Theories of activity motivation - Fundamentals of General Psychology

Theory of activity motivation

Scientists of different directions at different times tried to find out how external stimuli affect the productivity of a person's work, the level of his activity, ie, they created their own theory of motivation. Particularly active in this work were involved in the XX century. psychologists and managers in connection with the need for labor intensification and production growth. Studying first of all the influence of external motives, psychologists came to the conclusion that they have different force of influence on a person.

Pyramid of A. Maslow's needs

One of the first psychologists, who drew attention to the impact of needs on the organization of activities, was Abraham Maslow. He divided the needs into five categories:

1) physiological (the need for food, clothing, housing, necessary for survival);

2) security and confidence in the future, including the need to protect against physical and psychological attacks of others;

3) social, i.e. needs to feel like a member of a community, have social contacts, feel affection and support;

4) Respect is the need to recognize personal qualities or achievements;

5) self-expression (self-realization), i.e. the need to realize their potential capabilities, in the formation of a person as a person.

According to the theory of A. Maslow, these needs can be arranged in the form of a hierarchical structure (Figure 1). Physiological needs and security needs are primary needs, i.e. congenital, they are called the needs of lower levels.

The need for affiliation (social needs), the need for respect and self-expression (self-realization) are secondary. These are the needs of higher levels.

According to J. Godfroi, more than 90% of people stop at the level of searching for security and good relations. Not

Maslow's Pyramid of Needs

Fig. 1. The Maslow's Pyramid of Needs

which psychologists believe that the true flowering of the personality and the emergence of the need for self-realization reach 1-2% of people.

According to the theory of A. Maslow, if a person has two needs of different levels, then the dominant one, i.e. which determines its behavior, is the need for a lower level.

Since with the intellectual and spiritual development of man the needs of the higher levels are constantly expanding, they can never be completely satisfied, and therefore the motivation of behavior through needs is infinite.

The theory of A. Maslow has made an exceptionally important contribution to understanding what is at the core of people's striving for work. Leaders of different ranks and spheres of activity began to understand that people's efforts are determined by a wide range of their needs. In order to motivate a particular person, it is necessary to give him the opportunity to satisfy his most important needs.

Not so long ago, managers could motivate their subordinates almost exclusively with economic incentives, because people's behavior was determined mainly by their needs of lower levels. Today the situation has changed. Thanks to higher earnings and social benefits, even people on the lowest stages of the social ladder claim to meet the needs of higher levels. ^

As a result, we can conclude that to manage people you need to carefully monitor what needs drive them. As needs change over time, it can not be assumed that the external stimulus that has worked once will work effectively all the time.

David McClelland's Theory of Needs

Another approach to classifying the needs of higher levels was proposed by D. McClelland. He identified three types of needs of higher levels: power, success, involvement.

The need for power is expressed in the desire to influence other people. People who have such a need often show themselves to be energetic, do not fear confrontation, and strive to defend their own position. They are usually good speakers and require increased attention from others. Any leadership position attracts people with the need for power, as it enables to exercise and exercise power.

The need for success is met not by recognition of success, but by the process of bringing the work to a successful conclusion. People who are in need of success prefer to deal with problems that they can take responsibility for resolving, but these problems must be really solvable, and the reward for the result achieved is concrete and tangible.

The need for ownership is inherently the same as the social need according to the theory of A. Maslow.

The two-factor theory of motivation of Frederick Herzberg

According to the theory of Herzberg, all the factors that affect the person's satisfaction with work can be divided into two groups:

1) motivating factors that determine job satisfaction;

2) hygienic factors that determine the person's dissatisfaction with work.

Factors-motivators are:

1) the ability to achieve and recognize success;

2) interest in this activity;

3) responsibility;

4) promotion;

5) the possibility of professional growth.

The significance of these factors is estimated by people only positively and in the worst case can be zero.

Hygiene factors include:

1) management method and administration policy;

2) working conditions;

3) interpersonal relationships in the workplace;

4) earnings;

5) the degree of direct control over the work;

6) the impact of work is a cash life.

The significance of these factors is estimated by people only negatively and at best can be zero. According to Herzberg's theory, an employee generally begins to pay attention to hygiene factors only if he considers their implementation unfair.

Sometimes wages are given the status of a powerful incentive. However, according to the estimates of psychologists, the effect of increasing earnings is positive for three months. Then the person starts to work in the same relaxed mode that is habitual for him. This is clearly demonstrated by the stimulation curve shown in Fig. 2.

If you horizontally postpone the size of the specific remuneration C (labor payment per unit of labor effort, and the vertical corresponding to the production of P, then the dependence will be

Material Incentive Curve

Fig. 2. Material Incentive Curve

have the form of a sinusoidal section, which is called the stimulus curve.

Practice shows that, given a certain range of specific compensation (C [9 C2), in response to its increase, the employee increases output, i.e. there is a direct relationship between them. With a significant increase in remuneration, a moment (to the right of C2) comes, when the employee prefers a decrease in the intensity of labor to a further increase in wages. This limit is the level of the actual needs of the employee. A significant decrease in the specific remuneration (to the left of C ^) forces workers to increase production in order to ensure a minimum wage. However, this reduction leads to a significant increase in staff turnover. Point A - the threshold level, the minimum wage. If an employee does not get enough money to provide himself and his family within reasonable limits, he quits his job or starts distracting from his task, looking for a second, third job, and as a result, it is bad to work everywhere. Therefore, it is necessary to ensure that wages provide enough means to pay for the reasonable life requirements of the employee at the level of his actual needs and, at the same time, correspond to his real contribution to the growth of production.

The stimulus curve is a reflection of the Yerkes-Dodson law on the dependence of performance (performance) on the intensity (level) of motivation. According to this law, due to the increase in the intensity of motivation, the quality of activity first increases, but after passing through the point of the highest indicators of the success of the activity (the optimum of motivation, point B) gradually decreases. The level of motivation, in which the activity is carried out as successfully as possible, is called the optimum of motivation.

The theory of human factor D. McGregor

The author proceeds from the assumption that there are two types of managerial relations to a subordinate, respectively, two approaches in the management of subordinates: a fundamentally negative attitude toward subordinates (theory X) and a fundamentally positive (theories of Y).

McGregor came to the conclusion that the worldview of those who are guided by theory X, is based on the following conclusions:

1. Workers genetically hate work and, if possible, avoid it.

2. Since workers hate work, in order for them to work, they must be coerced, controlled and threatened with punishment.

3. Workers avoid responsibility, so they need constant supervision and guidance.

4. Above all, workers value workplace security, and they are practically devoid of ambitious intentions.

The opposite approach to man (the theory of U) is based on the principles:

1. Workers perceive labor as a process as natural to a person as recreation or play.

2. People are capable of self-organization and self-control if they are interested in their activities.

3. All employees strive for responsibility and freedom of decision-making related to the performance of work.

4. All employees are endowed with a high level of inventiveness and imagination, which are rarely used in modern industrial life; this leads to frustration and turns a person into an opponent of the organization. Creativity is extremely widespread among all members of the organization, and is not the prerogative of managers.

Theory X is an authoritarian view that leads to direct regulation and tight control of all the above variables of organizational behavior. This theory suggests that most people need coercion, strict and constant control, and the incentive to conscientious work involves punishment or fear of possible punishment.

McGregor himself was a supporter of Wu's theory and was a propagandist of the ideas of broad participation of all members of the organization in the processes of preparation and decision-making, giving employees greater responsibility and the ability to take risks, and also pointed to the importance of optimal group relations as a factor of individual motivation.

Theory & quot; Z & quot; U. Ouchi

Subsequently, theories X and Y were supplemented by the theory of K, reflecting the attitude to the personnel of Japanese managers. The theory was proposed by W. Ouchi.

The essence of this theory can be expressed in the following positions:

1. The manager should take care of each employee as a person in general, i.e. he should not only provide employees with the necessary level of wages, but also take care of the quality of their lives.

2. An employee is interested in the future of an enterprise no less than a manager, and therefore attracting employees to the group decision-making process is a direct responsibility of the manager.

3. The enterprise should demonstrate its interest in the employee by way of lifelong hiring and providing the employee with the opportunity to find the most suitable activity for him through rotation of the staff.

Victor Vroom's expectations theory

By expectation is understood a person's assessment of the probability of occurrence of an event. The theory of expectations is based on two assumptions:

1) any human activity is purposeful;

2) the achievement of the goal depends on the reward that allows the employee to meet his needs;

Vroom felt that the power of striving to achieve the goal depends:

1) on the value of the reward, i.e. a person should be rewarded with what he values, and the reward should be related to the achievement of the goal directly;

2) on the degree of attainability of the goal.

Based on previous experience, a person develops ideas about the degree of attainability of the goal; if the expectations of achieving the goal are high, then the force of the incentive motive increases. This prior experience can be positive, which reinforces the motivation, or negative, that motivation weakens. Feeling the futility of trying to achieve the goal reduces motivation. A low motivation reduces the person's performing contribution to the achievement of the goal, which leads to the accumulation of negative experience, etc. round; the result of this is a loser man. Therefore, the goals must be real and achievable so that the person does not have doubts about receiving rewards.

Because different people have different needs, they evaluate the specific reward in different ways. Therefore, motivating a person to something, it is necessary to compare the proposed remuneration with the needs of employees and bring them into line.

Theory of Justice

The main conclusion of the theory of justice is that people subjectively determine the ratio of remuneration received to spent efforts and then correlate it with the remuneration of other people doing similar work. If the comparison shows imbalance and injustice, i.e. a person believes that his colleague received a greater reward for the same job, then he has psychological tension, motivation for activity falls.

People can restore a sense of justice, or change the level of effort, or trying to change the level of the reward received. Studies show that when people feel that they are short-handed, they begin to work worse. If they think that they are overpaid, they are not inclined to change their behavior and intensify their activities.

It is important to remember that perception and evaluation of justice is relative, not absolute. People compare themselves with others, often make mistakes when they evaluate the significance and intensity of their work. We need to tell and explain to people why and for what they evaluate.

In some organizations, they try to solve the problem of employees having a feeling of unfair evaluation of their work by keeping the amounts of payments in secret. Unfortunately, this is not only difficult to do technically, but it also forces people to suspect injustice and where it really is not. In addition, if you keep the amount of employee earnings secret, then (as it follows from the theory of expectation), the organization risks losing the positive motivational effect of wage growth associated with promotion.

The Porter-Lawler model

Lyman Porter and Edward Lawler developed a comprehensive procedural theory of motivation that includes elements of expectations theory and justice theory. In their model (Figure 3) there are five variables: the effort expended, the perception, the results obtained, the reward, the degree of satisfaction. According to the Porter-Lawler model, the results achieved depend on the efforts made by the employee, his abilities and characteristics, and also his awareness of his role. The level of effort will be determined by the value of the reward and the degree of certainty that this level of effort will indeed entail a certain level of remuneration. Moreover, in the Porter-Lawler theory, the relationship between reward and results is established, i.e. a person meets his needs through rewards for the results achieved.

According to the Porter-Lawler model, the results achieved by the employee depend on three variables (figure 3): the effort expended (3), the abilities and characteristics of the person (4), and also the awareness of his role in the labor process (5 ). The level of effort expended depends on the value of the reward (1) and how much a person believes in the existence of a strong link between the effort spent and the possible reward (2). Achieving the required level of performance (6) may entail internal rewards (7a), such as a sense of satisfaction from the work performed,

Porter-Lawler Model

Fig. 3. The Porter-Lawler Model

A sense of competence and self-esteem, as well as external rewards (76), such as praise of a leader, a bonus, promotion.

The dotted line between performance and external reward means that there may be a link between the performance of an employee and the rewards given to him. The fact is that these awards reflect the remuneration opportunities determined by the manager for the employee and the organization as a whole. The dotted line between performance and reward, perceived as fair (8), shows that people have their own assessment of the fairness of remuneration. Satisfaction (9) is the result of external and internal rewards, given their fairness (8). Satisfaction is a measure of how valuable the reward really is (1). This assessment will affect the person's perception of future situations.

One of the most important conclusions of Porter and Lawler is that the resultant work leads to satisfaction and, apparently, contributes to the increase of effectiveness.

Studies confirm the view of Porter and Lawler that high productivity is the cause of complete satisfaction, and not a consequence of it. The Porter-Lawler model contributed greatly to understanding motivation. She showed, in particular, that motivation is not a simple element in the chain of cause-effect relationships. This model also shows how important it is to combine efforts, abilities, results, rewards, satisfaction and perceptions into a single system.

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.