Main Aspects of Organisations and Behavior, The Role of Motivation and Leadership - Coursework Example

MOTIVATION AND LEADERSHIP Introduction This module on organizations and behavioral assessment will explore two of the most widely discussed and researched topics in management – leadership and motivation. It will cite definitions on leadership, use research studies on behavioral theories and contingency theories to investigate a variety of leadership styles. Similarly, this module will explain a range of motivation theories, their relevance and use in the workplace. It will cite the application of some motivation theories by companies in their management policy and techniques. Definition of Leadership Leadership (Draft 514) is the ability to influence people toward the attainment of goals. This definition captures the idea that leaders are involved with other people in the achievement of goals. Leadership (Nelson 256) as the process of guiding and directing the behavior of people in the work environment. Kerzner (260) on the other hand defines leadership as a style of behavior designed to integrate both the organizational requirements and one’s personal interest into the pursuit of some objectives. Although the definitions of the leadership role vary widely, general agreement exists that someone is needed to serve as agent for guiding and encouraging people to work together (Harris 229). Behavioral Theories (Nelson 258-259) Behavioral theories emerged as a response to the deficiencies of the trait theories. Trait theories told us what leaders were like, but didn’t address how leaders behaved. The following studies are the foundations of many modern leadership theories: the Lewin, Lippit, and White studies; the Ohio State studies, and the Michigan studies: Lewin Studies The earliest research on leadership style, conducted by Kurt Lewin and his students, identified three basic style: autocratic, democratic, and laissez-faire. Each leader uses one of these three basic styles when approaching a group of followers in a leadership situation. The autocratic style is directive, strong and controlling in relationships. Leaders with an autocratic style use rules and regulations to run the work environment. Followers have little discretionary influence over the nature of the work, its accomplishment or other aspects of the work environment. The leader with a democratic style is collaborative, responsive, and interactive in relationship and emphasizes rules and regulations less than the autocratic leader. Followers have a high degree of discretionary influence, although the leader has ultimate authority and responsibility. The leader with a laissez-faire style leads through non-leadership. A laissez-faire leader abdicates the authority and responsibility of the position, and this style often results in chaos. Ohio State Studies The leadership research program at the Ohio State University suggested that there were two important underlying dimensions of leader behaviors as initiating structure and consideration. Initiating structure is leader behavior aimed at defining and organizing work relationships and roles, as well as establishing clear patterns of organization, communication, and ways of getting things done. Consideration is leader behavior aimed at nurturing friendly, warm working relationships, as well as encouraging mutual trust and interpersonal respect within the work unit. Michigan Studies Another approach to the study of leadership, developed at the University of Michigan, suggests that the leader’s style has very important implications for the emotional atmosphere of the work environment and, for the followers who work under that leader. Two styles of leadership were identified: employee-oriented and production-oriented. An employee-oriented leadership style leads to a work environment that focuses on relationships. The leader exhibits less direct or less close supervision. Employee oriented leaders display concern for people and their needs. A production-oriented style leads to a work environment characterized by constant influence attempts on the part of the leader, either through direct, close supervision or through the use of many written and unwritten rules and regulations for behavior. The focus is clearly on getting work done. These three groups of studies (the Lewin, Lippit and White Studies; Ohio Studies; and Michigan Studies) taken together form the building blocks of many recent leadership theories. What the studies have in common is that two basic leadership styles identified, with one focusing on task (autocratic, production-oriented, consideration) and one focusing on people (democratic, employee-oriented, consideration). The Leadership Grid The leadership grid is distinguished from the original Ohio State research in two important ways. First, it has attitudinal overtones that are not present in the original research. The grid addresses both the behavior and the attitude of the leader. Second, the Ohio State approach is descriptive and non evaluative, whereas the grid is normative and prescriptive. The grid evaluates the team manager (9,9) as the very best style of managerial behavior. As an organizational development method, the grid aims to transform the leader in the organization to lead in the “one best way” which according to the grid is the team approach. Contingency Theories (Nelson 263-268) Contingency theories involve the belief that leadership style must be appropriate for the particular situation. Fiedler’s Contingency Theory Fiedler’s contingency theory of leadership proposes that the fit between the leader’s need structure and the favorableness of the leader’s situation determine the team’s effectiveness in work accomplishment. This theory assumes that leaders are either task oriented or relationship oriented, depending upon how the leaders obtain their primary need gratification. Task oriented leaders are primarily gratified by accomplishing task and getting work done. Relationship oriented leaders are primarily gratified by developing good, comfortable interpersonal relationship. Path-Goal Theory Robert House developed a path-goal theory of leader effectiveness based on an expectancy theory of motivation. From the perspective of Path-Goal theory, the basic role of the leader is to clear the follower’s path to the goal. The directive style is used when the leader must give specific guidance about work task, and let followers know what is expected. The supportive style is used when the leader needs to express concern for follower’s well-being and social status. The participative style is used when the leader must engage in joint decision making activities with followers. The achievement oriented style is used when the leader must set challenging goals for followers and show strong confidence in these followers. Actual test of the path-goal theory and its propositions provide conflicting evidence. It is premature either to fully accept or fully reject the theory at this point. Vroom-Yetton-Jago Normative Decision Model The Vroom-Yetton-Jago normative decision model helps leaders and managers know when to have employees participate in the decision-making process. Victor Vroom, Philip Yetton and Arthur Jago developed and refined the normative decision model, which helps managers determine the appropriate decision-making strategy to use. The model recognizes the benefits of authoritative, democratic, and consultative styles of leader behavior. Situational Leadership Model The situational leadership model, developed by Paul Hersey and Kenneth Blanchard, suggests that the leader’s behavior should be adjusted to the readiness level of the follower. The model employs two dimensions of leader behavior as used in the Ohio State Studies: one dimension is task oriented, and the other is relationship oriented. One key limitation of the situational leadership model is the absence of central hypothesis that could be tested, which would make it more valid, reliable theory of leadership. However, the theory has intuitive appeal and is widely used for training and development in corporations. In addition, the theory focuses attention on follower readiness as an important determinant of the leadership process. Recent Developments in Leadership Theory (Nelson 269) Leadership is an exciting area of organizational behavior, one in which new research is constantly emerging. Four new developments are leader-member exchange, substitute for leadership, and charismatic leadership. Definition of Motivation Motivation (Draft 546) refers to the forces either within or external to a person that arouse enthusiasm and persistence to pursue a certain source of action. Nelson (103) on the other hand defines motivation as the process of arousing and sustaining goal directed behavior. From Harvard Business Review (45), Frederick Herzberg, likens motivation to an internal generator. Achievement, recognition for achievement, the work itself, responsibility, and growth or advancement motivate people. Foundations of Motivation (Draft 548) Four distinct perspectives on employee motivation have evolved, namely: Traditional Approach – The study of employee motivation really began with the work of Frederic Taylor on scientific management. The emphasis on pay evolved into the notion of the economic man – people would work harder for higher pay. This approach led to the development of incentive pay systems, in which people were paid strictly on the quantity and quality of their work outputs. Human Relations Approach – The economic man was gradually replaced by a more sociable employee in manger’s mind. Non-economic rewards, such as congenial work groups that met social needs, seemed more important than money as a motivation of work behavior. For the first time, workers were studied as people, and the concept of social man was born. Human Resources Approach – The human resource approach carries the concepts of economic man and social man further to introduce the concept of the whole person. The human resource approach laid the groundwork for contemporary perspectives on employee motivation. Contemporary Approach – The contemporary approach to employee motivation is dominated by three types of theories. The first are content theories, which stress the analysis of underlying human needs. Content theories provide insight into the needs of people in organizations and help managers understand how needs can be satisfied in the workplace; Process theories concerns the thought processes that influence behavior. They focus on how employees seek reward in work circumstances; Reinforcement theories focus on employee learning of desired work behaviors. Content Theories The content theories of motivation focus on the factors within the person that energize, direct, sustain, and stop behavior (Evancevich 149). Content theories (Draft 549) emphasize the needs that motivate people. At any point in time, people have basic needs such as those for food, achievement, a monetary reward. These needs translate into an internal drive that motivates specific behaviors in an attempt to fulfill the need. To the extent that managers understand worker needs, the organization’s reward systems can be designed to meet them and reinforce employees for directing energies and priorities toward attainment of organizational goals. Hierarchy of Needs Theory: As mentioned by Evancevich (149), the crux of Maslow’s theory is that needs are arranged in hierarchy. The lowest level needs are the physiological needs and the highest level needs are the self-actualization needs. Maslow’s need theory was later tested in research with working population (Debra 106-107). Motorola adapted motivational techniques aimed at social and interpersonal needs for its teamwork from its Penary operations in Malaysia. At All Metro Health Care in Lynbrook, New York, CEO Irviny Edward set up a special “customer service” department for his home health aids to help meet their basic needs (Draft 550). ERG Theory: Clayton Alderfer’s ERG theory identified three categories of needs: Existence needs – for physical and well-being. Relatedness needs – for satisfactory relationships with others. Growth needs – development of human potential and the desire for personal growth and increase competence. At ClickAction Inc., an online direct marketing firm based in Palo Alto, California, managers have created a culture of “working smarter and respecting people’s time” to enhance motivation and productivity (Daft 551). Herzberg Two Factors Theory: Dissatisfier or Hygiene Factors: salary, job security, working conditions, status, company procedures, quality of technical supervision and quality of interpersonal relations among peers, with supervisors and subordinates. Satisfiers or Motivators: achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, the work itself, and the possibility of growth. Hewlett-Packard has restructures many of its operations along the lines described by Herzberg. McClelland’s Acquired Needs Theory: The three needs most frequently studied are: need for achievement, need for affiliation, and need for power. Summary This module on organizations and behavioral assessment covered important ideas on leadership and motivation. The writer took pain of compressing wide range of topics to fit into the eight to ten page requirement of the course. Three studies under behavior theories are the foundations of modern leadership theories: Lewin studies, Ohio state studies and Michigan studies. Contingency theories include Fiedler’s study, Path-Goal study, the Vroom-Yetton-Jago model, and the Situational leadership model. Because of limitations of early research/theories on current leadership situations, new research is constantly emerging. The contemporary approach to employee motivation is dominated by three types of theories: the content theories, process theories and reinforcement theories. The application of motivational theories is exemplified in job design and other management policies and techniques in the organizations mentioned. Works Cited Draft, Richard L. “Leadership in Organizations and Motivation in Organizations.” Management. N.Y. Thompson South-Western. 2003. Harris, Jeff O. and Sandra J. Hartman. “The Role of Leadership in the Organization Objectives.” Organizational Behavior. N.Y. Best Business Book. 2002. Ivancevich, John M. and Michael T. Matheson. “Motivation.” Organizational Behavior and Management. N.Y. McGraw-Hill. 1999. Kerzner, Harold. “Leadership in a Project Environment and Motivation.” Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. N.Y. John Wiley and Sons In. 2001. McClelland, David C. and David Burnham. “Executive Summary. Power is the Great Motivator.” Harvard Business Review on Motivating People. Boston Harvard Business School Publishing Corp. 2003: 103-130. Meshane, Steven L. and Mary Ann Von Glinow. “Applied Motivational Practices.” Organizational Behavior. N.Y. Irwin/McGraw-Hill. 2000. Nelson, Debra L. and James C Quick. “Motivation at Work and Leadership and Followership.” Understanding Organizational Behavior. N.Y. Thompson South-Western. 2005. Stevenson, William J. “The Human Relations Movement.” Operations Management. 9th ed. N.Y. Irwin/McGraw-Hill. 2007. Read More