Know these early theories because they: 1 Represent the foundation from which contemporary theories grew, and 2 Still are used by practicing managers to explain employee motivation.

(probably THE best-known motivation theory)7

• Abraham Maslow—a psychologist—proposed that within every person is a hierarchy of five needs:

  Exhibit 12–1

  Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

  

  Figure 12–1 Full Alternative Text

• Each level must be substantially satisfied before the next need becomes dominant; an individual moves up the hierarchy from one level to the next.

• Lower-order needs are satisfied predominantly externally, and higher-order needs are satisfied internally.

• Managers will do things to satisfy employees’ needs.

• Remember: Once a need is substantially satisfied, it no longer motivates.

• Widely popular among practicing managers probably because it’s easy to understand and intuitive.8 HOWEVER...

• No empirical support provided for theory; other studies could not validate it.9

• Based on two assumptions about human nature.10

  • Theory X: a negative view of people that assumes workers have little ambition, dislike work, want to avoid responsibility, and need to be closely controlled to work effectively.

  • Theory Y: a positive view that assumes employees enjoy work, seek out and accept responsibility, and exercise self-direction.

• To maximize employee motivation, use Theory Y practices—allow employees to participate in decisions, create responsible and challenging jobs, and encourage good group relations.

  

• No evidence to confirm either set of assumptions or that being a Theory Y manager is the only way to motivate employees.

• Frederick Herzberg’s two-factor theory (also called motivation-hygiene theory)—intrinsic factors are related to job satisfaction, while extrinsic factors are associated with job dissatisfaction.11

  • Popular theory from the 1960s to the early 1980s.

  • Criticized for being too simplistic.

  • Influenced today’s approach to job design. (See Classic Concepts in Today’s Workplace box on p. 386.)

• Research focus: When people felt exceptionally good (satisfied—see left-hand side of Exhibit 12–2) or bad (dissatisfied—see right-hand side of exhibit) about their jobs.

  Exhibit 12–2

  Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory

  

  Figure 12–2 Full Alternative Text

• Replies showed these were two different factors!

  

  • When people felt good about their work, they tended to cite intrinsic factors arising from the job content (job itself), such as achievement, recognition, and responsibility.

  • When they were dissatisfied, they tended to cite extrinsic factors arising from the job context, such as company policy and administration, supervision, interpersonal relationships, and working conditions.

• Replies also gave us the new view of Satisfaction vs. Dissatisfaction (see Exhibit 12–3).

  Exhibit 12–3

  Contrasting Views of Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction

  

  Figure 12–3 Full Alternative Text

  • Herzberg concluded that the traditional view—the opposite of satisfaction is dissatisfaction—was wrong.

  • He believed that the factors that led to job satisfaction were separate and distinct from those that led to job dissatisfaction.

  • Removing dissatisfying characteristics from a job didn’t necessarily make that job more satisfying (or motivating); it simply made you “less” dissatisfied.

  • Proposed a dual continuum: The opposite of “satisfaction” is “no satisfaction,” and the opposite of “dissatisfaction” is “no dissatisfaction.”

  

• David McClelland and his associates proposed the three-needs theory, which says three acquired (not innate) needs are major motives in work, including:12

  1. 1 need for achievement (nAch), which is the drive to succeed and excel in relation to a set of standards

  2. 2 need for power (nPow), which is the need to make others behave in a way that they would not have behaved otherwise

  3. 3 need for affiliation (nAff), which is the desire for friendly and close interpersonal relationships

• nAch has been researched the most:

  • People with a high nAch are striving for personal achievement rather than for the trappings and rewards of success.

  • They have a desire to do something better or more efficiently than it’s been done before.13

  • They prefer 1 jobs that offer personal responsibility for finding solutions to problems, 2 receiving rapid and unambiguous feedback on their performance in order to tell whether they’re improving, and 3 moderately challenging goals.

  • High achievers avoid what they perceive to be very easy or very difficult tasks.

  • A high nAch doesn’t necessarily lead to being a good manager, especially in large organizations. Why? Because high achievers focus on their own accomplishments, while good managers emphasize helping others accomplish their goals.14

  • Employees can be trained to stimulate their nAch by being in situations where they have personal responsibility, feedback, and moderate risks.15

• The best managers tend to be high in nPow and low in nAff.16