Two theories of motivation Essays

Two theories of motivation Essays Two theories of motivation Essay Two theories of motivation Essay Motivation is an intangible human plus which acts as a driver that pushes worlds to be willing to execute certain actions. In merely about everything we do there is something that moves us to execute the action which involves some motive leting us to execute undertakings or actions which produces some type of personal benefit as a consequence. The general theory would be that, the greater the personal addition in executing the undertaking for the person, the more motivated they are to seek at the undertaking to accomplish the best result. Motivation is normally stimulated by a privation where there is a addition to be had as a consequence of executing a certain undertaking. As Todes, McKinney, Ferguson, Jr. ( 1977 ) p.223 provinces, A individual is a desiring being he ever wants, and he wants more. Therefore if there is nil that an single wants, there would be no demand for them to execute a certain undertaking as there is nil they can derive from it. Over c lip there have been many motivational theories developed to seek and research what motive is and how different degrees of motive can be achieved with different inputs. Two of the most widely recognised motivational theories come from Abraham Maslow ( hierarchy of demands ) and Fredrick Herzberg ( two factor theory ) . Directors in concerns would utilize these theories in an effort to actuate staff to supply them with occupation satisfaction and in return receive better undertaking public presentation. Through extended research Maslow and Herzberg developed their ain theories which are now used in concerns all around the universe. Both differ in how they are applied but in the modern universe they are seen as being wholly true by many although they should be perceived as being an interesting debatable set of observations about what motivates people ( Finchman A ; Rhodes, 2005 ) p.199. This is due to the deficiency of grounds to state that they are wholly true despite using to the overall bulk. Each is really similar in the manner that there are certain demands that must be fulfilled earlier high degrees of motive can be obtained. Abraham Maslow sets out a hierarchy of importance where human demands are arranged in a series of degrees ( Todes et al. 1977 ) . Like Herzberg s two factor theory, the demands in Maslow s hierarchy can be split into two degrees. The first set being the basic demands, incorporate physiological and safety demands. The 2nd set can be seen as the incentives dwelling of societal, esteem and self actualizing demands. In comparing to Herzberg, basic demands would be the equivalent of hygiene demands dwelling of: salary, co-workers, supervising, policies and environment. Herzberg s 2nd set ( incentives ) includes: acknowledgment, publicity, accomplishment, duty and intrinsic occupation facets, all of which are separately rather self-explanatory and reasonably interlinked ( Finchman A ; Rhodes, 2005 ) . As the construction of Maslow s hierarchy suggests, the higher incentives are harder to accomplish than the old and there is an order to which they must be acquired. If the old incentive ha s non been moderately satisfied so there will be no desire to seek and obtain the following. The physiological demands are reflected in the human demand to eat, breathe, remainder, drink and engage in active enterprises ( Todes et al. 1977 ) p.244. These demands can be seen as necessities for endurance doing it logical to be topographic point at the underside of the hierarchy and as the lowest incentive ( Todes et al. 1977 ) . Safety needs come in the signifier of experiencing secure in the occupation that you have which means that there is a demand of: shelter, a strong feeling of occupation security and as Todes et Al. ( 1977 ) provinces, a demand for protection against physical dangers along with the demand to gain a just wage that can fulfill a given criterion of life which is an component in Herzberg s list of hygiene factors. A director would be able to carry through the basic demands by giving suited sum of clip for interruptions in which the physiological demands can be eas y met. Safety would deduce from supervising and policies of the company where they act as a usher, assisting the employee s advancement giving them a feeling of being good supported. The environment that they work in would besides assist with employees experiencing safe every bit long as there is the turning away of physical dangers. Besides there is the struggle of whether or non salary is a incentive. Directors may believe that employees would work harder for a rise whereas others believe it is uneffective. Although necessary, hence it being placed in the hygiene factors and incorporated in the safety needs, it is non a incentive. The ground for this may be that although one receives more money for what they do, they will non needfully work harder holding acquired the rise. This therefore links salary to the incentive, publicity which would be the ground for why there is a sudden addition in an persons income. The incentives, get downing with societal demands, ( Maslow s 3rd demand which could be seen as being at the base of the motivational hierarchy ) can non be achieved unless the basic needs anterior to it are in topographic point and adequately satisfied. Social demands can be seen as the desire for interaction, credence and a sense of belonging with associates and personal familiarities ( Todes et al. 1977. With Herzberg, it can be argued that the societal incentive is split between both the categorical factors beliing Maslow s perceptual experience of it. As the hygiene factors of co-workers and to an extent, supervising, carry through the societal demand for interaction, the incentive acknowledgment would take to run intoing the demand for credence and belonging. Herzberg s incentive of acknowledgment combined with publicity, duty and possibly accomplishment would besides be linked with Maslow s 4th demand, respect. This, a more personal, possibly narcissistic demand, is much harde r for a director to integrate into the on the job environment due to the managerial tendency of cut downing most occupations to their lowest degree of occupation content ( Todes et al. 1977 ) . Bing noticed for good public presentation through congratulations and acknowledgment, which could take to the accomplishment of a publicity where duty is increased, can all be subscribers towards carry throughing regard but neer efficaciously fulfilling it wholly. Even if it does, it will merely be temporarily and possibly non plenty for the peak demand of self-actualisation to get down being met. It hence acts as a changeless incentive to work harder or go on working to run into the higher demands ( Finchman A ; Rhodes 1977 ) . Self-actualization is where an single grows towards a house apprehension of their abilities and utilises these accomplishments at an optimal degree ( McGregor. 1964 ) . This concluding demand nevertheless, is seldom met, hence it being at the top of the hierarchy as the thought of: as you progress up the hierarchy, the extremum of each demand that must be passed is higher than the demand before it. Not merely is this an of import factor, there is besides the demand that the old demands, although less dominant in focal point, must stay active and tolerably satisfied before the following factor can be of any involvement to the person ( Krech, Crutchfield A ; Ballachey cited in Todes et Al. 1977 ) . Due to this and the general fact that self-pride is satisfied in little measures and non on a regular basis, it does non do geting self-actualization an easy undertaking due to the antecedently described theory regulation. Although Herzberg s theory operates likewise, there is non as rigoro us an order to follow as to whether a specific factor must be met before another one can go of any involvement other than working on the footing that all hygiene factors must be adequately satisfied before any incentives can get down to be of any relevancy to the person. In this facet the theoretical account is more indulgent and due to non holding a rigorous order of how they must be met, any factor within their several classs can be acquired in any order doing it easy and ready to be tested. Not merely this but each factor is really much interlinked and regards one another in the manner that when one is achieved, other factors can be acquired in speedy sequence. Directors could so integrate this into the manner that undertakings are delegated so that when an employee completes one undertaking they obtain a certain sum of demand satisfaction. On the following undertaking performed, more demands could be fulfilled and unwittingly, employees would be come oning through the fulfilment of either Maslow or Herzberg s demands where they attain either more self-actualisation or occupation satisfaction. What needs to be kept in head is that although the two are really similar, Maslow s hierarchy can be applied about any state of affairs with the purpose of researching psychological patterned advance. Whereas Herzberg s theory outlines more of what factors must be in topographic point before occupation satisfaction can be achieved associating more specifically to motive and its impact within the work topographic point ( Finchman A ; Rhodes. 2005 ) . The intrinsic occupation facets would be the closest incentive related to personal achievement as this demand involves the employees feeling that through working they are profiting and developing as an person. This therefore means that a director would necessitate to seek and place which of the two theories they think would be most effectual and accomplishable in developing employee motive. Do they desire their employees to get occupation satisfaction through Herzberg s incentives or to be self realizing being more willing to work unders tanding themselves and what they are capable of. A combination of the two could be possible in Maslow s basic demands and Herzberg s hygiene factors but the acquisition of both does non needfully intend that motive or occupation satisfaction would be obtained, it merely means that occupation dissatisfaction would be probably to develop without it ( Finchman A ; Rhodes 2005 ) . Another point to retrieve is that non all persons are the same in what they want hence the theoretical accounts non being universally accurate. A state of affairs where either theoretical account would non be to the full applicable is where 1 is happy with their current place and the undertakings that they perform. As a consequence of the fulfilment of an unwanted demand such as publicity, that peculiar employee may underachieve as they have lost the occupation satisfaction they had prior to the acquisition of that motivational demand. Whereas another who may hold wanted such a demand would be discouraged due to them non having the publicity and as a consequence de-motivated the employee. As mentioned, everyone is different in their degrees of satisfaction and motivational precedences, some of which would be unknown to the person. Even if known they may non cognize what to make to obtain them. From this a director would hold to happen a manner of being able to match the demands of people with appropriate inducements ( Todes et al. 1977 ) p.165. Of class for a director to carry through all these demands they would hold to be able to associate to the motivational demands of the employees beneath them and integrate them into their scheme so that employees would be able to accomplish them through the undertakings they perform. As these motivational demands are met, employees may be more motivated to work and unwittingly develop other motivational demands that are fulfilled through the director s undertaking apparatus. A really of import factor for a director to retrieve harmonizing to Finc hman A ; Rhodes ( 2005 ) p.266, is that the rule of behavior that is rewarded tends to be repeated and that which is punished, avoided. From this, it can be seen that directors have a strong ability and influence on their employees behaviour. Therefore both motivational theories are non entire antonyms of each other but are in fact really similar. Both focal point on the incentives as being subscribers to psychological growing and development ( Finchman A ; Rhodes, 2005 ) . Each has certain demands which must be met before person can come on onto accomplishing motivational demands, such as in Maslow s instance the basic demands and the hygiene needs in Herzberg s both are seen as being needed to be in topographic point before there can be any patterned advance onto the following set of incentives. This besides expresses how both are similarly split into two groups. A large difference would be how Maslow s theory can use to any state of affairs but Herzberg s is more applicable in the workplace and set out in a manner that made it easy to turn out correct, whereas it was more hard with the former despite being taught as true ( Finchman A ; Rhodes, 2005 ) . Directors could efficaciously integrate the motivational techniqu es into developmental schemes by planing a work environment where employees would be able to develop personally as they work, in bend they could unwittingly get motive ( Todes et al. 1977 ) . This manner employees would be more willing to execute their undertakings and develop demands promoting them to work harder, going more motivated to run into these new demands. But possibly the most obvious and of import similarity is that although they are taught as being true, a director would necessitate to maintain in head that they are non. Even though they apply to the bulk, different people have different demands and degrees of satisfaction therefore either theoretical account can non be wholly relied on for a director to seek motivate employees ( McGregor. 1964 ) . Reference List: Finchman. R A ; Rhodes. P, Principles Of Organisational Behaviour, 2005 P.199, P.233 McGregor. D, The Professional Manager, 1964 P.11, P.75 Todes. J.L, Mckinney. J, Ferguson Jr. W, Management A ; Motivation, 1977 P. 165, P. 223-227, P.244