence for each first level outcome and the believed expectancy that a given behaviour will be followed by a particular first-level outcome.
3. Valence associated with a first level outcome is the sum of the products of valences attached to the second level outcomes and corresponding instrumentalities.
Although Vroom's theory does not directly contribute to techniques of motivating personnel in an organisation, it is of value in analysing the process of motivation. The theory tells us that what an individual does depend on a three-step thought process. First of all, he determines the relative importance of his various personal goals such as money, security, recognition, etc. These are the second-level outcomes for him. He then determines the probability of the organisational goals i.e., the prescribed standards of output and behaviour (which are first-level outcomes) leading him to his second level outcome. This is the instrumentality of the first-level outcomes. Finally, he decides what is his ability to achieve each first-level outcome. This is expectancy.
This model has several important applications for a manager. It tells him that to motivate people it is not enough to offer the rewards. They must also feel:
1. Attracted towards those rewards;
2. Convinced that the prescribed effort will lead them to those rewards ; and
3. That they have the ability to do the prescribed effort.
This model, however, operates in those situations only where the employees have the freedom to make their choices among alternative courses of action or behaviour. In those situations where this freedom does not exist this model will not operate.
