Personality and Motivation and Effective Management - Article Example

Personality and Motivation and Effective Management Personality and Motivation and Effective Management It goes that personality and motivation are the elements that offer diversity in organisation, and managers who know how to discern key personality traits in their workers also discern how to cultivate them to the advantage of the organisation (Trifunovska & Trifunovski 2010, p. 4). In a majority of organisations, many diverse personality traits exist, which aid to the successful practice of the organisations goals, missions, practices, philosophies and policies. Personality can have an extremely huge effect on someones attitude towards their job and work, eventually persuading diverse aspects of their career. Organisations that discern how to classify workers with personalities significant to their organisation try to nurture their strengths and create more revenue and better services and work to the company (Trifunovska & Trifunovski 2010, p. 4). For instance, a good hotel manager will not let his/her more friendly or engaging employee wash dishes for long, but rather they will be asked to serve the employees in order for them to feel a good dinning in the restaurant. Personality directly influences motivation as individual diverse characteristics and traits function in different ways (Trifunovska & Trifunovski 2010, p. 4). There are a number of theories which describe motivation. Because the goal of this assignment is the explore how personality and motivation are essential for the effective management of an organisation, it will use Need theories of motivation. These theories fall under name content theories, which explain what motivates people/workers. Process theories are another group of theories that discuss how to motivate workers. However, the paper will focus specifically on Maslows hierarchy of needs, and Herzbergs motivators and hygiene factors. These are all need theories and stand firm when it comes to dictating organisational behaviour. One of the first theories concerning work motivation is the hierarchy of needs referred to as the Maslow Hierarchy of Needs theory. According to this theory, there are five specific human needs which start with self-actualisation at the top and followed by self-esteem, belongingness and love, safety and physiological at the bottom (Parks & Guay 2009, p. 675). If Maslows theory stands true, then there are some significant implications for management. There are chances to motivate workers through job design, management styles, compensation packages and company events (Gannon University n.d, p. 1). For instance, when it comes to fulfilling the physiological needs of workers, organisations can provide them with rest breaks, lunch breaks and wages, which are suitable to the kind of work they so that they can feel appreciated (Parks & Guay 2009, p. 675). When it comes to safety need, organisations can provide a safe working environment, job security and also retirement benefits, which will make the workers want to work and develop the organisation. When it comes to the social needs, organisations need to create their own community among its members through allowing them to work in teams and also organising social events. When it comes to esteem needs, organisations needs to acknowledge the achievements of their workers. They also need to offer hard working workers promotion in order for them to feel valued. Finally, when it comes to self-actualisation, organisations should provide their workers a challenge that will make them want to attain their full job/career potential. However, due to different personality traits, not everyone is persuaded by the same needs stated here. At any moment, different personality trait workers might be motivated by completely diverse factors, which, when harnessed properly, bring the best out of them (Gannon University n.d, p. 1). Comprehending the needs that every employee pursues is overly significant. Managers should be in a position to identify these needs at which workers operate and utilise these needs as handles of motivation (Parks & Guay 2009, p. 677). Self-actualisers are considered as supreme achievers. Maslow evaluated stand-out people to better comprehend traits of people most likely to know about and achieve their need for self-actualization (Gannon University n.d, p. 1). This led him to discover that most of these individuals had similar personality traits, which are an awe to life, high sense of self-awareness and maintaining an almost-constant delight. These individuals take part in activities that bring such feelings as meaningfulness and unity. In spite of this fact, a majority of these people appear deeply embedded in reality and are vibrant problem-seekers, as well as solvers (Latham 2007, p. 55). They are fully aware of what they cannot change and are resilient to deal with anything that they feel they can change. A majority of these individuals have small, but healthy relationships with people who help them develop themselves (Gannon University n.d, p. 1). Harnessing such personalities is what most managers need and that can be an argument supporting Maslow hierarchy of needs. Every manager needs such individuals who will mostly push the organisation by trying to make them achieve their goals and solve almost every problem that they feel affects them (Gannon University n.d, p. 1). Arguments Against Maslow Whereas Maslows hierarchy makes total sense from an intuitive point of view, there is small evidence to endorse its hierarchical aspect. Furthermore, there is proof which tends to contradicts the order of needs explained by the model (Latham 2007, p. 64). For instance, some cultures seem to put all other needs behind social needs. To them, it is more important to be social then other needs come after. Maslows hierarchy of needs as well is challenged in clarifying cases such as the "starving artist" wherein an individual does not consider the lower needs, but decides to chase the higher ones, and evidence supports that this move works at times for the people who try it out (Latham 2007, p. 65). Also, there is no evidence at all to propose that people are persuaded to satisfy just one need level at a time, apart from in cases where there is clash between their needs. Another problem with this theory is that it is frequently misunderstood. Maslow specified that after one human need has been fulfilled, the next need emerges, and such as situation can be misunderstood because, if the earlier need will vanish and fresh needs will assume its place (Latham 2007, p. 65). Another worry concerning the concept is that not everybody is fully aware of their needs. Maslow claims that if these needs are discerned, then there are methods of taking action and motivating individuals, but if they are not aware of their needs, then it is hard to move forward and attempt to motivate. It should be noted that, Maslow’s theory is not as straightforward and simple as people imagine (Latham 2007, p. 65). Lastly, the concept has been very trendy in comprehending organisational behaviour, still does not have a great deal of scientific evidence. Frederick Herzberg What do workers desire from their careers? A higher income? Security? Good relations with their colleagues? Chances to advance? Or something else different altogether? This is a defining question, since it forms the foundation of motivation of workers. At least this is what psychologist Fredrick Herzberg believe after conducting a number of interviews with employees from different organisations, who also work in different career lines, on what motivates them to work effectively. He believes that intrinsic and extrinsic motivate have an opposite relationship. In short, intrinsic motivators lead to motivation only when they are present, but extrinsic motivators lessen motivate when absent (Trifunovska & Trifunovski 2010, p. 40). The effect of is that the latter are expected, plus will not rise motivation, but rather detract from it. Intrinsic motivator come about where more motivation can be achieved. This theory is someone in line with Maslows theory (Trifunovska & Trifunovski 2010, p. 40). Humans search for the fulfillment of higher-level psychological needs having to do with recognition, achievement, advancement, responsibility together with the nature of the work itself. The clear difference in this theory is the anticipated expectation wherein some factors lead to constructive response and some lead to unconstructive motivation (Trifunovska & Trifunovski 2010, p. 40). This implies that satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not on a scale with one rising as the other dropping, but are independent occurrences. This theory connects strongly to contemporary ethical management and social responsibility, as well as very directly to the psychological contract (Parks & Guay 2009, p. 672). Herzberg theory was established prior to its appropriate consideration and explanation of these more contemporary and significant organisational point of view. Many years ago, similar to Maslow, Herzberg comprehended well and tried to educate the ethical management ideas, which numerous managers, these days lack, especially humanity. With regards to this, this theory is just as significant now as it was then, only that the effects of fairness, responsibility, justice and compassion are global. Herzbergs study established the people always strive to attain hygiene needs since they are not happy when they lack this, but once fulfilled, the impact soon wears off, meaning that satisfaction is brief (Parks & Guay 2009, p. 673). Then as today, inadequately run organisations fail to comprehend that humans are not motivated by addressing hygiene needs, but rather they seek mainly to clarify how to manage humans adequately, for the benefit of everyone at the organisation. People are essentially motivated by allowing them to attain the factors that Herzberg classified as actual motivators, for instance, advancement, achievement and development among other factors, which stand for a much deeper level of fulfillment and meaning (Parks & Guay 2009, p. 673). Examples of Herzbergs hygiene needs in the place of work include relationship with supervisor, policy, company car, work conditions, status, salary, security, personal life and relationship with subordinates. Herzbergs study discerned that actual motivators were other utterly diverse factors, notably: recognition, achievement, responsibility, work itself and advancement. It is important to note that Herberg classified as particular category in the study responses that he referred to as possibility of growth. This came up in few scenarios in the study and was not regarded as a huge factor (Parks & Guay 2009, p. 674). When discussing personal growth or just growth, in general, it should be considered as the element of advancement and not to be mixed with the possibility of growth. Arguments Against Herzberg Theory Some critics have argued that this theory simply assumes that happy and satisfied employees are more productive, but this might not be the case (Latham 2007, p. 78). For instance, if playing as better match of soccer is the means opted for to gratify someones needs for recognition, then one will look for means to play and think about soccer more regularly, maybe leading to a lower output on the work because of a lower level of focus. Another argument against this theory is that it is only concerned with clarifying average behaviour, in spite of the different personalities between humans, which might affect their motivational factors (Parks & Guay 2009, p. 680). For example, in their pursuit of recognition, a person might assume a balanced point of view and endeavour to pursue many behavioural paths just to attain a union of individual status goals. In essence, someones expectation that dictate their behaviour, which bring a significant outcome, decides their option of means, as well as effort that they will offer to these means (Parks & Guay 2009, p. 680). However, with all this criticism, organisations have chosen to adopt this theory, which have led them to success in bringing out the best in their employees. Conclusion I support Maslows hierarchy of needs because if feel that if people are motivated to reach their full potential, then they will be fully aware of themselves and work to benefit the organisation. It makes more sense to motivate someone to reach their full potential then use them to your advantage, rather than putting into place factors that will make the feel safe, yet they might not be motivated to work or like the example of the footballer given in this paper. An organisation can do all it can to make their workers feel safe or bring in all the necessary factors that will make working easier (Herzbergs theory), but if they lack the necessary inside motivation (Maslows theory), then all that effort by the organisation to make their workers productive will be in vain. This paper has discussed how personality and motivation are essential for the effective management of an organisations human resources. The paper has focused on two motivational theories Maslows theory and Herzbergs theory and Maslows theory has come up at the top. This paper finds that personality will determine how the factors an organisation brings ease working will motivate the workers. It is important for every organisation to realise that once a worker achieves his full potential is when he or she can work effectively to help the organisation achieve its goals, and that is why I opted for Maslows theory. References Gannon University n.d, How motivation is affected by personality, viewed 19th Nov 2014 at http://online.gannon.edu/resource/business-and-leadership/how-motivation-is-affected-by-personality Latham, G P 2007, Work motivation; history, theory, research, and practice, Sage Publications, Inc., Thousands Oaks. Parks, L & Guay, R P 2009, Personality, values, and motivation, Personality and Individual Differences vol. 47, no. 9, pp. 675–684. Trifunovska, K & Trifunovski, R 2010, Human resource management - motivation among employees in multinational corporations, Kristianstad University Press, Kristianstad, Sweden. Read More