Motivation and Its Concepts and Application - Case Study Example

Motivation: concepts and application Review and critically analysis of the ideas, concepts and theories presented in three articles Introduction Motivation, according to Kreitner (1995), is a psychological process that leads behaviour in a certain direction and with a specific purpose. Higgins (1994) argues that through motivation an unsatisfied need is satisfied by an internal drive. This need, remarks Bedeian (1993), is possessed with a will to achieve something. Motivation, even though being a term from psychology, finds tremendous use in business and management and is characteristic of behavioural features as persistence, intensity, direction and initiation. Such terminology arises mainly from motivation's behavioural school of thought; another one being the scientific school. The latter came to limelight when Frederic Taylor analysed human behaviour through a scientific standpoint. Taylor's work gave precedence to the scientific component involved in work over the behavioural component and over the years he came to be recognised as the one who invented more productive and efficient ways to work. Changes as felt in the industry today are attributed to Taylor's work to some extent. This, however, is in contrast to the behavioural side of motivation which emphasizes people motivation and attempts to identify specific areas of influence that lead to people motivation. The most notable theory pertaining to this concept is the one propounded by Maslow in 1943, which is after Taylor's period i.e., 1856-1915. He argued that human needs can be divided in a hierarchical manner, where the hierarchy goes up from the lowest need to the highest one. The needs could be physiological, security or safety-related, social, esteem-related and self-actualization-based. To draw more information on motivation concepts and application and contrasts and comparisons between them, this paper uses peer-reviewed information primarily from three articles as mentioned below, along with other source of repute: Article I: Kim, D. (2006). Employee Motivation: “Just Ask Your Employees”. Seoul Journal of Business Volume 12, Number 1 (June 2006) Article II: Graham, S & Weiner, B. (n.d.). Theories and Principles of Motivation. Available at http://www.unco.edu/cebs/psychology/kevinpugh/motivation_project/resources/graham_weiner96.pdf. Article III: Lai, E.R. (2011). Motivation: A Literature Review. Pearson. Available at http://www.pearsonassessments.com/hai/images/tmrs/Motivation_Review_final.pdf. Comparing and contrasting motivational concepts and their application Some of the motivational concepts still find application, while some have previously been popular but lost applicability over the years. For example, drive theory of motivation as propounded by Clark Hull exerted tremendous influence for two decade starting 1940. It said when drive is multiplied by motivation; behaviour takes the form of a set of functions. Hull said this theory was dependent on two constructs, one of which is drive and another habit. The amalgamation of scientific aspect with motivation has had varied degrees of impacts during different periods of history. The impact was largely comparable with respect to the theorists who existed at a specific period of time. P.T. Young' influence was between 1941 to 1950 and he stressed relevance of certain attributes to motivation. These included appetite and aversion, need and activity level, equilibrium and homeostasis, degree of motivation, incentives, praise and reproof, success and failure, cooperation and competence, knowledge of results and neural structures. Similarly, M Max, another theorist, pinpointed mainly to techniques, drive and frustration, drive and learning, reward, arousal and fear and anxiety. B. Weiner, co-author of Article II here, talked of associative, cognitive, drive and psychoanalytic theories. He further stated the relevance of curiosity or exploratory behaviour to motivation, frustration and aggression. Weiner went a step ahead to link relevance of the processes to motivation and also that of dissonance or imbalance. The influence was around 1969. In 1982, S. Ball wrote about achievement motivation, attribution theory, self-esteem, affiliation, aspiration and attribution and reinforcement theories. There was a transition in the though over motivation and it was set during B. Weiner's period (1990). He stated the relevance of casual attribution in cognitions, learned helplessness in self-efficacy, need for achievement in individual differences, anxiety about failure, attributional style, environmental determinants (Hidi & Harackiewicz, 2000), locus of control, goal structure, extrinsic versus intrinsic rewards and praise (Weiner, 1990). It would be only half-hearted attempt to see the comparability and contrast of motivational theories without understanding the period in which their influence either flourished or declined. The period between 1930 -1960 is termed as the "mechanistic period". It is in this period that Young (1940, 1950) raised awareness about homeostasis, appetites and aversion, incentives, degrees of motivation and defense mechanisms. Motivation during this period was primarily being discussed with regard to drive theory. The general assertion thus deduced was that one with a drive to do something will de facto do it. During this period there was a Darwinian element attached to the study and practice of motivation. Drive and energy were at the forefront of this theory, promoted even by Melvin Marx in 1960. The next ten years, however, saw the arrival of cognition, which lasted until 1970; a period in which John Waton' associationistic theory, Hull's and Kenneth Spence's drive theory, John Atkinon’s and Kurt Lewin's cognitive theory and Sigmund Freud' psychoanalytic theory occupied the center stage. The subsequent two decades are marked by contemporary motivation research applicability including attribution theory, anxiety, and achievement motivation. The concept and applicability of the past "sweeping theories" do not hold any serious influence now. Today's motivation theories are primarily based on and accepted on the basis of conceptions efficacy, control beliefs, goal-related thoughts and interrelated cognitions of casual attributions. In the recent years, though, motivation as seen leading to some sort of achievement has more following than any other attribute. This is one reason why nowadays scholars and motivators alike make an effort to support themselves with theories that identify with pockets of power motivation, exploratory behaviour, affiliation, aggression, altruism and other social motivators. In all generality of a theory cannot be deemed as a perfect fit in all types of situations. General theories are the ones as propounded by Hull, Lewin, Atkinson, Rotter and Weiner. In the same order these can be put as drive theory, field theory, achievement theory, social learning theory and attribution theory. All these theories are remarkably different from one another in both concepts and applicability. Drive theory stresses the need for the existence of a drive to energise a specific behaviour, and states that drive can be an energy source that is pooled. But this theory falls short of expectations in case of complex tasks which, incidentally, is the hallmark of present-day business scenarios. When a heightened drive exists during complex tasks, performance is actually interfered by the drive. This is because high drive increases anxiety and thus impairs response to execute a task. However, drive theory is lauded till date because it gave a mechanistic perspective on precise and systematic exploration of motivated behaviour. The field theory by Lewin, on the other hand, argued that when individuals are drawn towards their goals, it is actually tensions that act as motivators. Atkinson triggered a paradigm shift in what was propounded by Lewin and Hull and discussed achievement motivation while concentrating on individual differences. In a mathematical attempt, Atkinson opined that goal achievement was directly proportionate to three factors, including the probability of achieving success at a task, an individual’s potential to achieve success and the incentive value involved. However, all these theories exhibit potential contrast with attribution theory, according to which the very basic nature of human beings is to act a scientists wanting to explore the world and its structure around them. This inquisitiveness leads to certain level of affect and expectancy which, in turn, are responsible for influencing a number of motivational variables. In business studies this theory helps analyse the relationship between stimulus as it occurs and the behavioural response that the stimulus triggers. In business situations it is important to identify imperativeness of motivation factors, their concepts along with the differences as they may pose in individual cases. It has to be born in mind that motivation is a force that is acting on a person either from within or outside, which trigger hi behavioural response (Hellriegel, Slocum, & Woodman, 1992). Brandt and Reece (1990) have rightly pointed out that motivation is a catalyst that encourages "people to do what they do" and when applied to a workplace scenario, people work since they are motivated to do so. During the last five decades, surveys have revealed that even most preferred motivators have undergone a major shift (Wiley, 1997). Several surveys carried over different periods – the first one done in 1946 and the recent in 1992 – and intervening ones in 1986 and 1980 (Kovach, 1987 & 1984) have provided results on ten motivators that are comparable. In 1946 the motivator that stood at the top was "appreciation of work in its totality". This was followed by "good wages" and seventh on the rank was "interesting work". The latter took the first spot in 1980, and good wages still stood at the second number. The middle order was replaced by job security. However, the recent survey of 1992 showed that good wages was a top motivator, followed by job security and appreciation of work. Conclusion There is some level of sophistication and intricacy involved with motivation, its concepts and its applicability under different scenarios. Each theory on motivation has been backed by specific conventions; each highly relevant during the period in which it was propounded or acceptable thereafter if the concepts were applicable under changed circumstances. But, as could be seen, even though motivational theories have remained unchanged over the years, the motivators have changed because of the contemporary influences and changing mindsets of the people involved. References Bedeian, A. G. (2003). Management (3rd ed.). New York: Dryden Press. Higgins, J. M. (2004). The management challenge (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan. Hellriegel, D., R. W. Woodman, and J. W. Slocum, Jr. (1992), Organizational Behavior (6th ed.). St. Paul: West Publishing Company. Hidi, S., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Motivating the academically unmotivated: A critical issue for the 21st century. Review of Educational Research, 70(2), 151–179. Kreitner, R. (2005). Management (6th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. Kovach, K. A. (1984). Why motivational theories don’t work. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 45 (2), 54-60. Kovach, K. A. (1987). What motivates employees? Workers and supervisors give different answers. Business Horizons, 30 (5), 58-66. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, July 1943. 370-396. Wiley, C. (1997). What motivates employees according to over 40 years of motivation surveys. International Journal of Manpower, 18 (3), 263-281. Weiner, B. (1990). History of motivational research in education. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82. 616-622. Read More