The following is my response to a frequently asked question. I hope you find it helpful. You may find that it raises more questions than it answers but isn't that usually the case with issues of leadership?
Rank the following from 1 to 10, 1 = most important and 10 = least important to level of motivation and job satisfaction.
Do this exercise twice as follows:
First for what you think your subordinates want, then for what you want.
| Subordinates | Myself | |
| Good Pay | ||
| Job Security | ||
| Promotion & Growth | ||
| Good Working Conditions | ||
| Interesting Work | ||
| Tactful Discipline | ||
| Managers Loyal to Staff | ||
| Appreciation for Work Done | ||
| Help with Personal Problems | ||
| A Feeling of Being "IN ON THINGS" |
Research conducted by Kenneth Kovoch for the Advanced Management Journal (Spring, 1998 Edition...this is one in a series dating back to the work of Elton Mayo in Hawthorn, Illinois in the 1920's and 30's) reports that the top 10 things that people 'want' in a job include the following:
Good Pay
Job Security
Promotion & Growth
Good Working Conditions
Interesting Work
Tactful (Sensitive) Discipline
Managers Who are Loyal to Employees
Full Appreciation for Work Done
Help with Personal Problems
A Feeling of Being "IN ON THINGS" (Belonging/Team)
Kovoch surveyed thousands of people at all organizational and wage levels throughout the US to determine the following:
Here's what he found:
In a similar study conducted by the Minneapolis Gas Company between 1945 and 1965 the rating different only slightly between women and men but both groups listed JOB SECURITY as #1. The next three were:
Pay, benefits and working conditions were given low rating by both groups.
Let's find out.
I recommend you do this as a training exercise during this weeks Leadership Team meeting.
We define 'the manager' as someone who 'gets things done through the efforts of others'.
Clearly employees will get a lot more done and a lot more of the right things, done right, if we and they are highly motivated.
In the following, I will attempt to briefly summarize some of the major theories and research studies in the field of motivation. I don't promise that this is exhaustive but I think it's a decent representation of key ideas in the field leading up to today.
Why is motivation so hard to understand and 'get it right? I hope this will help you a bit with that question at least. To create a motivating environment for oneself or anyone else requires a deep understanding human behavior with all its complexity and variability.
Why study and apply employee motivation principles?
Apart from the obvious moral value of making a concerted effort to treat people like the unique beings we are, research shows very clearly that highly motivated people are far more productive and creative. For affirmation I invite you to read such recent bestsellers as:
Theory X Management
This can best be ascribed to Sigmund Freud who based his theory on the assumptions that people:
All people want, according to Theory X is security.
To get people to do anything that requires effort, one must use a combination of rewards, coercion, intimidation and punishment. This management style is known as the 'carrot & stick' approach to motivation.
If Theory X is correct, managers must constantly police their staff, whom they cannot trust and who will refuse to cooperate.
Theory Y Management
Douglas McGregor's thesis is the antithesis of Freud's. He believed that people want, more than anything else, to learn and work and grow. Furthermore he believed that to work is the natural state of all mature and healthy human beings. People see their 'reward', said McGregor, not so much in cash but in the freedom to do difficult and challenging work. The job of the manager therefore is to 'dovetail' the human wish for self-development into the organization's need to maximize productive efficiency. When managers do their work successfully, both objectives are met and an enormous well of creative and productive potential is unleashed.
Does it sound too good to be true? Does Theory Y sound soft and slack? When put into practice it is just the opposite, it's the most demanding and productive form of management in existence. It's tough to accomplish but there is a growing body of (see the books noted above) success stories that provide compelling proof of the effectiveness of Theory Y.
For best results, participants in a Theory Y culture must be carefully selected (Jim Collins in phrases is: get the right people on the bus) so they have the potential to come together as a high performance, self-managing team. A good leader of such a group will occasionally 'absent' herself from group meetings so members can discuss matters freely and even help select and groom a new leader if that is appropriate. (see In Search of Excellence for examples) The leader no longer desires power (see level 5 Leadership in Good to Great) but encourages and lets people develop freely and enjoys watching the development and actualization of people. In this environment, everyone gains, most of all, the organization.
Theory Z Management
Abraham Maslow, like McGregor, totally rejects the dark view of humanity taken by Freud. Maslow is the 'godfather' of the human potential movement and believed that, at birth, every human has a vast resource of good qualities and potentialities. It is the responsibility of the culture, through parents, teachers, mentors and managers to educate and develop that potential. By 'educate', Maslow meant educare in the Latin sense i.e. to 'bring out' or 'call forth' from within.
Maslow's central thesis revolves around the meaning and significance of human work itself. He believed that 'by good works a man becomes holy, by evil works evil'. "A man's personality is the sum total of his works," says Maslow, "and only his works survive at death."
One of Maslow's great contributions to human development and motivation theory is his famous Hierarchy of Needs which states that:
Human beings are insatiable 'need satisfiers'. We always have needs and we are always striving to satisfy them, but these needs change and can be organized into a hierarchy:
Maslow theorized that human behavior is dominated by unsatisfied needs and when one need is satisfied, humans move on to the next higher need. This is therefore an ongoing activity in which we are totally absorbed in order to attain perfection through self-development.
The highest state of self-actualization is characterized by integrity, responsibility, magnanimity, simplicity and naturalness (see Level 5 Leadership in Good to Great). Self-actualizers focus on problems external to themselves. His prescription for human salvation is simple, but not easy: "Hard work and total commitment to doing well the job that fate or personal destiny calls you to do."
Hygiene Theory of Motivation
Fredrick Herzberg was a protege of Abraham Maslow's and based his theory on interviews of 200 engineers and accountants in the Pittsburgh area. According to Hygiene Theory, people work first and foremost in their own 'enlightened self-interest', for we achieve true happiness and optimal mental health only through work.
Peoples needs, said Herzberg, can be divided into two categories:
Unsatisfactory (unhealthy) hygiene factors can act as de-motivators but no matter how clean or hygienic they become, they can never become motivators.
Herzberg's work in the 1050's exploded several myths about motivation such as that people are motivated by:
As typical examples, saying 'please' to shop-workers does not motivate them to work hard, nor does telling them about the importance of performance to the company, indeed this may antagonize them. These are, in Herzberg's terms, hygiene factors, which, if satisfactory, satisfy animal needs but not human needs.
Team Based Organizational Structure & Motivation
Chris Argyris postulated that organization needs to be redesigned for a fuller utilization of the most precious resource, our workers, and in particular their psychological energy. The traditional pyramidal structure needs to be relegated to the background, and decisions should be taken by small teams rather than by a single boss. When this happens, satisfaction in work will be more highly valued than material rewards. Work, said Argyris, needs to be restructured to enable individuals to develop to the fullest extent. At the same time work will become more meaningful and challenging through self-motivation...the only kind of motivation there is.
Motivation Through Participative Management
Rensis Likert identified four different styles of management:
In his research studies he found the participative style to be the most effective and motivational because it satisfies a whole range of human needs. Major decisions are taken by groups by themselves and this in turn results in achieving high targets and excellent productivity. There is complete trust within the group and the sense of participation leads to a high degree of personal commitment, ownership and motivation.
Contingency Theory of Motivation
Fred Luthans advocates that certain management/motivation practices work better with some people than do others i.e. that one's leadership style should vary based on the person and the job in question. As an example, rigid, clearly defined jobs, authoritative leadership and tight controls lead in some cases to high productivity and satisfaction. In some other cases, the opposite approach will work best. It is necessary, therefore, to adapt one's leadership style to the particular group of workers and the specific job in hand.
Expectancy Theory
Victor Vroom's Expectancy Theory is an extension of Luthan's approach. Vroom says that one's leadership style should be 'tailored' to the particular situation and group. In some cases it appears best for the boss to decide and in others the group should develop a consensus, the choice depends largely on the relative importance of 'following an established process' or 'engaging the creative potential and generating high levels of commitment within the team'. Likewise, an individual should be rewarded with what he or she perceives as important rather than what the manager values. One individual may value a salary increase while another might prefer a promotion i.e. more responsibility or esteem. The unique insight developed by Vroom is that individual goals influence individual performance and levels of motivation i.e. Are employees getting what they expect to get?
This of brings us back to where we started: i.e. What do employees want?
Persuasion is far more powerful than coercion, which is why the pen is mightier than the sword. Managers have a much better chance of success if they develop and use skills of clear communication and persuasion rather than coercion. Persuasion builds morale, initiative and motivation while coercion kills them. The three key elements of effective persuasion are:
Once convinced, we become is so self-motivated that they will do whatever it takes to achieve the objective. When this happens, the manager will have achieved the goal so quietly, gently and effortlessly that it will appear almost like he/she made no effort at all. As a consequence the 'doer' will feel he did it himself and will experience the increased self-esteem that accompanies successful goal achievement.
Good success to you.
Your comments are always welcome.