The Critical Factor Of Motivation Tactics Business Essay

Published: Last Edited:

This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Motivation is a critical factor in individual, group and organisational success. "In broad term motivation can be considered to comprise an individual's effort, persistence and the direction of the effort .In simpler terms, motivation is the will to perform" (Ian Brooks, 2006). It is, perhaps, of more value to identify the characteristics which frequently associated with well motivated people. Such people have always seen with full of zest and enthusiasm. They often work with people to overcome obstacles, or organisational problems and frequently demand and accept additional responsibilities. In contrast, employees who are demotivated often appear apathetic and may tend to cause many problems to the organisation one and another.

The major researchers whose theories are still valuable for the business students and organisation were Maslow (1954), Herzberg et al. (1959), Vroom (1964), Alderfer (1972), McClelland (1961), and Locke et al. (1981) . if you look at the broader prospective, the researchers theories can be divided into two groups- the content theory and the process theory.

Table 3.1 A simple classification of motivation theories

Content theories

Process theories

Two factor theory (Herzberg)

Expectancy theory (Vroom;Porter &Lawler)

Needs hierarchy (Maslow; Alderfer)

Equity theory (Adams)

Achievements needs theory( Mcclelldnd)

Goal theory (Locke)

Attribution theory (Heoder;Kelley)

Table 3.1 (Ian Brooks, 2006) page 50

Herzberg purposed 'two factor theory of motivation'. He is the first person who developed the concept of job enrichment (1966, 1968). Frederick Herzberg latter on did studies to determine that which factors in an employee work and job environment causes satisfaction and dissatisfaction so that he can better understand employee attitudes and motivation, 203 Pittsburgh were interviewed . In this research he asked them to recall any event which made them feel good and any event which made them feel bad. After analysing the result from all the Accountants he finally figured out that factor responsible for job satisfaction are different from job dissatisfaction. Hezberg called this theory , 'two factor theory of motivation'.

Herzberg found that the factor causing satisfaction are different from the factors causing dissatisfaction. He developed the motivation-hygiene theory to explain his research, he called them motivator factor and hygiene factor. He called the term motivator to satisfiers, and hygiene to dissatisfier. He used the term ''hygiene'' because it is considered as a maintenance factor which are utmost important to avoid dissatisfaction but they do not provide satisfaction by themselves.

Herzberg reasoned that the two factors are different from each other so they cannot be treated as opposite of one another. The opposite of satisfaction is not dissatisfaction, but rather it is no satisfaction so similarly the opposite of dissatisfaction is no dissatisfaction.

The following table represent of Herzberg Shows the top six factors causing satisfaction and dissatisfaction, listed on the priority from higher level to lower level.

TABLE 1: Herzberg's Motivators and hygiene factors


(Job content)

Hygiene Factors

(Organizational context)




Company policy


Supervisory style





the work itself

Working conditions

Table 1.1: (Buchanan & Huczynski, 2010) p208

From the above table of results, one observes that both the factors which determine satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not part of the work itself, but rather, are external factors. Herzberg often referred to these hygiene factors as "kITA" factors, where KITA is an acronym for Kick in the A…, the process to threat someone to do something or to provide incentives. Herzberg argues that these factors can only provide short-run success because the motivators factors that determine whether there is satisfaction or no satisfaction are intrinsic from the job itself, and do not result from carrot and stick incentives.

If you look at crux of the matter, financial rewards for the applicants can be higher for both the organisation and individual but more over negatively employment continue and opportunities for the carries progression of individual seems deteriorated through a unilateral re-writing of the psychological contract of employers. . The role of money as a hygiene factor has been described as; "one of avoiding pain and dissatisfaction ("disease") but not one of promoting heightened motivation ("health")" (Opsahl and Dunnette, 1966, p. 96). Herzberg continuous proposition was, beyond a minimum threshold, money does not motivate.

After reading Herzberg theory there are several questions which made us to think that how pay can be a hygiene factor? If pay is a hygiene factor than what else are the other reason which motivate people.

"The excellent literatures of the 1980s emphasised the importance of team working and empowerment - see Peters and Waterman (1982) and Clutterbuck and Goldsmith (1984)." (Bassett-Jones, N. & Lloyd, G.C., 2005, pp. 929-943). During the 1990's there was a sudden growth in the service sector due to a change in technology and labour diversification. Many successful business were set up under the principle of Taylor's. Frederick Winslow Taylor

(1856 - 1917) put forward his points and ideas that worker are mainly motivated by pay because they do not enjoy the work they do, so it is important to supervise them and should be paid them according to their production . Mindless repetitive jobs resulted in the reassertion of theories which were predicted on ideological assumptions of economic man. They were the theories which resulted to the dominant coalition in senior management and reflected in the post-millennium Enron and other high profiles management and financial scandals. Here we can see that pay only motivate people for a time being. "Herzberg et al. (1959) argued that these impulses were a product of a failure to distinguish between motivation and movement, and produced behaviours that are dysfunctional at both boardroom and operational levels."(Bassett-Jones, N. & Lloyd, G.C., 2005, pp. 929-943).

Elton Mayo (1880 - 1949) who has introduced the term which Taylor ignored is, people can be better motivated by having their social needs whilst at work. He introduced the Human Relation School of thoughts, which focused on mangers that they can take more interest in their workers and treating them as a people who have worthwhile opinions and to make them realise that workers enjoy interacting together.

Through his research of Hawthorne factory of the Western Electric Company in Chicago , he finally concluded that people are best motivated by:

Better communication (between managers and workers)

Working in group or team

Greater manager involvement (in employees working lives)

These are the three main elements which he find from which people get motivate for their work not pay.

The extents to which certain outcomes will be valued are depended upon their particular needs. It has been argued that people often share a series of hierarchically needs will act as a source motivation. Perhaps the most recent theory is of Maslow's needs hierarchy. Maslow, a sociologist writing in 1943, suggested that individual person is motivated to satisfy a set of needs which are ranked hierarchically according to their salience. His model of needs of hierarchy has five different stages which state that if our biological, safety needs and social needs are not satisfied we will die, so in order to fulfil them we need money. If our need for esteem and love are not get satisfied we feel helpless and inferior, but if they get fulfilled we feel self contended. Self-actualization is the ultimate goal.

Through Maslow's needs hierarchy we see that to fulfil the lower needs pay act as a non hygiene factor but when we attain the higher level of needs even pay does stand anywhere. To a certain extent pay can be a non hygiene factor but after that it acts a demotivater.

When we further move with the era of 1960's we find expectancy theory by Vroom (1964), an American psychologist, he develope this theory from the original work of Tolman and Honzik (1930) , producing a systematic explanation of theory, workplace motivation. "It argued that the motivation to behave in a particular way is determined by an individual's expectation that behaviour will lead to a particular outcome, multiplied by the prefercence or valence that person has for that outcome" (Ian Brooks, 2006). For example if a working diligently and for long hour an employee expect to receive a promotion in future and if that worker values promotion in its job values highly (valence) then, rationally, we might expect that worker to adapt this criteria. "Vroom argues that human behaviour directed by subjective probability" (Ian Brooks, 2006). The individual's expectation that his or her behaviour will lead to a particular outcome.

The simple expectancy equation is:

Motivation (M) = Expectation (E) Ã- Valence (V) (Ian Brooks, 2006)

It has been assumed that level of motivation has been derived from his or her own decision making process. The theory also considered that every person have its own level of estimated outcome. So instead of pay also people's motivation depends upon their expectation.

In the same era theory X and theory Y was also introduced by Douglas McGregor. Theory X and Theory Y points of view and lists the various qualities that contribute to the both way of thinking. "Managers who make Theory X assumptions believe that employees dislike and attempt to avoid work, need direction, avoid responsibility, and lack of ambition. In contrast, managers of Theory Y assumptions believe that employees do not dislike work, have self control and direction, and seek responsibility (McGregor, 1960). Mangers of Theory Y are self-motivated a compare to the managers of Theory X blame other person, without questioning whether it may be the system, or lack of training that deserves the blame which will often lead to the mangers of Theory X to diseconomies of scale in large business. "Theory X and Theory Y served as a true benchmark for the human relations movement and Theory Y emerged as one of the hallmark relationship management principles of the last half of the 20th century" (Carson, 2005). So pay here also stands to be hygiene factor as people need to be self motivated as pay always satisfy the lower needs of Maslow's hierarchy which are essential for life.

Further beyond the theories of motivation there is also some of the theorist whose ideas are somewhere relevent to show that pay can be a hygiene factor. Max Weber discussed the phenomenon of backward-sloping supply curve for labour in General Economic History (1919-20), he stated through this curve is that "when wages incentives are offered to improve productivity, labourers respond by working shorter hours to earn the same money rather than harder or longer to earn more"( D. K. Sethi & Mrs U. Andrews, 2008).

Table 4.5 backward-sloping supply curve

Table 4.1 (D. K. Sethi & Mrs U. Andrews, 2008).

So as we see through this chart, when the wages have shoot up labourers are tend to do less work which states again that pay is a hygiene factor not a motivator.

How often one heard of an American organisation adopting the Japanese management style to surge ahead? Hoe often has one heard of the reverse? probably never. However, I do remember somewhere reading that IBM- USA was making losses on the other IBM-JAPAN was making profit. When IBM-USA tried to adopt the Japanese management style they incurred in more losses.

Considering these facts as well as various others aspects Arindam Chaudhuri brought a new concept of motivation with his Theory I. In his theory he put a different concept which motivates workers and that was Indian style of Management. An Indian group up in a system, where family ties and a sense of belongingness get an absolute top priority. Coming from this environment, he get a shock when he sees job environment practicing American philosophies of contractual style of management. He is not able to adjust productively to this cultural mismatch and thus, very often fails to less productive and looses all its motivation. Here the point to look over is even sometimes due to the mismanagement of style cause hygiene factor as even a worker get high pay he will tend to be not satisfied with its working style of management.

" "The Principles of "Theory 'i' Management"

Most Indians value bonds emotions and long-term relationships.

Most Indians value growth opportunities and commitment.

Our cultural roots (of tolerance etc.) often make us complacent.

Lack of patriotism at a macro level leaves us aimless". (Arindam Chaudhuri,2002)


After reviewing the theories of many famous motivation theorist I would like to conclude that pay is not a hygiene factor but only till the point when people did not overcome their basic needs.