Motivation

1. Motivation

2. What is Motivation? Motive – A motive is defined an inner state that energizes, activates (or moves), and directs (or channels) the behaviour of individual towards certain goals. Motives and Needs are different. Motivation – While motives are energizers of actions, motivation is the actual action, (that is, work behaviour), itself. Motivating is a term that implies that one person induces another to engage in action by ensuring that a channel to direct the motive of the individual becomes available and accessible to the individual.

3. Motive, Motivating and Motivation Motive Motivating Motivation Needs in individual Setting up proper stimuli in the environment to activate the motives in individual Engagement of individuals in work behaviour

4. Theories of Motivation Content Theories of Motivation The content theories of motivation are basically concerned with the need patterns of the individuals. Cognitive or Process Theories of Motivation Cognitive models of motivation are based on the notion that individual make conscious decisions about their behaviour. Reinforcement Theory This theory uses the principles of learning proposed by Skinner.

5. Self-Actualization Esteem Belongingness Safety Physiological Content Theories – Maslow Maslow believed that each person has an essential nature that “presses” to emerge. In his view, we all have higher-level growth needs – such as self-actualization and understanding of ourselves – but that these higher needs only assume a dominant role in our lives after our more primitive needs are satisfied.

6. Alderfer’s ERG Theory Growth Relatedness Existence

7. No Satisfaction Satisfaction Dissatisfaction No Dissatisfaction Herzberg’s Two Factor Model Hygiene factors Motivators Opposite of Dissatisfaction is NOT Satisfaction

8. Cognitive Theories – Adam’s Equity Theory Adam (1965) defined inequity as an injustice perceived by a person when he compares the ratio of his outcomes (rewards) to his inputs (efforts), with the ratio of another comparable person’s outcomes to inputs, and finds that they are not equal. Outcomes for person Outcomes for other Positive Inequity > Inputs of person Inputs of other

9. Adam’s Equity Theory… Outcomes for person Outcomes for other Negative Inequity < Inputs of person Inputs of other • Consequences of Inequity • The person can alter inputs (efforts). • The person can try to alter outcomes or rewards. • The person can cognitively distort inputs or outcomes. • The person might quit the job. • The person could try to influence the other individual to reduce inputs. • The person might change the level of comparison.

12. Need and Expectation of people at work

13. A Basic model of Frustration

14. Expectancy Theory

15. Vroom’s VIE Model of Motivation Valence – the strength of an individual’s preference for a particular outcome. In order for the valence to be positive, the person must prefer attaining the outcomes to not attaining it. Another major input into the valence is the instrumentality of the first-level outcome in obtaining a desired second-level outcome. Expectancy in Vroom’s theory is the probability (ranging from 0 to 1)

16. Vroom’s VIE Model of Motivation E P Probabilty Possible Performance Results Effort Alternatives HighPerformance .6 Attempted High Performance Efforts Choice 1 AcceptablePerformance .4 Acceptable Performance .7 Attempted Acceptable Performance Efforts Choice 2 .3 Sub-Standard Performance Fig: Expectancy perceptions on effort levels leading to performance

17. Bonus Bonus Bonus Recognition Recognition Recognition Stress Stress Stress Outcomes P  O Contengencies Vroom’s model… Performance Alternatives .8 .6 High Performance .7 .3 Acceptable Performance .4 .2 .01 Sub-Standard Performance .01 .6 Fig: Instrumentality Perceptions: Probabilities of Performance leading to Rewards

18. Bonus Bonus +.8 +.8 +.384 Recognition Recognition +.4 +.4 +.114 Stress Stress -.5 -.5 -.21 Valence Vroom’s model… Outcomes Performance Results P  R Probability E  P Probability X X E  P P  R V Effort Alternatives .8 .6 High Performance Choice 1: Attempted High Performance Efforts .7 .6 .4 +.096 .3 .4 Acceptable Performance +.064 .2 -.04 Force for Choice 1 = +.438 Fig: Choice Decisions based on Force calculations

19. Bonus Bonus +.8 +.8 +.168 Recognition Recognition +.4 +.4 +.112 Stress Stress -.5 -.5 -.07 Valence Vroom’s model… Outcomes Performance Results P  R Probability E  P Probability X X E  P P  R V Effort Alternatives .3 .4 Acceptable Performance Choice 2: Attempted Acceptable Performance Efforts .2 .7 .3 +.0024 .01 .01 Sub-standard Performance +.0012 .6 -.09 Force for Choice 2 = +.1236 Fig: Choice Decisions based on Force calculations

20. The Porter and Lawler Model

21. Porter & Lawler – Contribution to Work Motivation • The expectancy models provide certain guidelines that can be followed by human resource managers. For example, on the front-end (the relationship between motivation and performance), it has been suggested that the following barriers must be overcome: • Doubts about ability, skills, or knowledge. • The physical or practical possibility of the job. • The interdependence of the job with other people or activities. • Ambiguity surrounding the job requirements. • In addition, on the back end (the relationship between performance and satisfaction), guidelines such as the following have been suggested: • Determine what rewards each employee values • Define desired performance • Make desired performance attainable • Link valued rewards to performance

22. Reinforcement Theory Reinforcement theory suggests that it is possible to predict behaviour without trying to understand the internal thought process of individuals. Reinforcement theorists believe that environmental consequences mould the behaviour of people. Reinforcement Strategies Positive Reinforcement Negative Reinforcement – Negative reinforcement increases the frequency and strength of desired behaviour by making it contingent upon the avoidance of undesirable consequences for the person. Punishment Extinction Shaping