Coursework: Process theories of motivation. Process theories of motivation
Motivation is the process of inducing a person to a certain activity with the help of intrapersonal and external factors.
Motive - a conscious internal motivation of a person to behave in a certain way, aimed at satisfying certain needs.
Motive characterizes primarily the volitional side of behavior. A motive is generated by a certain need, which is the final cause of human actions.
Motivation - the process of influencing a person with the aim of inducing him to certain actions by awakening certain motives in him. It is carried out through the use of various techniques and methods of influencing a person. A separate technique or method acts as a motivator.
Stimulation – external motivation aimed at achieving the goals of the organization.
Motivational process
Motivation, considered as a process, can be presented in the form of 6 stages (Fig. 7.1).
The first stage is the emergence of a need. The need manifests itself in the fact that a person begins to feel a lack of something. It arises at a certain time and begins to “demand” from a person to find an opportunity and take some action to satisfy it.
The second stage is the search for ways to satisfy needs. Since the emerging need creates problems for a person, he begins to look for ways to satisfy it and determines the benefits with which he can achieve this. As a result, there is a need to do something.
The third stage is determining the direction of action, by completing which a person will be able to satisfy the need. At this stage, a person consciously or unconsciously determines:
What benefits can satisfy the need;
What needs to be done to receive these benefits;
What is the probability of carrying out the intended actions (receiving the desired benefits);
To what extent can real actions satisfy the need?
Figure 7.1. Motivation process
The fourth stage is the implementation of action. At this stage, a person expends effort in carrying out actions that should ultimately provide him with the opportunity to obtain a benefit that satisfies a need.
The fifth stage is receiving rewards, benefits for actions performed. This is where it becomes clear to what extent these actions contributed to achieving the desired result.
The sixth stage is need satisfaction. Depending on the degree of tension caused by the need, as well as on whether the satisfaction of the need causes a weakening or strengthening of motivation for activity, a person either stops the activity before a new need arises, or continues to look for opportunities and take actions to eliminate the need.
There are many theories of motivation. Depending on the subject of analysis, theories are divided into three areas:
1) theories based on a specific picture of an employee - a person;
2) intrapersonal theories (content);
3) procedural theories.
The theories of the first direction are based on a certain image of the employee, his needs and motives, the second - analyze the structure of the needs and motives of the individual and their manifestation, the third - study the influence of various environmental factors on motivation.
2. Theories based on a specific picture of a worker - a person
XY - McGregor's theory."
Theory “X” largely reflects W. Taylor’s views on the employee:
Average person lazy and tends to avoid work;
Employees are not very ambitious, are afraid of responsibility and want to be led;
To achieve the goals of the enterprise, it is necessary to force workers to work under the threat of sanctions, without forgetting about remuneration;
Strict guidance and control are the main management methods;
The behavior of workers is dominated by the desire for safety.
According to this theory, motivation management should be built on these postulates.
Theory “Y” developed in the 60s and is a complement to the theory “X”. It is built on principles opposite to Theory X:
Reluctance to work is not an innate quality of the worker, but a consequence of poor working conditions that suppress the innate love of work;
With favorable past experiences, employees tend to take responsibility;
The best means achieving the goals of the organization - remuneration and personal development;
Given the right conditions, employees internalize the organization's goals;
The labor potential of workers is higher than is commonly believed.
The main practical conclusion from Theory “U”: it is necessary to provide employees with more freedom to show initiative and creativity and create favorable conditions for this.
Ouchi's Z Theory
home distinguishing feature theories – substantiation of collectivist principles of motivation. According to this theory, employee motivation should come from the values of the “production clan.”
Essence of the theory:
The manager must take care of each employee as a person as a whole, i.e. he must not only provide employees with the required level of salary, but also take care of the quality of life;
The employee is interested in the future of the enterprise, thanks to the lifelong employment system, therefore, involvement in the group decision-making process is the direct responsibility of the manager;
Universal nature of qualifications, broad communications;
Confidential, friendly communication between a manager and a subordinate, etc.
3. Intrapersonal theories of (content) motivation
A. Maslow's theory of self-actualizing person
Among the fundamental classical theories the content of needs is attributed to the theory of A. Maslow (1943). The author of the idea proceeds from the fact that all people constantly feel some kind of needs that prompt them to action. A person is influenced by a whole complex of clearly expressed needs, which can be combined into several groups, arranging them according to the principle of hierarchy. Usually a person experiences several interacting needs at the same time, the strongest of which determines his behavior. A manager who knows well the level of needs of his subordinate can foresee what type of needs will dominate him in the foreseeable future and use the appropriate motivator to improve the effectiveness of his activities.
Maslow identifies 5 groups of needs:
1. Physiological needs - needs for food, clothing, shelter, sleep, rest, etc. Their satisfaction is necessary to maintain life and survive. In relation to production, they manifest themselves as needs for wages, vacation, pensions, breaks in work, favorable conditions labor, etc. Workers whose behavior is determined by these needs have little interest in the meaning and content of work; they are concerned about pay and conditions.
2. Security needs. By this we mean both physical security (health protection, workplace safety) and economic security (cash income, job security, social insurance). These needs are updated and come to the fore as soon as physiological needs are satisfied. They reflect the desire to maintain the position already achieved, including the level of wages and various benefits, and to protect oneself from dangers and injuries. In an organization, this need is expressed in the form of workers’ struggle for stable employment, social insurance, etc.
3. Social needs. They focus on communication and emotional connections with others: friendship, love, belonging to a group, acceptance by it. In an organization, this manifests itself in the fact that people belong to formal and informal groups. A person motivated by social needs considers his work as a part of the activity of the entire team.
4. Esteem needs (prestigious). These include the needs for both self-esteem and respect from others, including the needs for prestige, authority, power, and career advancement.
5. Needs for self-realization, self-expression, self-actualization. They include the needs for creativity, the implementation of one’s own plans, and the realization of individual abilities. They characterize the highest level of manifestation of human activity.
Employee satisfaction is achieved when the degree of need saturation meets expectations. Otherwise, a feeling of dissatisfaction sets in, which blocks the actualization of higher needs.
5. secondary needs
1. primary needs
Figure 7. “Pyramid of Needs”
The importance of theory. From the hierarchical nature of the motivational impact of needs for a manager, very specific practical conclusions follow. First of all, he must strive to satisfy primary needs. Only after this should higher incentives be used.
The theory of two factors by F. Herzberg
 |
Herzberg in the late 50s. studied 200 accountants and engineers to identify motivational factors and their strength. Employees were asked two questions: “Can you describe in detail a time when you feel exceptionally bad at work?” and “Can you describe in detail when you feel exceptionally good at work?”
As a result of the study, two groups of factors clearly emerged that clearly do not equally influence work motivation. He called the first group of factors hygiene factors, the second - motivational.
The main practical conclusion from the theory is that managers should take a differentiated and cautious approach to the use of various incentives and, when lower-level needs are satisfied, not rely on hygiene factors as the main ones. Conversely, they should not waste time and money using motivators until hygiene needs are met.
Alderfer's ERG theory
"E" - existence
“R” – connections
"G" - height
Existence needs include a group of physiological needs and a group of safety needs
Connection needs are the needs of belonging and involvement. They reflect the social nature of a person, the desire to be a member of a family, to have colleagues, etc. This group includes some of the needs for recognition and self-esteem, as well as the needs for group security.
Growth needs are similar to the needs of self-expression; to them are added those needs for self-esteem and recognition that are associated with the desire to develop confidence.
All these groups of needs are located hierarchically, but needs can be satisfied not only from the bottom up, but also from the top down.
McClelland's theory of secondary needs
McClelland examines the needs of achievement, participation, and mastery.
Achievement needs are manifested in a person’s desire to achieve the goals set before him, and more effectively than before (these are people who like to take risks and prefer to work independently)
The needs of participation manifest themselves in the form of a desire for friendly relations with others. People with a high need for participation try to establish and maintain a good relationship, seek support and approval.
The need for power is that a person strives to control the resources and processes occurring in his environment. The main focus of this need is the desire to control people’s actions, influence their behavior, and take responsibility for the actions of other people. People with high power motivation are divided into 2 groups:
· those who strive for power for the sake of domination
· those who strive for power for the sake of solving group problems
McClelland believes that the developed need for power of the second group is most important for the success of a manager. The needs in his theory are not located hierarchically and the manifestation of these needs depends on their mutual influence.
Process theories of motivation
S. Adams' theory of justice (60s)
Notable among the procedural theories of motivation is Adams' theory of justice (equality). This theory is based on the fact that social interaction in an organization occurs similar to the economic exchange between employee and employer. The employee makes his labor contribution, as well as experience, management, education, age, nationality and class. This is his “entry” into the interaction system. The “exit” is provided by the employer in the form of wages, job satisfaction, social services, i.e. recoil.
 |
Contribution Return
Return Contribution
Figure 7.3. Relationship diagram
When engaging in work activity, an employee evaluates the situation according to two parameters: “what do I give to the organization?”, “What reward will I receive according to my contribution and in comparison with the remuneration of other employees performing the same work?”
The employee strives for a balance between “input” and “output”, expenses and income, labor costs and reward. The main criterion for assessing balance is to compare these indicators with those of other workers performing similar work.
Normal labor Relations employee and employer are established only when there is distributive justice, i.e. remuneration is fairly distributed among employees according to the formula:
Each employee compares the ratio of his remuneration and costs with the ratio of others and, as a result of the comparison, evaluates whether fairness or injustice was shown to him. Injustice can exist both in the form of underpayment (it is tolerated more acutely and causes indignation) and overpayment (a normal person feels guilty about this).
The feeling of injustice leads the employee to psychological stress, the severity of which is determined by the magnitude of the inequality. Tension, in turn, causes a certain behavioral response aimed at eliminating inequality and injustice (in an effort to reduce the imbalance, the employee can reduce or increase his labor contribution, change income, for example, by increasing it through extra work; choose another person for comparisons and calm down if the ratio is not in his favor).
| CONTRIBUTION›RETURN=>UNDERVALUATION CONTRIBUTION=RETURN=>FAIR VALUATION OF CONTRIBUTION<ОТДАЧА=>REVALUATION |
The significance of Adams' theory: One cannot underestimate the impact on motivation of underpayment or overpayment in piecework and time-based forms of remuneration.
V. Vroom's expectancy theory (1964, “Work and Motivation”)
Expectation refers to a person’s assessment of the likelihood of an event occurring. This theory is based on two assumptions: any human activity is purposeful; achieving a goal depends on rewards that allow the employee to satisfy certain needs. The state of motivation is a natural and constant state of the employee. A person is always motivated in one way or another and makes a choice between alternative forms of behavior. This choice depends primarily on three variables: the value of the goal, i.e. reward values; probability of achieving the goal; expectations that the employee's action will lead to the achievement of the goal.
 |
Based on previous experience, a person forms ideas about the degree of achievability of the goal; If expectations of achieving a goal are high, then the strength of the incentive increases. These previous experiences can be positive, which increases motivation, or negative, which weakens it. Therefore, it is not enough to offer the employee strong incentives; it is important to show them the means and opportunities to achieve goals, and the goals must be realistic and achievable so that the employee has no doubts about receiving the reward.
B. Skinner's theory of motivation enhancement
This theory reflects important aspect motivation – dependence on people’s past experiences. According to Skinner's theory, people's behavior is determined by the consequences of their actions in a similar situation in the past. Employees learn from their experiences and try to take on tasks that have previously yielded positive results, and, conversely, avoid tasks that have previously resulted in negative results.
Schematically, Skinner behavior can be depicted as follows:
Related information.
Process theories of motivation, their characteristics.
Process theories of motivation(motivation process theories) show how the motivation process is built and how people can be motivated to achieve the desired results. According to the process approach, a person makes a decision about active actions or inaction, taking into account not only needs, but also the perception of the situation, expectations associated with it, his capabilities, and the consequences of the chosen type of behavior.
1. Expectation theory
Expectancy theory was proposed by Victor Vroom. She describes the dependence of motivation on two points: how much a person would like to receive and how much effort he is willing to expend for this. This theory reflects the interaction of three blocks: effort, execution and result. Efforts– this is a consequence, the result of motivation. Execution- this is a consequence of the interaction of efforts, personal capabilities and the state of the environment. Result is a function that depends on execution and on the degree of desire to obtain results of a certain type. First level results imply the actual results of performing work, carrying out actions (the quality and quantity of the product produced, the amount of time spent, the amount of time lost, etc.). Second level results associated with possible reward or punishment (increase or decrease in pay, promotion or demotion, positive or negative reaction from the team. Valence reflects the priorities for a person of certain results. Valence is positive if the outcome is highly valued by the person; valence is negative if the result is not accepted by the person; valence is zero if a person is indifferent to this result. Expectation reflects a person’s idea of the extent to which his actions will lead to certain results. Expectation is zero if a person believes that performance and results do not depend on his efforts. Expectation is equal to one when a person believes that the result and performance are completely determined by his efforts. Based on expectancy theory, degree of motivation(M) can be represented by the formula: M = (Z → P)*(P → V)*V, where Z – costs; B – reward; P – result; V – valence. Thus, according to V. Vroom’s theory of expectations, people carry out their actions, focusing on the possible consequences of these actions and based on their own efforts that will need to be expended to achieve the expected result.
2. Goal setting theory Goal setting is a conscious process, and conscious goals are the basis for determining human behavior.
According to goal setting theory, the level of job performance largely depends on the following characteristics goals:
· difficulties, i.e. the degree of professionalism and level of performance required to achieve the goal;
· specificity, which implies quantitative clarity of the goal, its accuracy and certainty;
· acceptability – the degree to which a person perceives the goal as his own;
· commitment, which is defined as the willingness to expend a certain level of effort to achieve a goal.
In accordance with the theory of goal setting, the quality of performance depends on the following factors: the efforts of the employee, organizational factors, employee abilities.
Satisfaction with the result is determined by internal and external factors. Internal processes show how a person evaluates the result obtained from the perspective of correlating it with the intended goal. TO external processes refers to the reaction to the results of labor from the environment. Achieving results increases motivation.
3. Porter-Lawler model
Integrated process theory includes elements of expectancy theory and equity theory.
Porter and Lawler studied what determines the results achieved by employees. Their model includes five variables: effort, perception, results obtained, reward, and satisfaction.
In accordance with this model, the following relationship can be determined: “the achieved labor results depend on the efforts made by the employee, his abilities and characteristic features, as well as from his awareness of his role. The level of effort exerted will be determined by the value of the reward and the degree of confidence that a given level of effort will actually entail a well-defined level of rewards.
Also in the Porter-Lawler theory, a relationship is established between reward and results, i.e. the employee satisfies his needs through rewards received for the results achieved. One of the most important conclusions of the Porter-Lawler theory is that productive work leads to satisfaction.
4. Participatory management theory
Close to the theory of goal setting is the concept of participative management, based on the fact that a person receives satisfaction from participating in the affairs of the organization.
The concept of participatory management(from English - participant) involves involving employees in the management of the organization. It is based on the premise that if an employee is interested in participating in intra-company activities and receives satisfaction from his work, then he works more productively and efficiently. As a result, the employee also maximizes his abilities and capabilities.
There are three degrees of participation in intra-company activities:
1. Making proposals does not require significant changes to the traditional organization and can be carried out by the leader.
2. Development of an alternative involves the creation in the organization of temporary or permanent committees and commissions that are entrusted with carrying out this work (for example, conflict commissions at domestic enterprises, committees for recruiting personnel into work groups at American firms, quality circles in Japanese organizations).
3. Selecting the final solution assumes that participation in management is organized in the form of work special advice: scientific, technical, technical, economic and managerial nature. The decisions of such councils may be binding on the heads of the organizations under which they are created.
Participative management allows you to connect the motives, incentives and needs of people working in groups, based on various forms of self-government labor collectives. Participation in management motivates a person to do a better job, which affects productivity and quality. By giving the employee access to decision-making on his activities in the organization, participatory management, firstly, motivates him to do his job better, and secondly, it promotes greater impact, a greater contribution of the individual employee to the life of the organization. Thus, thanks to participative management, the potential of the organization's human resources is more fully utilized.
5. Theory of equality (theory of justice)
Stacy Adams, based on research he conducted at General Electric, formulated the key provisions of this theory. The main idea of the theory of equality is that in the process of work a person compares how his actions were evaluated with how the actions of others were evaluated. And based on this comparison, depending on whether he is satisfied with his comparative assessment or not, a person modifies his behavior:
Justice
Your exit and entrance = exit and entrance of your colleagues,
where Output is salary, recognition, promotion;
The input is education, experience, effort and ability.
A person feels satisfied when there is equality. If an individual considers his reward to be excessive or insufficient, then a feeling of dissatisfaction arises.
Adams singled following methods eliminating injustice:
1. Changing the output.
2. Changing the input.
3. Changing ideas about justice.
4. Change of place of work.
Process theories of motivation, in contrast to substantive theories based on needs and related factors that determine people’s behavior, view motivation from a different perspective. They analyze how a person distributes efforts to achieve various goals and how he chooses a specific type of behavior. Those. The behavior of an individual is determined by the feeling of the situation, the expectations associated with it, the assessment of one’s capabilities and the consequences of the chosen type of behavior.
Process theories recognize the existence of needs, but assume that people's behavior is determined not only by them.
According to process theories, an individual's behavior is also a function of the perceptions and expectations associated with a particular situation, and the possible consequences of the chosen type of behavior. There are the following main process theories of motivation:
1. Victor Vroom's expectancy theory.
4. Edwin Locke's theory of goal setting. 1. Victor Vroom's expectancy theory.
V. Vroom's theory is based on the fact that the presence of a need is not the only necessary condition for motivating a person to achieve a certain goal. A person must be confident that the type of behavior she has chosen will actually lead to the satisfaction of his needs. Most people, for example, expect that graduating from higher education will provide them with the opportunity to obtain better job. V. Vroom called this the theory of expectations, without rejecting the active role of needs in the motivational process
Expectations are people's beliefs about the extent to which their actions will lead to certain results. It is determined based on the analysis of the situation, the ability to assess it and one’s capabilities, intuition, knowledge, experience, and influences a person’s activity and his desire to achieve his goal. Expectation is a probabilistic category; its numerical characteristic varies in the range from 0 to 1.
Active need, according to V. Vroom’s theory, is not the only necessary condition motivating a person to achieve his goal.
The theory is based on three critical interdependencies:
o the ratio of “labor inputs (efforts) - results”;
o “result-reward” ratio;
o valence (hopes for sufficient value of the reward, satisfaction with the reward).
Expectations in the system of relations: labor costs (efforts) - results are the ratio between the efforts expended and the results obtained. If people feel that there is no direct connection between the efforts they expend and the results achieved, then, according to expectancy theory, motivation will weaken and decrease. This relationship may not exist due to insufficient training or education of the employee, or the employee was not given the opportunity to work. This type of expectation is also called expectation of results of the first kind.
Expectations in the system of relations results - reward are expectations of a certain specific reward or reward for the achieved level of results. In this case, as in the previous one, if a person does not feel the relationship between the achieved results and the desired reward, the motivation to work will also weaken. This type of expectation is also called expectation of results of the second kind.
In these relationships, the result must be considered both as a product of human activity, and as a consequence associated with its receipt (reward or punishment).
In expectancy theory important place ranks as the third factor of motivation
Valence, or the value of an incentive or reward. Valence is the perceived degree of relative satisfaction or dissatisfaction resulting from receiving a particular reward. If the result had value, then the valence is positive, if the attitude towards the result is negative, then the valence is negative, if the attitude is equal, the valence is zero. In this case, the valence of the overall result is the resultant of all results. Since different people have different needs and desires regarding rewards, a certain reward is determined according to the results achieved and may not have any value for them. Therefore, motivation in this case will be weakened. This valency is also called the valence of the second kind of result.
If the value of any of these three factors is insignificant, then motivation will be insufficient and labor results will be low.
The general motivation of activity will be determined as the product of private motivations. If the value of at least one of them is small, then the overall motivation will be weak, and vice versa. Thus, for success motivation important It has optimal ratio people's personal capabilities, expected rewards and the degree of its value.
For effective motivation the manager needs to establish a close relationship between results and reward. That is, the manager must know the motivational structure of the behavior of subordinate employees, and they must have a sufficiently high level of expectations of the first and second kind and positive valence of the second type (i.e., know that certain labor results depend on their efforts, followed by reward).
So, in addition to the needs realized by a person, it is guided by the hope of fair reward.
2. John Adams' theory of justice.
Equity theory suggests that people subjectively determine the ratio of reward received to effort expended and then compare it both with previous periods and with the reward of other people doing similar work.
If a person feels that she is treated fairly, as well as others, and that her work is properly appreciated, she will be happy and active. Conversely, if the comparison shows imbalance and injustice, e.g. If a person believes that his colleague received more compensation for the same work, then he begins to experience psychological stress. As a result, it is necessary to motivate this employee, relieve tension and correct the imbalance to restore justice.
Thus, those workers who feel they are underpaid compared to others may work less intensively or seek higher remuneration. Those workers who believe that they are overpaid will strive to maintain the intensity of work at the same level and even increase it. According to Adams' theory, every person always mentally evaluates the ratio:
Costs include not only the human effort to perform specific work, but also her age, qualifications, work experience at the enterprise, in the organization, social status and other factors. It should be remembered that the assessment of costs and benefits is quite subjective. If, as a result of all assessments and comparisons, a person concludes that there are no violations, then motivating factors continue to operate normally. If the violation is monitored, the individual is demotivated, as a result of which labor efficiency drops and the person reduces his business activity, demands increased wages and improved working conditions, uses illegal methods to increase income, or is even released. If a person is overpaid, she does not plan to change her behavior.
People can restore balance by changing the level of effort expended or by changing the level of reward received.
For management purposes, the implication of equity theory is that unless people perceive that they are being fairly compensated, they will try to reduce their work intensity.
Enterprise managers can solve this problem in the following ways:
♦ creation of a clear, understandable and simple remuneration system (official salaries or tariff rate remuneration + bonus);
♦ keeping the amount of total earnings of each employee secret;
♦ the opportunity to openly discuss controversial issues related to remuneration, creating a favorable moral and psychological climate.
3. The theory of Lyman Porter - Edward Lawler.
L. Porter and E. Lawler developed a complex process theory of motivation, which combined elements of expectancy theory and equity theory. Their model, shown in Figure 6.10, includes five variables:
♦ effort expended;
♦ perception of the results obtained;
♦ remuneration;
♦ degree of satisfaction;
♦ assessment of the employee’s role.
Rice. 6.10. Porter-Lawler Model of Motivation
According to the Porter-Lawler model, the results achieved depend on the employee’s efforts, his abilities and characteristics.
properties, as well as from his awareness of his role in the labor process. The employee's level of effort is determined by the value of the reward and the degree of confidence that this level of effort will lead to a specific level, that is, this effort will be adequately rewarded. A person satisfies his needs through rewards for achieved results.
Moreover, the Porter-Lawler theory establishes a relationship between reward and results, i.e. a person satisfies his needs through rewards for achieved results, and, very importantly, productive work gives pleasure to the employee.
In order to better understand how Porter and Lawler explain the mechanism of motivation, we will step by step analyze their model. According to the model, the results achieved by an employee depend on 3 variables: effort expended (3), abilities and characteristic properties person (4), as well as from his awareness of his role in the labor process (5).
The level of effort expended in turn depends on the value of the reward (1) and the extent to which the person believes in the existence of a relationship between the expenditure of effort and the possible reward (2). Achieving the required level of performance (6) can lead to internal rewards (7a), such as managerial praise or a bonus. The dotted line between performance and extrinsic reward means that there may be a relationship between performance and perceived reward. The fact is that these rewards reflect the reward opportunities that are determined by the manager of a given employee and the organization as a whole.
The dotted line between performance and rewards that are perceived as fair (8) is used to show that according to equity theory, people have their own assessment of the degree of fairness of the rewards they give for certain results. Satisfaction (9) is external and internal rewards, taking into account their fairness (8). Satisfaction is a measure of how valuable a reward actually is (1). This assessment will influence the person's perception of future situations.
The Porter-Lawler model shows how important it is to integrate concepts such as effort, ability, performance, reward, satisfaction and perception into a single, interrelated theory of motivation.
Research has supported Porter and Laurer's view that high performance is the root cause of overall employee satisfaction, not a consequence of it. The theory proved that motivation is not a simple element in the chain of cause and effect. She made major contributions to the understanding of motivation.
The mechanism of motivation through the behavioral aspects of the person of assistance and the assessment of the possible consequences of its chosen type in achieving the goal were also considered.
4. Edwin Locke's theory of goal setting.
E. Locke's theory is based on the fact that people subjectively understand the goal of an enterprise as their own and try to achieve it, while enjoying doing a certain job. Labor productivity is largely determined by such characteristics of goals as belonging to them, their complexity, etc. .
If the goals are real, then the higher they are, the greater the results a person achieves in the process of fulfilling them. It is the clarity and certainty of goals, the clarity and specificity of their setting that leads to high results. The higher the acceptability of goals for an employee, the more persistently he will try to fulfill them, despite the complexity, specificity, or some other obstacles. If goals are not realistic, they cease to be a means of motivation.
The favorable organization of work and the abilities of employees play a special role in the successful implementation of goals.
According to the theory of goal setting, the motivation of employees is greatly influenced by the result obtained. If it is positive, the employee remains satisfied with himself and motivation increases. If it is negative or “zero”, motivation decreases. It should be taken into account that satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the achieved result is also influenced by its internal and external assessment.
Thus, analyzing various theories of motivation, D. S. Sink made the following conclusions:
o when analyzing motivation, you need to focus on the factors that encourage or enhance action, including needs, motives and incentives;
o motivation is process-oriented and relates to the choice of behavior, direction of effort, goal and reward that is expected as a result of the work done.
The American economist and sociologist T. Veblen refuted the opinion of economic man, that is, of a person who acts as a maximizer of utility, or, in the words of T. Veblen himself, as a “lightning-fast determination of pleasures and pains, or a small ball rolling out under the influence of incentives.” , which throw her back and forth, but at the same time she remains unperturbed."
The purpose of consumption, T. Veblen believed, is not to satisfy material needs. Modern industrial society makes it possible to satisfy people's vital needs without much difficulty.
Instead, consumption in modern society becomes a means of increased status in society, which is ensured, as T. Veblen believed, “consumption that catches the eye.” Most economists are of the opinion that people, as a rule, make rational choices by systematically comparing the degree of satisfaction of needs they receive from certain expenses with the sacrifices they must make.
So, the desire to work depends not so much on the amount of annual salary, but on what the person will work for. As long as the worker believes that working for a while will earn him more than this particular time will cost him, so long will he work and his total benefit will increase. And vice versa, the lower the return, the more profitable it is to reduce the operating time.
K. Eklund looked at the reward system and how far income equalization policies could go without causing damage to the economy.
The formation of a reward system should encourage employees to take initiative, improve their skills and introduce new ideas. Income equalization is also very important. This allows workers with low incomes to improve their education and health care.
Except material incentives, there are moral ones, there is a desire to contribute to the improvement of the economy without any reward.
K. Eklund believes that there is no clear answer to the question of how important moral incentives are compared to material ones. their comparative importance varies in different countries and for different time and depends on historical traditions, political ideology, legal provisions.
The American economist A. Laffer became famous in the early 80s on the so-called “Laffer Curve”. Too much tax makes people less willing to work. The higher the tax rate, the less workers will work legally. If the tax rate increases, then after some time it will reach a level at which no one wants to work and pay these taxes, and the state will not receive a certain amount of income. That is, high taxes negatively affect people’s desire to work and pay taxes.
V. Ouchi developed theory “2”, according to which the achievement of high production efficiency is based on individual efforts using the three main commandments of the theory - trust, tact and intimacy. That is, each person is able to act at his own discretion and work autonomously, without control, since he has trust. Tight control reduces motivation and inhibits the creative development of freedom.
Considering these theories, it is still necessary to note that, unfortunately, industrial society does not make enough use of human intellectual potential (the willingness to use one’s knowledge and experience). The theories outlined are helpful in application. theoretical knowledge in practice in any field of activity.
Introduction
3. Process theories of motivation
3.1 V. Vroom's theory of expectations
3.2 S. Adams' theory of justice
3.3 E. Locke’s theory of goal setting
3.4 Complex theory Porter-Lawler
Introduction
Success in business comes from people. The secret to the success of a modern manager is the art of motivation, knowing what gives people energy and how to maintain their enthusiasm. If a leader knows what motivates people, then he has the most powerful tool for managing people and getting extraordinary results from them. The outstanding British businessman Richard Denny, who to this day deals with the problems of motivation, inspiration and education in business, states: “Motivation and strength are so closely interrelated that we can say that there is strength in a motivated person.”
This paper examines procedural theories of motivation: the stages of their emergence, their authors, their essence and the positions from which they are applicable to enterprise personnel; touches upon the problem of the need to motivate employees in modern conditions.
1. The concept of motivation. Motivational management
Motivation (from lat. "movere") - an incentive to action; dynamic process of physiological and psychological plan, controlling human behavior, determining its direction, organization, activity and stability; a person's ability to actively satisfy their needs.
Motivation has an intellectual basis; emotions only indirectly influence the process (applicable only to a person).
Motivation is determined by such a concept as motive. Motive (lat. Moveo – I move) is a material or ideal object, the achievement of which is the meaning of activity. The motive is presented to the subject in the form of specific experiences, characterized either by positive emotions from the expectation of achieving a given object, or negative ones associated with the incompleteness of the present situation. Understanding the motive requires inner work. The term “motivation” was first used by A. Schopenhauer in his article. Today this term is understood differently by different scientists. For example, motivation according to V.K. Vilyunasu is a total system of processes responsible for motivation and activity. And K.K. Platonov believes that motivation, as a mental phenomenon, is a set of motives.
Motive is one of key concepts psychological theory of activity, developed by leading Soviet psychologists A. N. Leontyev and S. L. Rubinstein. The simplest definition of motive within the framework of this theory is: “Motive is a materialized need.” Motive is often confused with need and goal, but need is, in essence, an unconscious desire to eliminate discomfort, and goal is the result of conscious goal setting. For example: thirst is a need, the desire to quench thirst is a motive, and a bottle of water that a person reaches for is a goal.
Motivational management is motivation as an action, as a process.
True motives are what exists inside a person. The essence of motivational management is to activate precisely these motives that a given person already has. It seems to us as leaders that there are universal methods. Let’s make some part of the reward a variable depending on the employee’s efforts, and important motives will awaken in a person that increase the efficiency of his activities. But in fact, it awakens excitement in some and anxiety in others. And it is by no means a fact that passion will increase performance. Every person we try to motivate needs to be studied. The first commandment of motivational management is that successful motivation must be individual. That is, in motivational management there is much more not influence, but research: if you want to motivate correctly and effectively, first research the person with whom you are going to work, and motivate exactly to the target. For some, the leading motive will be the motive of ambition, for others - independence, for the third - the motive of knowledge and involvement in the group.
On the other hand, you can go through selection. If we are considering a new, newly emerged company, then you, as a leader, can gather people who will work at the peak of their capabilities, because they cannot do otherwise. Indeed, you can hire people for whom working well is a matter of honor, and, it would seem, save on additional motivation. But! There are usually few such people on the market, and they are expensive. That is, you need to buy them. At the same time, you cannot pay them less than they are actually worth on the market: in this case, their sense of fairness will be violated, they will not value you as their leader - and after some time they will leave for another, more “fair” director.
Motivational management is management built on the priorities of motivating business behavior, i.e. creating conditions of interest in the results work activity and commitment to achieving organizational goals.
2. History of the development of the problem of motivation. Theories of motivation
Dedicated to issues of motivation a large number of monographs as domestic (V.G. Aseev; V.K. Vilyunas; E.P. Ilyin; V.I. Kovalev; A.N. Leontiev; M.Sh. Magomed-Eminov; V.S. Merlin; P .V. Simonov; D.N. Uznadze; A.A. Faizullaev; P.M. Yakobson), and foreign (A. Adler; J. Atkinson; K. Levin; K. Madsen; A. Maslow; J. Rotter; H. Heckhausen; G. Hall and others) authors.
The abundance of literature on the problem of motivation and motives is accompanied by a variety of points of view on their nature. To date, there has not been a consistent and generally accepted theory of motivation and, accordingly, a system of its basic concepts. In this regard, the problem of analyzing and generalizing existing motivational theories becomes particularly relevant. In foreign psychology, three directions of research into personal motivation have historically developed: psychoanalytic, cognitive and humanistic. IN Lately Steps are being taken towards a synthesis of these approaches. Thus, research conducted by J. Atkitson and D. McClelland combines the features of psychoanalytic and cognitive directions.
The most promising is the study of motivation from the perspective of cognitive and humanistic directions. The cognitive direction has been developed in line with studies of causal attribution, which are focused on justifying possibilities and finding ways to predict behavior. The humanistic direction is developing most effectively in the field of studying goal setting and self-actualization of the individual.
Domestic scientists dealing with motivation issues form several directions, according to their views. The first direction was developed by L.S. Vygotsky, A.N. Leontyev and their students, in particular V.K. Viliunas; second – S.L. Rubinstein, B.G. Ananyev; third – V.N. Myasishchev; fourth – D.N. Uznadze and his students - A.S. Prangishvili, I.V. Imedadze.
The first actually motivational psychological theories, which have absorbed rationalistic and irrationalistic ideas, we should consider the theory of decision making, which arose in the 17th – 18th centuries, explaining human behavior on a rationalistic basis, and the theory of the automaton, which explains the behavior of an animal on an irrationalistic basis.
The development of automaton theory, stimulated by the successes of mechanics in the 17th – 18th centuries, was further combined with the idea of a reflex as a mechanical, automatic, innate response of a living organism to external influences. The separate, independent existence of two motivational theories: one for humans, the other for animals, supported by theology and the division of philosophies into two opposing camps - materialism and idealism - continued until late XIX centuries.
The second half of the 19th century was marked by a number of outstanding discoveries in various fields of science, including biology, the development of which led to the emergence of the evolutionary theory of Charles Darwin. Under the influence of Darwin's teachings, psychology began an intensive study of intelligent forms of behavior in animals (W. Köhler; E. Thorndike) and instincts in humans (W. McDougall; I.P. Pavlov; Z. Freud, etc.). S. Freud and W. McDougall made attempts to reduce all forms of human behavior to innate instincts. In Freud's theory, three basic instincts were identified: the life instinct, the death instinct and the aggressive instinct. McDougall proposed a set of ten instincts, to which he later added eight more.
In the 20s of the twentieth century, the theory of instincts was replaced by a concept based on biological needs in explaining human behavior. Both concepts – “instinct” and “need” – had one significant drawback: their use did not imply the presence in a living organism of cognitive factors associated with consciousness, with subjective or mental states. Due to this circumstance, these two concepts were replaced by the concept of attraction.
In addition to the theories of human biological needs, instincts and drives, two more new directions arose in these same years, the formation of which was stimulated not only by the evolutionary teachings of Charles Darwin, but also by the discoveries of I.P. Pavlova – behavioral (behaviourist) theory of motivation and theory of higher nervous activity. Both of these directions acted as a logical continuation of the ideas of D. Watson in the theory that explains behavior. In addition to D. Watson and E. Tolman, among the most famous representatives of this trend are K. Hull and B. Skinner. They were characterized by a deterministic explanation of behavior within the framework of the original stimulus-reactive scheme.
Research started by I.P. Pavlov, were continued, deepened and expanded not only by his immediate students and followers, but also by other physiologists and psychologists. Among them we can name N.A. Bernstein, author of the original theory of psychophysiological regulation of movements; PC. Anokhin, who proposed the model functional system, describing and explaining at the modern level the dynamics of a behavioral act; E.N. Sokolov, who studied the orienting reflex, which has great importance to understand the psychophysiological mechanisms of perception, attention and motivation.
This means that the expectancy theory emphasizes the need to predominate in improving the quality of work and the confidence that this will be noted by the manager, which allows him to actually satisfy his need.
Based on expectancy theory, we can conclude that the employee must have needs that can be largely satisfied as a result of the expected rewards. And the manager must give such incentives that can satisfy the expected need of the employee. For example, in a number of commercial structures, remuneration is provided in the form of certain goods, knowing in advance that the employee needs them.
The meaning of variables. By the concept of valence, Vroom understands the stability of a person’s preferences regarding a specific outcome. Other terms could be used, such as value, incentive, attitude, and expected utility. Valence will be positive if a person prefers the first of two options - “to achieve a result” or “not to achieve a result.” Valence is zero if a person is indifferent to the result; Negative valence is when a person prefers not to achieve a result, instead of trying to achieve it. Another important component of valence is the significance, or instrumentality, of the first-level result for achieving the second-level result. For example, a person may be motivated to perform at the highest level because he wants to advance in his career. Best Performance work (first-level outcome) is seen as a means to career advancement (second-level outcome).
Another important variable in Vroom's motivational process is expectancy. Despite the fact that at first glance the concept of expectation seems similar to the “instrumentality” component of valence, in reality these are completely different concepts. Expectancy defines the connection between effort and first-level outcomes, while instrumentality links first- and second-level outcomes. In other words, expectation in Vroom's theory represents the probability (ranging from 0 to 1) with which some action or effort will lead to a certain first-level outcome. Instrumentality determines the extent to which the results of the first level will lead to the desired result of the second level. In short, the strength of motivation to perform a particular action will depend on the algebraic sum of outcome valences (including instrumentality) multiplied by expectancy.
Vroom's theory differs from substantive theories in that it describes the state of cognitive variables that reflect individual differences in motivation to work. It does not attempt to explain what the content of motivation is or what individual differences are. Each person is characterized by a unique combination of valences, instrumentality, and expectations. Therefore, Vroom's theory only points to the conceptual determinants of motivation and how they relate to each other. It does not make specific suggestions about what motivates organizational members, as Maslow's, Herzberg's, and Alderfer's models do.
Although Vroom's model does not directly contribute to employee motivation techniques, it is of some value in understanding organizational delivery. This theory helps clarify the relationship between personal goals and organizational goals. Suppose, for example, that a specific production rate is determined for workers. By measuring the performance of each of them, management can determine how significant different individual goals are (second-level outcomes - for example, money, security, recognition); how organizational goals (first-level outcomes such as production rates) can be used as a means to achieve personal goals; What are workers' expectations regarding the extent to which their efforts and abilities will contribute to achieving the organization's goals? If their returns are below normal, this may indicate that workers do not particularly value second-level outcomes or that they do not see how first-level outcomes will enable them to achieve second-level outcomes; or they think that their efforts will not lead to the achievement of first-level results. Vroom believes that any of these options, alone or in combination with the others, leads to low level motivation to do work. The model is designed to help managers understand and analyze worker motivation and identify relevant variables; it does not provide specific solutions to motivational problems. Except existing problems practical application, this model, like early economic theory, assumes that people are rational and their behavior can be logically calculated. This assumption is probably too idealistic.
The main reason why Vroom's model became significant modern model work motivation and gave rise to many research work, most likely lies in the fact that she does not resort to simplifications. Substantive theories oversimplify human motivation. However, they remain extremely popular because their ideas are easy to understand and apply to the situations faced by practicing managers. On the other hand, VIE theory recognizes the complexity of motivation labor activity, but at the same time it is difficult to understand and apply. Thus, from a theoretical point of view, VIE helps managers understand the complexity of the motivation process, but it does not help solve practical problems.
Porter-Lawler model
This theory is built on a combination of elements of expectancy theory and equity theory. Its essence is that the relationship between remuneration and achieved results has been introduced.
In substantive theories, it is unconditionally accepted that satisfaction leads to improved performance, and dissatisfaction reduces performance. Herzberg's model is actually a theory of job satisfaction, yet it does not address the relationship between satisfaction and performance. Vroom's theory also largely avoids analyzing this connection. Although the concept of satisfaction contributed to Vroom's concept of valence, and outcomes were associated with performance, the relationship between satisfaction and work performance was specifically addressed only in the motivation model of Porter and Lawler, who refined and expanded Vroom's model. (In their model, for example, relationships are represented diagrammatically rather than mathematically, more variables are used, and the cognitive process of perception plays a central role.)
L. Porter and E. Lawler introduced three variables that affect the amount of reward: effort expended, personal qualities a person and his abilities and awareness of his role in the labor process. Elements of expectancy theory here are manifested in the fact that the employee evaluates the reward in accordance with the effort expended and believes that this reward will be adequate for the effort expended. Elements of equity theory are manifested in the fact that people have their own judgment about the rightness or wrongness of rewards in comparison with other employees and, accordingly, the degree of satisfaction. Hence the important conclusion that it is the results of work that are the reason for employee satisfaction, and not vice versa. According to this theory, performance should steadily increase.
Porter and Lawler start from the premise that motivation (effort or energy) does not equal satisfaction or performance. Motivation, satisfaction, and performance are separate variables and interact differently than is generally believed; they generally correspond to the parameters of Vroom's equation. However, what is significant is Porter and Lawler's point that effort (energy or motivation) does not directly lead to increased performance. This connection is mediated by the employee’s abilities, character traits, and perception of his own role. In the Porter-Lawler model, what comes after the job is considered more important. The degree of satisfaction will be determined by the reward itself and its perception. In other words, the Porter-Lawler model assumes - and this is its most significant difference from the traditional understanding - that performance of work leads to satisfaction
This model has been largely supported by research for many years. For example, recent field research has shown that the level of effort and its focus are very important in explaining the work performance of individual organizational members. Extensive research supports the importance of rewards in the relationship between job performance and satisfaction. It was specifically concluded that the relationship between satisfaction and performance is stronger when reward is linked to performance than when it is not.
Although the Porter-Lawler model is more practical-oriented than the Vroom model, it is still very complex to bridge the existing gap between theory and management practice. To the credit of Porter and Lawler, it should be noted that they were fully aware of the need to implement their theory and research results into practice. They recommend that practicing managers go beyond traditional job attitude assessments and try to assess variables such as the value of potential rewards, perceptions of the relationship between effort and reward, and role perceptions. These variables will certainly help managers better understand what determines effort and productivity. With a focus on what follows performance, Porter and Lawler recommend that organizations critically re-evaluate their reward policies. They emphasize that management must concentrate its efforts to evaluate how well the level of satisfaction corresponds to the level of job performance. These recommendations have been supported by scientific research. However, recent research and in-depth analysis continue to point to the complex impact of cognitive processes on rewards and other organizational outcomes.
Porter and Lawler's model has undoubtedly contributed greatly to the understanding of work motivation and the relationship between job performance and satisfaction, but has not yet had a major impact on actual human resource management practice. However, expectancy models provide some guidelines that human resource managers can follow. For example, it has been suggested that the first stage (the relationship between motivation and job performance) needs to overcome the barriers listed below.
1. Doubts about abilities, skills or knowledge.
2. Physical or practical possibility doing the work.
3. The dependence of this work on other people or activities.
4. Uncertainty of the requirements for this work 17.
In addition, for the final stage (the relationship between job performance and satisfaction), the following recommendations are given.
1. Determine what type of reward each employee values most.
2. Determine the desired level of work performance.
3. Make this desired level achievable.
4. Link the rewards people value to job performance.
The last of the above points is reflected in the management compensation systems of many large companies, as described in the fragment “Total Quality Management in Action: Linking Manager's Remuneration to the Performance of His Unit.”
In recent years, theories of justice and attribution have emerged and attracted the attention of many researchers. Although some authors of textbooks highlight the following theories in separate category“modern theories of motivation”, in essence, these theories must be attributed to the procedural approach to the motivation of work activity.
The theory of justice in work motivation
Equity theory has been around almost as long as motivational expectancy theory. However, in the field of organizational behavior, the concept of justice has only recently received due attention. The roots of this theory can be found in cognitive dissonance theory and exchange theory. The development of equity theory as a theory of work motivation is usually credited to social psychologist J. Stacy Adams. In short, this theory shows that the degree of fairness (or unfairness) that workers perceive in a particular job situation plays a major role in job performance and satisfaction. In other words, this is another cognitive theory of motivation, and Adams describes how this kind of motivation occurs.
Injustice occurs when a person feels that the ratio of the output he receives to his contribution to the job is not equal to the corresponding ratio of other workers.
The assessment of labor contribution and the resulting return in relation to oneself and other people is based on a person’s subjective perceptions. Age, gender, education, social status, position in the organization, qualifications and how hard one works are some of the variables that a person perceives as contributions to job performance. The return received consists mainly of various types of incentives, such as cash payments, status, promotions, and the degree of intrinsic interest in the work itself. Essentially, this relationship is based on the employee's perception of what he gives (input) and receives (output) compared to what the other person respectively gives and receives. His conclusion may or may not correspond to what others think of the relationship or to what actually occurs.
If the idea of one’s own “contribution-output” relationship does not correspond to the idea of the same attitude of others, a person will make every effort to restore justice. This “thirst” to restore justice is used as an explanation for work motivation. The strength of this kind of motivation is directly dependent on the feeling of existing injustice. Adams believes that such motivation comes in several forms. To restore justice, a person can change his input or output, deliberately distort them, quit his job, try to influence or change other people.
Research conducted to date to test the validity of Adams' theory of justice has provided ample material in support of it. A review of the findings showed that laboratory studies support the existence of a “fairness norm” (people evaluate contributions and returns to themselves and others, and if they perceive injustice, they try to eliminate it), but this theory has received only limited support from carrying out relevant field research.
The development and analysis of equity theory goes beyond expectancy theory as a cognitive explanation of work motivation and serves as a starting point for attribution theory and explanations based on the concept of locus of control.
List of used literature.
1) V.P. Kokorev, “Motivation in Management”, Barnaul, 1997
2) Lutens F. “Organizational Behavior.” M., “Infra-M”, 1999. p. 179
3) Gibson J.L., Ivantsevich J., Donnelly D.H. “Organizations. Behavior. Structure. Processes.” M., “Infra-M”, 2000., p. 175
4) Lutens F. “Organizational Behavior.” M., “Infra-M”, 1999. p. 181
5) Gary Blau. “Operationalizing Direction and Level of Effort and Testing their Relationships to Individual Job Performance,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, June 1993, pp. 152-170
6) Kartashova L.V., Nikonova T.V., Solomanidina T.O. "Organizational behavior". M., “Infra-M”, 2001. p. 100
7) Lutens F. “Organizational Behavior.” M., “Infra-M”, 1999. p. 182
8) Mall. E.G. “Management: organizational behavior.” M., “Finance and Statistics”, 2000, p. 44
9) David G. Myers, Social Psychology. 2d ed., New York, 1990, p. 71
10) Participatory management (from the English Participate - to participate) is based on the involvement of employees in making management decisions.
11) Lutens F. “Organizational behavior.” M., “Infra-M”, 1999. p. 186
12) Gibson J. L., Ivantsevich J., Donnelly D. H. “Organizations. Behavior. Structure. Processes.” M., “Infra-M”, 2000., pp. 99-100
V.P. Kokorev, “Motivation in Management”, Barnaul, 1997 Lutens F. “Organizational Behavior.” M., “Infra-M”, 1999. p. 179
Gibson J.L., Ivantsevich J., Donnelly D.H. “Organizations. Behavior. Structure. Processes.” M., “Infra-M”, 2000., p. 175
Lutens F. “Organizational Behavior.” M., “Infra-M”, 1999. p. 181 Gary Blau. “Operationalizing Direction and Level of Effort and Testing their Relationships to Individual Job Performance,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Process, June 1993, pp. 152-170 Lutens F. “Organizational Behavior.” M., “Infra-M”, 1999. p. 182
Moll. E.G. “Management: organizational behavior.” M., “Finance and Statistics”, 2000, p. 44