7 work motivation and job satisfaction

The relationship between the organisation and its members isinfluenced by what motivates them to work and the rewards andfulfilment they derive from it. The nature of the work organisation,styles of leadership and the design and content of jobs can havea significant effect on the satisfaction of staff and their levels ofperformance. The manager needs to know how best to elicit theco-operation of staff and direct their efforts to achieving the goalsand objectives of the organisation.

Learning outcomes

After completing this chapter you should be able to:

■ explain the meaning and underlying concept of motivation;

■ detail main types of needs and expectations of people at work;

■ explain frustration-induced behaviour and possible reactions to frustrationat work;

■ examine main theories of motivation and evaluate their relevance toparticular work situations;

■ review the meaning, nature and dimensions of job satisfaction;

■ assess broader influences on motivation and job satisfaction;

■ evaluate the relationship between motivation, job satisfaction and workperformance.

WORK MOTIVATION AND JOBSATISFACTION

Critical reflection

7

‘Some writers argue that people do not lack motivation, only the righttriggers to motivate them. Some claim that motivation can only come fromwithin and attempts from other people to motivate you have little lastinginfluence.’

What are your views? In your own words, what motivates you most?

CHAPTER 7 WORK MOTIVATION AND JOB SATISFACTION

253

THE MEANING OF MOTIVATION

The study of motivation is concerned, basically, with why people behave in a certain way.The basic underlying question is ‘Why do people do what they do?’ In general terms, motiv-ation can be described as the direction and persistence of action. It is concerned with whypeople choose a particular course of action in preference to others, and why they continuewith a chosen action, often over a long period and in the face of difficulties and problems.1

From a review of motivation theory, Mitchell identifies four common characteristics whichunderlie the definition of motivation:2

■ Motivation is typified as an individual phenomenon. Every person is unique and all the major theories of motivation allow for this uniqueness to be demonstrated in one wayor another.

■ Motivation is described, usually, as intentional. Motivation is assumed to be under the worker’s control, and behaviours that are influenced by motivation, such as effortexpended, are seen as choices of action.

■ Motivation is multifaceted. The two factors of greatest importance are: (i) what gets peopleactivated (arousal); and (ii) the force of an individual to engage in desired behaviour(direction or choice of behaviour).

■ The purpose of motivational theories is to predict behaviour. Motivation is not thebehaviour itself and it is not performance. Motivation concerns action and the internaland external forces which influence a person’s choice of action.

On the basis of these characteristics, Mitchell defines motivation as ‘the degree to which an individual wants and chooses to engage in certain specified behaviours’.

A fuller definition is given by the Chartered Management Institute:

Motivation is the creation of stimuli, incentives and working environments that enable people to performto the best of their ability. The heart of motivation is to give people what they really want most fromwork. In return managers should expect more in the form of productivity, quality and service.3

Underlying concept of motivation

The underlying concept of motivation is some driving force within individuals by which theyattempt to achieve some goal in order to fulfil some need or expectation. This concept givesrise to the basic motivational model, which is illustrated in Figure 7.1. People’s behaviour is

Figure 7.1 A simplified illustration of the basic motivational model

PART 2 THE INDIVIDUAL

254

determined by what motivates them. Their performance is a product of both ability level and motivation.

Performance == function (ability ×× motivation)

Kreitner et al. suggest that although motivation is a necessary contributor for job perform-ance, it is not the only one. Along with ability, motivation is also a combination of level of skill, knowledge about how to complete the task, feelings and emotions, and facilitatingand inhibiting conditions not under the individual’s control.4 However, what is clearly evident is that if the manager is to improve the work of the organisation, attention must begiven to the level of motivation of its members. The manager must also encourage staff todirect their efforts (their driving force) towards the successful attainment of the goals andobjectives of the organisation.

NEEDS AND EXPECTATIONS AT WORK

But what is this driving force and what is it that people really want from work? What are people’s needs and expectations and how do they influence behaviour and performance atwork? Motivation is a complex subject, it is a very personal thing, and it is influenced bymany variables. Farren reminds us of the 12 human needs that have been around since the beginning of recorded history: family, health and well-being, work/career, economic,learning, home/shelter, social relationships, spirituality, community, leisure, mobility, andenvironment/safety. ‘Work and private life in the new millennium will continue to revolvearound the 12 human needs.’5

The various needs and expectations at work can be categorised in a number of ways – forexample the simple divisions into physiological and social motives or into extrinsic andintrinsic motivation.

■ Extrinsic motivation is related to ‘tangible’ rewards such as salary and fringe benefits,security, promotion, contract of service, the work environment and conditions of work.Such tangible rewards are often determined at the organisational level and may be largelyoutside the control of individual managers.

■ Intrinsic motivation is related to ‘psychological’ rewards such as the opportunity to useone’s ability, a sense of challenge and achievement, receiving appreciation, positive recognition and being treated in a caring and considerate manner. The psychologicalrewards are those that can usually be determined by the actions and behaviour of individual managers.6

Higher set of motivational needs

According to Kets de Vries, the best-performing companies possess a set of values that createsthe right conditions for high performance; he questions whether in such best companiesthere is something more going on that touches upon a deeper layer of human functioning,causing people to make an extra effort. The emphasis is on widening choice that enables people to choose more freely, instead of being led by forces of which they are unaware; and it is a motivational needs system on which such choice is based. Kets de Vries suggeststhat in addition to the motivation needs system for physiological needs, sensual and enjoyment needs, and the need to respond to threatening situations, companies that get the best out of their people are characterised by a system based on a higher set of motivational needs:

■ attachment/affiliation – concerning the need for engagement and sharing, a feeling ofcommunity and a sense of belonging to the company; and

■ exploration/assertion – concerning the ability to play and work, a sense of fun andenjoyment, the need for self-assertion and the ability to choose.7

Figure 7.2 Needs and expectations of people at work


255

A three-fold classification

Given the complex and variable nature of needs and expectations, the following is a simplistic but useful, broad three-fold classification as a starting point for reviewing themotivation to work (see Figure 7.2):

■ Economic rewards – such as pay, fringe benefits, pension rights, material goods and secu-rity. This is an instrumental orientation to work and concerned with ‘other things’.

■ Intrinsic satisfaction – derived from the nature of the work itself, interest in the job, andpersonal growth and development. This is a personal orientation to work and concernedwith ‘oneself ’.

■ Social relationships – such as friendships, group working and the desire for affiliation,status and dependency. This is a relational orientation to work and concerned with ‘otherpeople’.

A person’s motivation, job satisfaction and work performance will be determined by thecomparative strength of these sets of needs and expectations and the extent to which they arefulfilled. For example, some people may make a deliberate choice to forgo intrinsic satisfac-tion and social relationships (particularly in the short term or in the earlier years of theirworking life) in return for high economic rewards. Other people are happy to accept com-paratively lower economic rewards in favour of a job that has high intrinsic satisfactionand/or social relationships. Social relationships would appear to be an important feature formany people, especially, for example, for those working in the hospitality industry whereinteractions with other people and the importance of supportive working relationships andgood teamwork can be strong motivators at work.8

MONEY AS A MOTIVATOR

Earlier writers, such as F. W. Taylor, believed in economic needs motivation. Workers wouldbe motivated by obtaining the highest possible wages through working in the most efficientand productive way. Performance was limited by physiological fatigue. For Taylor, motivation


256

was a comparatively simple issue – what the workers wanted from their employers morethan anything else was high wages. This approach is the rational–economic concept ofmotivation. The ideas of F. W. Taylor and his ‘rational–economic needs’ concept of motivation (discussed in Chapter 2) and subsequent approaches to motivation at work havefuelled the continuing debate about financial rewards as a motivator and their influence onproductivity.

Where there is little pleasure in the work itself or the job offers little opportunity for career advancement, personal challenge or growth, many people may appear to be motivatedprimarily, if not exclusively, by money. Weaver suggests that for many hourly workers in the hospitality industry, such as dishwashing, waiting or housekeeping staff, the work does not change much among different companies and there is little attachment to a particular company. For such staff, Weaver proposes a ‘Theory M’ programme of motiv-ation based on direct cash rewards for above-average performance. A percentage base is calculated from the average performance of workers on the staff.9 Yet we frequently see pronouncements from prominent business figures that motivation is about much more than money.

Work is about letting people know they are important, their hard work and efforts matter, and they’re doing a good job. And this kind of recognition, in fact, can sometimes be moreimportant than money.

Gary Kusin, CEO, FedEx Kinko’s10

The short answer appears to be that for the vast majority of people, money is clearlyimportant and a motivator at work but to what extent and how important depends upontheir personal circumstances and the other satisfactions they derive from work. The bottomline is surely the extent to which money motivates people to work well and to the best oftheir abilities. Although pay may still make people tick, there are now a number of otherimportant influences on motivation. For many people, the feeling of being recognised andvalued appears more important than money in motivating them to stay in a particular job.(See the discussion of Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation later in this chapter.)

BROADER INTRINSIC MOTIVATION

Popular press reports appear to indicate that many people are increasingly motivated by broader concerns such as their work/life balance (discussed in Chapter 3), opportunitiesfor flexible working, career advancement and personal development and growth, and a feeling of identification with the values of the organisation. The motivation to work is also influenced by the changing nature of the work environment and the concept of the ‘psychological contract’, which was discussed in Chapter 1.

If your staff do something good, tell them. And then tell them again. And again. Keep it up. Putit in writing. Send them a memo – something they can keep. Put it in the company newsletter.Add a note to their file. Whatever, but make it widely known they did good. This is a quick andcheap method of praising and motivating your team and it lets everyone know you are monitoring,praising, motivating.11

As Grayson and Hodges point out, historically loyalty was bought and employers offeredgradual progression up the hierarchy, a decent salary and job security in return for a hardday’s work. ‘Increasingly, motivation is based on values rather than purely on financialreward.’12

However, according to Gratton finding intrinsically motivating tasks is not easy.

Critical reflection

‘It’s all very well talking about a contented workforce, praise and recognition but at timesof high unemployment, rapid change or uncertainty a secure job, increased training andsteady income are the true motivators. In the real world money is the most potent needand strongest motivator.’

Can you argue convincingly against this contention?

Figure 7.3 A basic model of frustration


257

Finding tasks and experiences that are intrinsically motivating sounds relatively straightforward but infact it requires a heightened awareness of who we are. Without this emotional self-awareness we haveno capacity to judge whether the tasks available to us could be intrinsically motivating . . . Findingintrinsically motivating tasks also requires the companies of which we are members to communicate thetasks available and to encourage volunteering.13

Waller refers to the importance today of identity and that work inevitably plays a key roleon shaping identity. Waller questions how much of ourselves do we put into our job. Hepoints out that not long ago, a job was something you did to put bread on the table butnowadays (global financial situation apart) people in a cushy job with a decent salary, paidholiday, pension, health care and a well-stocked sandwich trolley will jack it all in, saying‘It’s not really me’. If people are getting absorbed by their work-life, they expect their job tohelp them to discover and develop themselves.14

FRUSTRATION-INDUCED BEHAVIOUR

What happens if a person’s motivational driving force is blocked and they are unable to satisfy their needs and expectations, and what is the likely effect on their work performance?There are two possible sets of outcomes: constructive behaviour or frustration (see Figure 7.3).

Constructive behaviour

Constructive behaviour is a positive reaction to the blockage of a desired goal and can taketwo main forms: problem-solving or restructuring.


258

■ Problem-solving is the removal of the barrier – for example finding an alternative meansof undertaking a task, repairing a damaged machine or bypassing an unco-operative superior.

■ Restructuring, or compromise, is the substitution of an alternative goal, although such a goal may be of a lower or different order – for example taking an additional part-timejob because of failure to be promoted to a higher grade, or reassessing the work/life balance.

Note: Even if a person engages in constructive behaviour in response to a barrier or blockage, it could be said that the person was ‘frustrated’, if only mildly or in the short term,in an attempt to satisfy a desired goal. However, the term ‘frustration’ is usually interpretedas applying to negative responses to a barrier or blockage which prevents satisfaction of a desired goal.

Frustration (negative responses)

Frustration is a negative response to the blockage of a desired goal and results in a defensiveform of behaviour. There are many possible reactions to frustration caused by the failure toachieve a desired goal. These can be summarised under four broad headings: aggression,regression, fixation and withdrawal.15 However, these categories are not mutually exclusive.Most forms of frustration-induced behaviour at work are a combination of aggression,regression and fixation.

Aggression is a physical or verbal attack on some person or object, for example strikinga supervisor, rage or abusive language, destruction of equipment or documents, or maliciousgossip about a superior. This form of behaviour may be directed against the person or objectthat is perceived as the source of frustration, that is the actual barrier or blocking agent.However, where such a direct attack cannot be made, because, for example, the source offrustration is not clear or not specific, or where the source is feared, as with a powerful superior, aggression may be displaced towards some other person or object.

With displaced aggression the person may find an easier, safer person or object as ascapegoat for the outlet of frustration – for example picking arguments with colleagues,being short-tempered with subordinates, shouting at the cleaners or kicking the waste-paperbin. A more constructive form of displaced aggression is working off frustrated feelingsthrough demanding physical work or sport, or perhaps by shouting/cursing when alone orin the company of an understanding colleague.

Regression is reverting to a childish or more primitive form of behaviour – for examplesulking, crying, tantrums or kicking a broken machine or piece of equipment.

Fixation is persisting in a form of behaviour which has no adaptive value and continuingto repeat actions which have no positive results – for example the inability to accept changeor new ideas, repeatedly trying a door that is clearly locked or a machine which clearly willnot work, or insisting on applying for promotion even though not qualified for the job.

Withdrawal is apathy, giving up or resignation – for example arriving at work late andleaving early, sickness and absenteeism, refusal to accept responsibility, avoiding decision-making, passing work over to colleagues or leaving the job altogether.

Factors influencing frustration

Among the factors which determine an individual’s reaction to frustration are the:

■ level and potency of need (see, for example, Maslow’s theory of motivation, discussedbelow);

■ degree of attachment to the desired goal;■ strength of motivation;■ perceived nature of the barrier or blocking agent; and■ personality characteristics of the individual.


259

It is important that managers attempt to reduce potential frustration, for example through:

■ effective recruitment, selection and socialisation;■ training and development;■ job design and work organisation;■ equitable HRM policies;■ recognition and rewards;■ effective communications;■ participative styles of management;■ attempting to understand the individual’s perception of the situation.

Proper attention to motivation and to the needs and expectations of people at work will helpovercome boredom and frustration-induced behaviour.

THEORIES OF MOTIVATION

There are many competing theories that attempt to explain the nature of motivation. Thesetheories may all be at least partially true and help to explain the behaviour of certain peopleat certain times. The issue of motivation is often most acute for younger people starting ontheir career, for people at mid-career positions or for those who find limited opportunities forpromotion or further advancement. For employers there may be difficulties in motivatingstaff both in the longer term and in the short run. It is because of the complexity of motivationand the fact that there is no ready-made solution or single answer to what motivates peopleto work well that the different theories are important to the manager. They show there aremany motives that influence people’s behaviour and performance. Collectively, the differenttheories provide a framework within which to direct attention to the problem of how bestto motivate staff to work willingly and effectively.

Criticisms and reservations

It is important to emphasise, however, that these various theories are not conclusive. Theyall have their critics (this is particularly true of the content theories of motivation) or havebeen subject to alternative findings that purport to contradict original ideas. Many of thesetheories were not intended initially to have the significance that some writers have sub-sequently placed upon them. It is always easy to quote an example that appears to contradictany generalised observation on what motivates people to work. Despite these reservationsthe different theories provide a basis for study and discussion, and for review of the mosteffective motivational style (see Figure 7.4).

You don’t motivate individuals. You provide them with an environment to be self-motivated. It isa personal decision, but it’s management’s job to provide the right environment.

Kathy Schofield, Director of Human Resources, HFC Bank16

The manager, therefore, must judge the relevance of these different theories, how best todraw upon them, and how they might effectively be applied in particular work situations.The manager should be aware of at least the main theories of motivation.

Content theories and process theories

The usual approach to the study of motivation is through an understanding of internal cognitive processes – that is, what people feel and how they think. This understandingshould help the manager to predict likely behaviour of staff in given situations. These dif-ferent cognitive theories of motivation are usually divided into two contrasting approaches:content theories and process theories.

Figure 7.4 An overview of main theories of work motivation


260

■ Content theories attempt to explain those specific things that actually motivate the individual at work. These theories are concerned with identifying people’s needs and theirrelative strengths, and the goals they pursue in order to satisfy these needs. Content theoriesplace emphasis on the nature of needs and what motivates.

■ Process theories attempt to identify the relationship among the dynamic variables thatmake up motivation. These theories are concerned more with how behaviour is initiated,directed and sustained. Process theories place emphasis on the actual process of motiv-ation. These theories are discussed later in this chapter.

CONTENT THEORIES OF MOTIVATION

Major content theories of motivation include:

■ Maslow’s hierarchy of needs model;■ Alderfer’s modified need hierarchy model;■ Herzberg’s two-factor theory;■ McClelland’s achievement motivation theory.

MASLOW’S HIERARCHY OF NEEDS THEORY

A useful starting point is the work of Maslow and his theory of individual development and motivation, published originally in 1943.17 Maslow’s basic proposition is that people are

Figure 7.5 Maslow’s hierarchy of needs model


261

wanting beings, they always want more, and what they want depends on what they alreadyhave. He suggests that human needs are arranged in a series of levels, a hierarchy of importance.

Maslow identified eight innate needs, including the need to know and understand, aesthetic needs and the need for transcendence. However, the hierarchy is usually shown asranging through five main levels, from, at the lowest level, physiological needs, throughsafety needs, love needs and esteem needs, to the need for self-actualisation at the highestlevel. The hierarchy of needs may be shown as a series of steps but is usually displayed inthe form of a pyramid (see Figure 7.5). This is an appropriate form of illustration as it implies a thinning out of needs as people progress up the hierarchy.

■ Physiological needs. These include homeostasis (the body’s automatic efforts to retainnormal functioning) such as satisfaction of hunger and thirst, the need for oxygen and tomaintain temperature regulation. Also sleep, sensory pleasures, activity, maternal behaviourand, arguably, sexual desire.

■ Safety needs. These include safety and security, freedom from pain or threat of physicalattack, protection from danger or deprivation, the need for predictability and orderliness.

■ Love needs (often referred to as social needs). These include affection, sense of belong-ing, social activities, friendships, and both the giving and receiving of love.

■ Esteem needs (sometimes referred to as ego needs). These include both self-respect andthe esteem of others. Self-respect involves the desire for confidence, strength, independenceand freedom, and achievement. Esteem of others involves reputation or prestige, status,recognition, attention and appreciation.

■ Self-actualisation needs. This is the development and realisation of one’s full potential.Maslow sees this as ‘What humans can be, they must be’ or ‘becoming everything that oneis capable of becoming’. Self-actualisation needs are not necessarily a creative urge andmay take many forms which vary widely from one individual to another.

Once a lower need has been satisfied, it no longer acts as a strong motivator. The needsof the next higher level in the hierarchy demand satisfaction and become the motivatinginfluence. Only unsatisfied needs motivate a person. Thus Maslow asserts that ‘a satisfied needis no longer a motivator’.

Not necessarily a fixed order

Although Maslow suggests that most people have these basic needs in about the order indi-cated, he also makes it clear that the hierarchy is not necessarily a fixed order. There will be


262

a number of exceptions to the order indicated. For some people there will be a reversal ofthe hierarchy, for example:

■ Self-esteem may seem to be more important than love to some people. This is the mostcommon reversal of the hierarchy. It is often based on the belief that the person mostloved is strong, confident or inspires respect. People seeking love try to put on a show ofaggressive, confident behaviour. They are not really seeking self-esteem as an end in itselfbut for the sake of love needs.

■ For some innately creative people the drive for creativity and self-actualisation may arisedespite lack of satisfaction of more basic needs.

■ Higher-level needs may be lost in some people who will continue to be satisfied at lowerlevels only: for example, a person who has experienced chronic unemployment.

■ Some people who have been deprived of love in early childhood may experience the permanent loss of love needs.

■ A need which has continued to be satisfied over a long period of time may be undervalued.For example, people who have never suffered from chronic hunger may tend to under-estimate its effects, and regard food as rather an unimportant thing. Where people aredominated by a higher-level need this may assume greater importance than more basicneeds.

■ People with high ideals or values may become martyrs and give up everything else for thesake of their beliefs.

Maslow claims that the hierarchy is relatively universal among different cultures, but herecognises that there are differences in an individual’s motivational content in a particularculture.

Degrees of satisfaction

Maslow points out that a false impression may be given that a need must be satisfied fullybefore a subsequent need arises. He suggests that a more realistic description is in termsof decreasing percentages of satisfaction along levels of the hierarchy. For example, arbitrary figures for the average person may be: satisfied 85 per cent in physiological needs;70 per cent in safety needs; 50 per cent in love needs; 40 per cent in esteem needs; and 10 per cent in self-actualisation needs. There is a gradual emergence of a higher-level needas lower-level needs become more satisfied. The relative importance of these needs changesduring the psychological development of the individual. Maslow subsequently modified hisviews by noting that satisfaction of self-actualisation needs by growth-motivated individualscan actually enhance these needs rather than reduce them. Furthermore, he accepted thatsome higher-level needs may still emerge after long deprivation of lower-level needs ratherthan only after their satisfaction.

Evaluation of Maslow’s theory

Based on Maslow’s theory, once lower-level needs have been satisfied (say at the physiolog-ical and safety levels), giving more of the same does not provide motivation. Individualsadvance up the hierarchy as each lower-level need becomes satisfied. Therefore, to providemotivation for a change in behaviour, the manager must direct attention to the next higherlevel of needs (in this case, love or social needs) that seek satisfaction.

Applications to the work situation

There are a number of problems in relating Maslow’s theory to the work situation. Theseinclude the following:

■ People do not necessarily satisfy their needs, especially higher-level needs, just throughthe work situation; they satisfy them through other areas of their life as well. Therefore themanager would need to have a complete understanding of people’s private and sociallives, not just their behaviour at work.

Table 7.1 Applying Maslow’s need hierarchy

Needs levels General rewards Organisational factors

1 Physiological Food, water, sex, sleep a Payb Pleasant working conditionsc Cafeteria

2 Safety Safety, security, stability, protection a Safe working conditionsb Company benefitsc Job security

3 Social Love, affection, belongingness a Cohesive work groupb Friendly supervisionc Professional associations

4 Esteem Self-esteem, self-respect, prestige, status a Social recognitionb Job titlec High-status jobd Feedback from the job itself

5 Self-actualisation Growth, advancement, creativity a Challenging jobb Opportunities for creativityc Achievement in workd Advancement in the organisation

Source: Steers, R. M. and Porter, L. W. Motivation and Work Behaviour, fifth edition, McGraw-Hill (1991), p. 35. Reproduced with permission from the McGraw-HillCompanies.


263

■ There is doubt about the time that elapses between the satisfaction of a lower-level needand the emergence of a higher-level need.

■ Individual differences mean that people place different values on the same need. Forexample, some people prefer what they might see as the comparative safety of working ina bureaucratic organisation to a more highly paid and higher status position, but with lessjob security, in a different organisation.

■ Some rewards or outcomes at work satisfy more than one need. Higher salary or promo-tion, for example, can be applied to all levels of the hierarchy.

■ Even for people within the same level of the hierarchy, the motivating factors will not bethe same. There are many different ways in which people may seek satisfaction of, forexample, their esteem needs.

■ Maslow viewed satisfaction as the main motivational outcome of behaviour. But job satisfaction does not necessarily lead to improved work performance.

A useful basis for evaluation

Although Maslow did not originally intend that the need hierarchy should necessarily beapplied to the work situation, it remains popular as a theory of motivation at work. Despitecriticisms and doubts about its limitations, the theory has had a significant impact on management approaches to motivation and the design of organisations to meet individualneeds. It is a convenient framework for viewing the different needs and expectations thatpeople have, where they are in the hierarchy, and the different motivators that might be applied to people at different levels. The work of Maslow has drawn attention to a number of motivators and stimulated study and research. The need hierarchy model provides a useful base for the evaluation of motivation at work. For example, Steers andPorter suggest a list of general rewards and organisational factors used to satisfy differentneeds (see Table 7.1).18

Saunders contends that despite the time that has elapsed, Maslow’s theory remains watertight.

When prehistoric man first took shelter in a cave and lit a fire, he was satisfying his lowest – physio-logical and safety needs. When a Buddhist achieves a state of nirvana, she is satisfying the fifth andhighest – self-actualisation . . . The cave these days might be a three-bedroom semi with garden and


264

off-street parking, but the fact remains that once we’ve got enough to feed, clothe and house our fami-lies money is a low-level motivator for most people. The dash for cash is soon replaced by the desire forrecognition, status and ultimately (although Maslow reckoned that a lot of us never get this far) theneed to express yourself through your work.19

Critical reflection

‘John Adair points out that presenting Maslow’s hierarchy as a pyramid model gives the impression that the greatest needs are in the lower levels. Adair suggests that thepyramid should be inverted as physiological needs, for example, are limited but there are fewer limitations the further up you go.’20

How would you best explain and present Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs?

ALDERFER’S MODIFIED NEED HIERARCHY MODEL

A modified need hierarchy model has been presented by Alderfer.21 This model condensesMaslow’s five levels of need into only three levels based on the core needs of existence, relatedness and growth (ERG theory) (see Table 7.2 on p. 267).

■ Existence needs are concerned with sustaining human existence and survival and coverphysiological and safety needs of a material nature.

■ Relatedness needs are concerned with relationships to the social environment and coverlove or belonging, affiliation and meaningful interpersonal relationships of a safety oresteem nature.

■ Growth needs are concerned with the development of potential and cover self-esteemand self-actualisation.

A continuum of needs

Like Maslow, Alderfer suggests that individuals progress through the hierarchy from existenceneeds to relatedness needs to growth needs as the lower-level needs become satisfied. However,Alderfer suggests these needs are more a continuum than hierarchical levels. More than oneneed may be activated at the same time. Individuals may also progress down the hierarchy.There is a frustration–regression process. For example, if an individual is continually frustratedin attempting to satisfy growth needs, relatedness needs may reassume most importance.The lower-level needs become the main focus of the individual’s efforts.

Alderfer proposed a number of basic propositions relating to the three need relationships.Some of these propositions followed Maslow’s theory, some were the reverse of the theory.A number of studies were undertaken to test these propositions across different samples of people in different types of organisations. Results from the studies were mixed. For example, the proposition that the less existence needs are satisfied the more they will bedesired received constant support from all six samples. However, the proposition that satisfaction of existence needs activates desire for relatedness needs was not supported in anyof the six samples.

Satisfaction of needs

Unlike Maslow’s theory, the results of Alderfer’s work suggest that lower-level needs do nothave to be satisfied before a higher-level need emerges as a motivating influence. The results,however, do support the idea that lower-level needs decrease in strength as they becomesatisfied. ERG theory states that an individual is motivated to satisfy one or more basic sets


265

of needs. Therefore if a person’s needs at a particular level are blocked, attention should befocused on the satisfaction of needs at the other levels. For example, if a subordinate’sgrowth needs are blocked because the job does not allow sufficient opportunity for personaldevelopment, the manager should attempt to provide greater opportunities for the subordin-ate to satisfy existence and relatedness needs.

HERZBERG’S TWO-FACTOR THEORY

Herzberg’s original study consisted of interviews with 203 accountants and engineers, chosenbecause of their growing importance in the business world, from different industries in thePittsburgh area of America.22 He used the critical incident method. Subjects were asked torelate times when they felt exceptionally good or exceptionally bad about their present jobor any previous job. They were asked to give reasons and a description of the sequence ofevents giving rise to that feeling. Responses to the interviews were generally consistent andrevealed that there were two different sets of factors affecting motivation and work. This ledto the two-factor theory of motivation and job satisfaction.

Hygiene and motivating factors

One set of factors are those which, if absent, cause dissatisfaction. These factors are relatedto job context, they are concerned with job environment and extrinsic to the job itself. Thesefactors are the ‘hygiene’ or ‘maintenance’ factors (‘hygiene’ being used as analogous to themedical term meaning preventive and environmental). They serve to prevent dissatisfaction.The other set of factors are those that, if present, serve to motivate the individual to superioreffort and performance. These factors are related to job content of the work itself. They arethe ‘motivators’ or growth factors. The strength of these factors will affect feelings of satisfaction or no satisfaction, but not dissatisfaction. The opposite of dissatisfaction is notsatisfaction but, simply, no dissatisfaction (see Figure 7.6).

The hygiene factors can be related roughly to Maslow’s lower-level needs and the motivatorsto Maslow’s higher-level needs (see Table 7.2). To motivate workers to give of their best, themanager must give proper attention to the motivators or growth factors. Herzberg emphasisesthat hygiene factors are not a ‘second-class citizen system’. They are as important as the motivators, but for different reasons. Hygiene factors are necessary to avoid unpleasantnessat work and to deny unfair treatment. ‘Management should never deny people proper treatment at work.’ The motivators relate to what people are allowed to do and the qualityof human experience at work. They are the variables which actually motivate people. Thework of Herzberg indicates that it is more likely good performance leads to job satisfactionrather than the reverse.

Evaluation of Herzberg’s work

Herzberg’s theory is, however, a source of frequent debate. There have been many other studies to test the theory. The conclusions have been mixed. Some studies provide supportfor the theory. However, it has also been attacked by a number of writers. There are two common general criticisms of Herzberg’s theory. One is that the theory has only limitedapplication to ‘manual’ workers. The other is that the theory is ‘methodologically bound’.

It is often claimed that the theory applies least to people with largely unskilled jobs orwhose work is uninteresting, repetitive and monotonous, and limited in scope. Yet these arethe people who often present management with the biggest problem of motivation. Someworkers do not seem greatly interested in the job content of their work or with the motiv-ators or growth factors.

A second, general criticism concerns methodology. It is claimed that the critical incidentmethod, and the description of events giving rise to good or bad feelings, influences the

Figure 7.6 Representation of Herzberg’s two-factor theory


266

results. People are more likely to attribute satisfying incidents at work, that is the motivators,as a favourable reflection on their own performance. The dissatisfying incidents, that is, thehygiene factors, are more likely to be attributed to external influences and the efforts of otherpeople. Descriptions from the respondents had to be interpreted by the interviewers. Thisgives rise to the difficulty of distinguishing clearly between the different dimensions and tothe risk of possible interviewer bias.

Despite such criticisms, there is still evidence of support for the continuing relevance ofthe theory. According to Crainer and Dearlove:

Herzberg’s work has had a considerable effect on the rewards and remuneration packages offered bycorporations. Increasingly, there is a trend towards ‘cafeteria’ benefits in which people can choose from a range of options. In effect, they can select the elements they recognise as providing their ownmotivation to work. Similarly, the current emphasis on self-development, career management and self-managed learning can be seen as having evolved from Herzberg’s insights.23

Whatever the validity of the two-factor theory, much of the criticism is with the benefit ofhindsight, and Herzberg did at least attempt an empirical approach to the study of motivation


267

at work and job satisfaction. Furthermore, his work has drawn attention to the importanceof job design in the ‘quality of work life’.

McCLELLAND’S ACHIEVEMENT MOTIVATION THEORY

McClelland’s work originated from investigations into the relationship between hunger needsand the extent to which imagery of food dominated thought processes. From subsequentresearch McClelland identified four main arousal-based, and socially developed, motives:

■ the Achievement motive;■ the Power motive;■ the Affiliative motive;■ the Avoidance motive.24

The first three motives correspond, roughly, to Maslow’s self-actualisation, esteem andlove needs. The relative intensity of these motives varies between individuals. It also tendsto vary between different occupations. Managers appear to be higher in achievement motivation than in affiliation motivation. McClelland saw the achievement need (n-Ach) asthe most critical for the country’s economic growth and success. The need to achieve islinked to entrepreneurial spirit and the development of available resources.

Use of projective tests

Research studies by McClelland use a series of projective ‘tests’ – Thematic ApperceptionTests (TATs) – to gauge an individual’s motivation. For example, individuals are shown a number of pictures in which some activity is depicted. Respondents are asked to lookbriefly (10–15 seconds) at the pictures and then to describe what they think is happening,what the people in the picture are thinking and what events have led to the situationdepicted.25 An example of a picture used in a projective test is given in Assignment 2 at the end of this chapter. The descriptions are used as a basis for analysing the strength of theindividual’s motives.

People with high achievement needs

Despite the apparent subjective nature of the judgements, research studies tend to supportthe validity of TAT as an indicator of the need for achievement.26 McClelland has, over yearsof empirical research, identified four characteristics of people with a strong achievementneed (n-Ach): a preference for moderate task difficulty, a preference for personal respon-sibility for performance, the need for feedback, and innovativeness.

Table 7.2 Linking Maslow’s, Alderfer’s and Herzberg’s theories of motivation

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs Alderfer’s ERG theory Herzberg’s two-factor theory

PHYSIOLOGICALEXISTENCE

SAFETY HYGIENE FACTORS

LOVE RELATEDNESS

ESTEEMMOTIVATORS

GROWTHSELF-ACTUALISATION


268

■ They prefer moderate task difficulty and goals as an achievement incentive. This providesthe best opportunity of proving they can do better. If the task is too difficult or too risky,it would reduce the chances of success and of gaining need satisfaction. If the course ofaction is too easy or too safe, there is little challenge in accomplishing the task and littlesatisfaction from success.

■ They prefer personal responsibility for performance. They like to attain success throughthe focus of their own abilities and efforts rather than by teamwork or chance factors outside their control. Personal satisfaction is derived from the accomplishment of the taskand recognition need not come from other people.

■ They have the need for clear and unambiguous feedback on how well they are performing.A knowledge of results within a reasonable time is necessary for self-evaluation. Feedbackenables them to determine success or failure in the accomplishment of their goals and toderive satisfaction from their activities.

■ They are more innovative. As they always seek moderately challenging tasks they tend alwaysto be moving on to something a little more challenging. In seeking short cuts they are morelikely to cheat. There is a constant search for variety and for information to find new waysof doing things. They are more restless and avoid routine and also tend to travel more.

Characteristics of achievement motivationThe extent of achievement motivation varies between individuals. Some people rate veryhighly in achievement motivation. They are challenged by opportunities and work hard toachieve a goal. Money is not an incentive but may serve as a means of giving feedback onperformance. High achievers seem unlikely to remain long with an organisation that does notpay them well for good performance. Money may seem to be important to high achievers,but they value it more as symbolising successful task performance and goal achievement.

McClelland’s research has attempted to understand the characteristics of high achievers. Hesuggests that n-Ach is not hereditary but results from environmental influences and he hasinvestigated the possibility of training people to develop a greater motivation to achieve.27

McClelland suggests four steps in attempting to develop achievement drive:

■ Striving to attain feedback on performance. Reinforcement of success serves to strengthenthe desire to attain higher performance.

■ Developing models of achievement by seeking to emulate people who have performed well.■ Attempting to modify their self-image and to see themselves as needing challenges and

success.■ Controlling day-dreaming and thinking about themselves in more positive terms.

McClelland was concerned with economic growth in underdeveloped countries. He hasdesigned training programmes intended to increase the achievement motivation andentrepreneurial activity of managers.

McClelland and Burnham has also suggested that as effective managers need to be suc-cessful leaders and to influence other people, they should possess a high need for power.28

However, the effective manager also scores high on inhibition. Power is directed more towardsthe organisation and concern for group goals and is exercised on behalf of other people. Thisis ‘socialised’ power. It is distinguished from ‘personalised’ power that is characterised by satisfaction from exercising dominance over other people, and personal aggrandisement.

PROCESS THEORIES OF MOTIVATION

Process theories, or extrinsic theories, attempt to identify the relationships among thedynamic variables that make up motivation and the actions required to influence behaviourand actions. They provide a further contribution to our understanding of the complex natureof work motivation. Many of the process theories cannot be linked to a single writer, butmajor approaches and leading writers under this heading include:

Figure 7.7 Expectancy theory: the motivational link


269

■ expectancy-based models – Vroom, and Porter and Lawler;■ equity theory – Adams;■ goal theory – Locke;■ attribution theory – Heider and Kelley (discussed in Chapter 6).

Expectancy theories of motivation

The underlying basis of expectancy theory is that people are influenced by the expectedresults of their actions. Motivation is a function of the relationship between:

1 effort expended and perceived level of performance; and2 the expectation that rewards (desired outcomes) will be related to performance.

There must also be:

3 the expectation that rewards (desired outcomes) are available.

These relationships determine the strength of the ‘motivational link’ (see Figure 7.7).Performance therefore depends upon the perceived expectation regarding effort expended

and achieving the desired outcome. For example, the desire for promotion will result in highperformance only if the person believes there is a strong expectation that this will lead topromotion. If, however, the person believes promotion to be based solely on age and lengthof service, there is no motivation to achieve high performance. A person’s behaviour reflectsa conscious choice between the comparative evaluation of alternative behaviours. Thechoice of behaviour is based on the expectancy of the most favourable consequences.

Expectancy theory is a generic theory of motivation and cannot be linked to a single individual writer. There are a number of versions and some of the models are rather complex.More recent approaches to expectancy theory have been associated with the work of Vroomand of Porter and Lawler.

VROOM’S EXPECTANCY THEORY

Vroom was the first person to propose an expectancy theory aimed specifically at work motivation.29 His model is based on three key variables: valence, instrumentality andexpectancy (VIE theory or expectancy/valence theory). The theory is founded on the ideathat people prefer certain outcomes from their behaviour over others. They anticipate feelings of satisfaction should the preferred outcome be achieved.

Figure 7.8 Basic model of expectancy theory


270

Valence

The feeling about specific outcomes is termed valence. This is the attractiveness of, or preference for, a particular outcome to the individual. Vroom distinguishes valence fromvalue. A person may desire an object but then gain little satisfaction from obtaining it.Alternatively, a person may strive to avoid an object but find, subsequently, that it providessatisfaction. Valence is the anticipated satisfaction from an outcome. This may differ substantially from value, which is the actual satisfaction provided by an outcome.

The valences of certain outcomes may be derived in their own right, but more usually they are derived from the other outcomes to which they are expected to lead. An obviousexample is money. Some people may see money as having an intrinsic worth and derive satisfaction from the actual accumulation of wealth. Most people, however, see money interms of the many satisfying outcomes to which it can lead.

Instrumentality

The valence of outcomes derives, therefore, from their instrumentality. This leads to a dis-tinction between first-level outcomes and second-level outcomes.

■ The first-level outcomes are performance-related. They refer to the quantity of output orto the comparative level of performance. Some people may seek to perform well ‘for itsown sake’ and without thought to expected consequences of their actions. Usually, however, performance outcomes acquire valence because of the expectation that they willlead to other outcomes as an anticipated source of satisfaction – second-level outcomes.

■ The second-level outcomes are need-related. They are derived through achievement offirst-level outcomes – that is, through achieving high performance. Many need-relatedoutcomes are dependent upon actual performance rather than effort expended. Peoplegenerally receive rewards for what they have achieved rather than for effort alone orthrough trying hard.

On the basis of Vroom’s expectancy theory it is possible to depict a general model ofbehaviour (see Figure 7.8).


271

Expectancy

When a person chooses between alternative behaviours which have uncertain outcomes, thechoice is affected not only by the preference for a particular outcome but also by the prob-ability that such an outcome will be achieved. People develop a perception of the degree ofprobability that the choice of a particular action will actually lead to the desired outcome.This is expectancy. It is the relationship between a chosen course of action and its predictedoutcome. Expectancy relates effort expended to the achievement of first-level outcomes. Itsvalue ranges between 0, indicating zero probability that an action will be followed by theoutcome, and 1, indicating certainty that an action will result in the outcome.

Motivational force

The combination of valence and expectancy determines the person’s motivation for a givenform of behaviour. This is the motivational force. The force of an action is unaffected byoutcomes which have no valence or by outcomes that are regarded as unlikely to result froma course of action. Expressed as an equation, motivation (M) is the sum of the products ofthe valences of all outcomes (V ), times the strength of expectancies that action will result inachieving these outcomes (E). Therefore, if either, or both, valence or expectancy is zero,then motivation is zero. The choice between alternative behaviours is indicated by the highest attractiveness score.

M = ∑n

E·V

There are likely to be a number of outcomes expected for a given action. Therefore, the measure of E·V is summed across the total number of possible outcomes to arrive at a single figure indicating the attractiveness for the contemplated choice of behaviour.

THE PORTER AND LAWLER EXPECTANCY MODEL

Vroom’s expectancy/valence theory has been developed by Porter and Lawler.30 Their modelgoes beyond motivational force and considers performance as a whole. They point out thateffort expended (motivational force) does not lead directly to performance. It is mediated byindividual abilities and traits, and by the person’s role perceptions. They also introducerewards as an intervening variable. Porter and Lawler see motivation, satisfaction and performance as separate variables and attempt to explain the complex relationships amongthem. Their model recognises that job satisfaction is more dependent upon performance,than performance is upon satisfaction.

Explanation of relationships

These relationships are expressed diagrammatically (see Figure 7.9) rather than mathem-atically. In contrast to the human relations approach which tended to assume that job satisfaction leads to improved performance, Porter and Lawler suggest that satisfaction is an effect rather than a cause of performance. It is performance that leads to job satisfaction.

■ Value of reward (Box 1) is similar to valence in Vroom’s model. People desire variousoutcomes (rewards) which they hope to achieve from work. The value placed on a rewarddepends on the strength of its desirability.

■ Perceived effort–reward probability (Box 2) is similar to expectancy. It refers to a person’s expectation that certain outcomes (rewards) are dependent upon a given amountof effort.

■ Effort (Box 3) is how hard the person tries, the amount of energy a person exerts on agiven activity. It does not relate to how successful a person is in carrying out an activity.The amount of energy exerted is dependent upon the interaction of the input variables ofvalue of reward and perception of the effort–reward relationship.

Figure 7.9 The Porter and Lawler motivation model

Source: From Porter, L. W. and Lawler, E. E. Managerial Attitudes and Performance (1968), p. 165. Copyright © 1968 Richard D. Irwin Inc. Reproduced with permissionfrom the McGraw-Hill Companies.


272

■ Abilities and traits (Box 4). Porter and Lawler suggest that effort does not lead directly toperformance but is influenced by individual characteristics. Factors such as intelligence,skills, knowledge, training and personality affect the ability to perform a given activity.

■ Role perceptions (Box 5) refer to the way in which individuals view their work and the rolethey should adopt. This influences the type of effort exerted. Role perceptions will influencethe direction and level of action which is believed to be necessary for effective performance.

■ Performance (Box 6) depends not only on the amount of effort exerted but also on theintervening influences of the person’s abilities and traits, and their role perceptions. If theperson lacks the right ability or personality, or has an inaccurate role perception of whatis required, then the exertion of a large amount of energy may still result in a low level ofperformance or task accomplishment.

■ Rewards (Boxes 7A and 7B) are desirable outcomes. Intrinsic rewards derive from theindividuals themselves and include a sense of achievement, a feeling of responsibility andrecognition (for example Herzberg’s motivators). Extrinsic rewards derive from the organ-isation and the actions of others and include salary, working conditions and supervision(for example Herzberg’s hygiene factors). The relationship between performance andintrinsic rewards is shown as a jagged line. This is because the extent of the relationshipdepends upon the nature of the job. If the design of the job permits variety and challenge,so that people feel able to reward themselves for good performance, there is a direct relationship. Where job design does not involve variety and challenge, there is no directrelationship between good performance and intrinsic rewards. The wavy line between performance and extrinsic rewards indicates that such rewards do not often provide adirect link to performance.

■ Perceived equitable rewards (Box 8). This is the level of rewards people feel they shouldfairly receive for a given standard of performance. Most people have an implicit perceptionabout the level of rewards they should receive commensurate with the requirements anddemands of the job, and the contribution expected of them. Self-rating of performance linksdirectly with the perceived equitable reward variable. Higher levels of self-rated performance

Figure 7.10 An illustration of the Lawler expectancy model


273

are associated with higher levels of expected equitable rewards. The heavily arrowed lineindicates a relationship from the self-rated part of performance to perceived equitablerewards.

■ Satisfaction (Box 9). This is not the same as motivation. It is an attitude, an individual’sinternal state. Satisfaction is determined by both actual rewards received and perceivedlevel of rewards from the organisation for a given standard of performance. If perceivedequitable rewards are greater than actual rewards received, the person experiences dis-satisfaction. The experience of satisfaction derives from actual rewards that meet or exceedthe perceived equitable rewards.

LAWLER’S REVISED EXPECTANCY MODEL

Following the original Porter and Lawler model, further work was undertaken by Lawler (seeFigure 7.10).31 He suggests that in deciding on the attractiveness of alternative behaviours,there are two types of expectancies to be considered: effort–performance expectancies (E → P) and performance–outcome expectancies (P → O).

The first expectancy (E →→ P) is the person’s perception of the probability that a givenamount of effort will result in achieving an intended level of performance. It is measured on a scale between 0 and 1. The closer the perceived relationship between effort and perform-ance, the higher the E → P expectancy score.

The second expectancy (P →→ O) is the person’s perception of the probability that a givenlevel of performance will actually lead to particular need-related outcomes. This is measuredalso on a scale between 0 and 1. The closer the perceived relationship between performanceand outcome, the higher the P → O expectancy score.

Motivational force to perform

The multiplicative combination of the two types of expectancies, E → P and the sum of the products P → O, determines expectancy. The motivational force to perform (effort


274

expended) is determined by multiplying E → P and P → O by the strength of outcomevalence (V).

E(Effort) = (E → P) × ∑ [(P → O)V]

The distinction between the two types of expectancies arises because they are determined bydifferent conditions. E → P expectancy is determined in part by the person’s ability and self-confidence, past experience and the difficulty of the task. P → O expectancy is determinedby the attractiveness of the outcomes and the belief about who controls the outcomes, theperson him/herself or other people.

IMPLICATIONS FOR MANAGERS OF EXPECTANCY THEORIES

There are a number of versions of expectancy theory. The main elements tend to be very similar, however, and this suggests the development of a generally accepted approach.Expectancy models are not always easy to understand, or to apply. There are many variableswhich affect behaviour at work. A problem can arise in attempting to include a large numberof variables or in identifying those variables which are most appropriate in particular situations.

Expectancy theory does, however, draw attention to the complexities of work motivation.It provides further information in helping to explain the nature of behaviour and motivationin the work situation, and helps to identify problems in performance. Expectancy theory indi-cates that managers should give attention to a number of factors, including the following:

■ Use rewards appropriate in terms of individual performance. Outcomes with high valenceshould be used as an incentive for improved performance.

■ Attempt to establish clear relationships between effort–performance and rewards, as perceived by the individual.

■ Establish clear procedures for the evaluation of individual levels of performance.■ Pay attention to intervening variables such as abilities and traits, role perceptions,

organisational procedures and support facilities, which, although not necessarily directmotivational factors, may still affect performance.

■ Minimise undesirable outcomes which may be perceived to result from a high level ofperformance, such as industrial accidents or sanctions from co-workers, or to resultdespite a high level of performance, such as short-time working or layoffs.

Porter and Lawler also emphasise that the expectancy model is just a model and thatexpectancy theory applies only to behaviours which are under the voluntary control of theindividual. The two general types of choices over which individuals have voluntary controlof work performance in organisations are:

1 the amount of effort and energy expended; and2 the manner in which they go about performing their work.

There is always a choice about the way you do your work, even if there is not a choice about the work itself. You always have a choice about the attitude you bring to the job.

World famous Pike Place Fish Market, Seattle32

Critical reflection

‘Expectancy theories of motivation appear to make sense in the classroom and form the basis of an interesting academic debate, but it is unlikely the practising manager willbe impressed or take much notice.’

What do you think? How would you explain the potential benefits of expectancy theory toa sceptical manager?

Figure 7.11 An illustration of Adams’s equity theory of motivation


275

EQUITY THEORY OF MOTIVATION

One of the major variables of satisfaction in the Porter and Lawler expectancy model is perceived equitable rewards. This leads to consideration of another process theory of motiv-ation – equity theory. Applied to the work situation, equity theory is usually associated withthe work of Adams.33

Equity theory focuses on people’s feelings of how fairly they have been treated in com-parison with the treatment received by others. It is based on exchange theory. Social relationships involve an exchange process. For example, a person may expect promotion asan outcome of a high level of contribution (input) in helping to achieve an important organ-isational objective. People also compare their own position with that of others. They deter-mine the perceived equity of their own position. Their feelings about the equity of theexchange are affected by the treatment they receive when compared with what happens toother people. Most exchanges involve a number of inputs and outcomes. According to equitytheory, people place a weighting on these various inputs and outcomes according to howthey perceive their importance. When there is an unequal comparison of ratios the personexperiences a sense of inequity.

Behaviour as a consequence of inequity

A feeling of inequity causes tension, which is an unpleasant experience. The presence ofinequity therefore motivates the person to remove or to reduce the level of tension and theperceived inequity. The magnitude of perceived inequity determines the level of tension. Thelevel of tension created determines the strength of motivation. Adams identifies six broadtypes of possible behaviour as consequences of inequity (see Figure 7.11):

■ Changes to inputs. A person may increase or decrease the level of their inputs, for example through the amount or quality of work, absenteeism, or working additionalhours without pay.


276

■ Changes to outcomes. A person may attempt to change outcomes such as pay, workingconditions, status and recognition, without changes to inputs.

■ Cognitive distortion of inputs and outcomes. In contrast to actual changes, people maydistort, cognitively, their inputs or outcomes to achieve the same results. Adams suggeststhat although it is difficult for people to distort facts about themselves, it is possible,within limits, to distort the utility of those facts: for example, the belief about how hardthey are really working, the relevance of a particular qualification, or what they can or cannot obtain with a given level of pay.

■ Leaving the field. A person may try to find a new situation with a more favourable balance, for example by absenteeism, request for a transfer, resigning from a job or fromthe organisation altogether.

■ Acting on others. A person may attempt to bring about changes in others, for example tolower their inputs or accept greater outcomes. Or the person may cognitively distort theinputs and outcomes of others. Alternatively, a person may try to force others to leave thefield.

■ Changing the object of comparison. This involves changing the reference group with whomcomparison is made. For example, where another person with a previously similar outcome–input ratio receives greater outcomes without any apparent increase in contribution, thatother person may be perceived as now belonging to a different level in the organisationstructure. The comparison need not necessarily be made with people who have the sameinputs and outcomes. The important thing is a similar ratio of outcomes to inputs.

Under the control of the manager

The manager may seek to remove or reduce tension and perceived inequity among staff byinfluencing these types of behaviour – for example by attempting to change a person’s inputsor encouraging a different object of comparison. People measure and compare their totalinputs and outcomes so, for example, a working parent may prefer greater flexibility in work-ing hours in return for lower monetary rewards. However, there are likely to be only twocourses of action under the direct control of the manager. Outcomes can be changed by, forexample, increased pay, additional perks or improved working conditions, or by instigatinga person leaving the field through transfer, resignation or, as an extreme measure, dismissal.It is important to remember that equity theory is about the perceived ratio of inputs to out-puts and these perceptions may not reflect the reality of the situation.

The ultimatum game

The ultimatum game is an economic behavioural game that can arguably be related to theconcept of equity theory.34 Two participants, A and B, are given the opportunity to split agiven sum of money between them. The game is played anonymously and once only. Oneperson (A) has to decide to make a one-time, take it or leave it, offer to B (ultimatum). If theother person (B) agrees to the division, both A and B keep their share of the money.However, if the offer is rejected neither person receives anything. Experiments indicate thatif A offers around 50% of the money then B will accept the offer. But if A offers a noticeablylesser amount than 50%, B will typically refuse the offer in which case neither participantreceives anything. One might expect B to accept because even a lesser amount, whatever theoffer, is better than nothing. Can you see how this might be related to perceptions of equitytheory? Viewers of the ITV1 television quiz programme Divided, in which contestants haveto agree how to divide a cash prize, may see a similarity with the ultimatum game.

GOAL THEORY

Another theory usually considered under the heading of motivation to work is goal theory,or the theory of goal-setting (see Figure 7.12). This theory is based mainly on the work of

Figure 7.12 An illustration of Locke’s theory of goal-setting


277

Locke.35 The basic premise of goal theory is that people’s goals or intentions play an importantpart in determining behaviour. Locke accepts the importance of perceived value, as indicatedin expectancy theories of motivation, and suggests that these values give rise to the experienceof emotions and desires. People strive to achieve goals in order to satisfy their emotions and desires. Goals guide people’s responses and actions. Goals direct work behaviour andperformance and lead to certain consequences or feedback. Locke subsequently pointed outthat ‘goal-setting is more appropriately viewed as a motivational technique rather than as a formal theory of motivation’.36

Goal-setting and performance

The combination of goal difficulty and the extent of the person’s commitment to achievingthe goal regulates the level of effort expended. People with specific quantitative goals, suchas a defined level of performance or a given deadline for completion of a task, will performbetter than people with no set goal or only a vague goal such as ‘do the best you can’. Peoplewho have difficult goals will perform better than people with easier goals.

Gratton refers to ‘stretch goals’ which are ambitious, highly targeted opportunities forbreakthrough improvements in performance. These goals should stem from critical successindicators and come from deep discussions within the company, and from collaborationwithin and across task forces, and lead to the development of activities and tactics to achievethe goals.37 People lacking positive motivation at work may also help gain improved resultsand a better sense of achievement by setting themselves specific goals and identifying tasksdirectly related to their work and measurable targets of time and performance.

Practical implications for the manager

Goal theory has a number of practical implications for the manager:

■ Individuals lacking in motivation often do not have clear goals. Specific performance goalsshould systematically be identified and set in order to direct behaviour and maintainmotivation.

■ Goals should be set at a challenging but realistic level. Difficult goals lead to higher performance. However, if goals are set at too high a level or are regarded as impossible toachieve, this can lead to stress and performance will suffer, especially over a longer period.

■ Complete, accurate and timely feedback and knowledge of results is usually associatedwith high performance. Feedback provides a means of checking progress on goal attainmentand forms the basis for any revision of goals.


278

■ Goals can be determined either by a superior or by individuals themselves. Goals set byother people are more likely to be accepted when there is participation. Employee partici-pation in the setting of goals may lead to higher performance.

Much of the theory of goal-setting can be related to the system of management by object-ives (discussed in Chapter 12). MBO is often viewed as an application of goal-setting,although it was devised originally before the development of goal-setting theory. However itis viewed, the theory of goal-setting provides a useful approach to work motivation and per-formance. And Hannagan goes so far as to suggest: ‘At present goal-setting is one of the mostinfluential theories of work motivation applicable to all cultures.’38

ATTRIBUTION THEORY

A more recent approach to the study of motivation is attribution theory. Attribution is theprocess by which people interpret the perceived causes of behaviour. This was discussed inChapter 6.

RELEVANCE TODAY FOR THE MANAGER

Given that most major theories of motivation date back many years it is inevitable that ques-tions will be raised about their relevance today. Reis and Pena question whether motivatingpeople to work in the 21st century with theories conceived during the past hundred years islikely to be feasible. They conclude that the core message is that managers should reconsiderthe outdated motivational patterns utilised to maintain role performance in organisationsand adopt a fresh motivation formula for the 21st century based on friendship, work andrespect.39

However, we have seen from the discussions above that there still appears to be generalsupport for the theories – and, perhaps ironically, particularly for the early theories ofMaslow, Herzberg and McClelland. A Chartered Management Institute checklist maintainsthat these theories are still valid today. ‘A basic understanding of their main principles willprovide the background for building a climate of honesty, openness and trust.’40 From a 12-year study of the use of management concepts in technical organisations, Flores and Utleyfound the work of Maslow and McGregor the most popular motivational theories and alsorefer to the relationship between Maslow and Herzberg and the successful implementationof quality systems.41

Whatever the relevance of the different theories of motivation, to what extent do indi-viduals have control over their own level of motivation or how much is dependent upon theleadership they encounter? Adair reassesses the theories of Maslow and Herzberg in terms ofaction-centred leadership, which is discussed in Chapter 10. Adair also argues that the extentto which you can motivate anyone else is limited and refers to the fifty-fifty rule of motiv-ation, that is:

Fifty percent of motivation comes from within a person and 50% from his or her environment, espe-cially from the leadership encountered there. The fifty-fifty rule in motivation does not claim to inden-tify the different proportions in the equation exactly. It is more like a rough and ready rule of thumb.In effect it says no more than a substantial part of motivation lies with a person while a substantial partlies, so to speak, outside and beyond control.42

ORGANISATIONAL BEHAVIOUR MODIFICATION

Another possible approach to motivation is that of organisational behaviour modification(OBMod). This is the application of learning principles to influence organisational


279

behaviour. In particular it can be seen as a form of Skinner’s operant conditioning, or reinforcement theory, discussed in Chapter 5. Reinforcement is a feature of the behaviourismapproach and shaped by environmental influences. The reward for a particular form ofbehaviour is likely to result in the reinforcement of that behaviour. A negative outcome orlack of acknowledgement for the behaviour is likely to mean that the behaviour will stop.Luthans and Kreitner suggest that OBMod ‘represents a merging of behavioral learning theoryon the one hand and organizational behavior theory on the other’.43

According to Luthans and Kreitner, a major premise of OBMod is that positive con-sequence management is much more effective than negative consequence management.Organisations that encourage the members to learn and undertake desired behaviours andnot to undertake undesired behaviours follow five main steps:

1 Identify the observable, objective and measurable behaviours relevant to the desiredorganisational performance.

2 Measure the frequency with which those behaviours actually occur under normal condi-tions. Provide baseline performance data as a point of reference to compare with changesin step 5.

3 Determine the antecedents of the behaviours, the reinforcements to encourage patternsof behaviour and the consequences that follow from those behaviours.

4 Develop an intervention strategy for change in order to strengthen desirable behavioursand weaken undesirable behaviours, through the use of operant conditioning and re-inforcement theory including punishment if necessary.

5 Measure and evaluate systematically (using the same measure as in step 2) the extent towhich the frequency of desired behaviours and undesired behaviours have changed, andimprovements in organisational performance.

Applications of OBMod

To what extent can OBMod be applied effectively to improve motivation and performancein work organisations? OBMod works best for behaviours that are specific, objective andcountable. There have been a number of studies in the United States that indicate positiveresults in behaviours that improved performance in reducing errors, attendance and punctuality, health and safety and customer service.44 In a study of a Russian textile factory,following the OBMod approach, workers were subjected to two forms of intervention –extrinsic rewards and social rewards. The extrinsic rewards provided valued American products, such as clothing, music tapes and hard-to-get foods, for improved performance.Social rewards such as attention, recognition and praise from supervisors were for perform-ing specified actions such as checking looms, undertaking repairs and helping others. Both the extrinsic and social interventions led to highly significant increases in performance.This contrasted with a previous participative job design approach that involved asking workers for ideas for improving performance and enriching their jobs that did not work. The researchers suggest cultural issues and the workers’ past experiences may explain the failure of the participative intervention strategy, and that the OBMod approach has widerapplication.45

Although there appear to be a number of supporters in America, in the UK it is a con-troversial concept. Critics claim that OBMod is not an accepted theory of motivation andthat there are too many individual differences for people to be treated as subjects of operantconditioning. OBMod is concerned only with shaping. There is the added criticism of a ‘BigBrother’ approach with excessive management manipulation and control over employees,more in line with scientific management (recall the discussion in Chapter 2). This in turncould also have the added disadvantage of discouraging individual initiative and adaptabil-ity to change circumstances. Workers subject to OBMod programmes may tend to ignorethose aspects of voluntary behaviours, such as social support or assistance to colleagues, thatare not subject to direct reward and reinforcement.

Figure 7.13 Motivating knowledge workers


280

THE MOTIVATION OF KNOWLEDGE WORKERS

Recent advantages in telecommunications and in scientific and technological knowledgehave led to greater emphasis on the knowledge and expertise of staff and the importance ofcreativity. Tampoe suggests that at the core of the new industrial trend are the ‘knowledgeworkers’ – those employees who apply their theoretical and practical understanding of aspecific area of knowledge to produce outcomes of a commercial, social or personal value.The performance of knowledge workers should be judged on both the cleverness of ideasand the utility and commercial value of their applied knowledge. Creativity is necessary andneeds to be encouraged but should be bounded by commercial realism. This presents management with a new challenge of how to motivate the knowledge workers.46

Tampoe suggests that the personal motivation of knowledge workers is based on the value they place on the rewards they expect to earn at work. In addition to the individual’sown motivation, the performance of knowledge workers is dependent upon four key characteristics (see Figure 7.13):

■ task competence;■ peer and management support;■ task and role clarity; and■ corporate awareness.

The challenge to management is to ensure the effectiveness of the four key variables and torecognise the need for staff to supervise and manage themselves and the wider rewardsexpected by knowledge workers.

A climate of creativity

Lucas draws attention to skills shortages as one of the biggest challenges facing employers in the new millennium. In order to attract and keep talented individuals, the so-called know-ledge workers, organisations cannot rely simply on a pay rise or cash bonus but have to bemore creative about the way they structure remuneration packages. Individual performance-related pay is still the most widely used reward strategy, but attention is also given to employeeshare ownership, competence-related pay and team reward – and also to non-cash incentivessuch as gift vouchers. However, Lucas points out that employees, especially high flyers, rankchallenging and interesting work and freedom higher on their motivational list than money

Source: Tampoe, M. ‘Knowledge Workers: The New Management Challenge’, Professional Manager, Institute of Management, November 1994, p. 13. Reproduced with permission from Chartered Management Institute.


281

and performance-related pay. ‘Research suggests that most organisations haven’t recognisedthe need to identify and tap into their employees’ personal motivators.’47

A report from the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development draws attention to the management of knowledge workers, highlighting the importance of autonomy, challenging work and sharing in the creation of organisational values. With the developmentof new technology it is important to motivate employees to capture, share and transferknowledge.48

Whitmore suggests that in order to create a climate for creativity among employees, recog-nition must be given to the importance of two human needs that rise above all others andexist independent of race, creed and culture – the need for self-belief and the developmentof emotional intelligence; and the ever-present need that every human being has for a senseof meaning and purpose in their lives.

Self-belief and meaningful work are the fundamental bedrocks that underlie business performance. Ofcourse, pay and conditions are important too, but we know that. It is these two others that are barelyrecognised . . . but business leaders ignore them at their peril.49

CROSS-CULTURAL DIMENSIONS OF MOTIVATION

Whatever the popularity of different theories of motivation, doubts are raised about theiruniversality on the ground that they have not adequately addressed the factor of culture.50

Are theories of motivation universally applicable or are there meaningful differences inmotivation at work, or in life more generally, in different societies? Many readers may feelable to recognise perceived variations in extrinsic, intrinsic and relational aspects of motiv-ation as a result of experience of foreign cultures. Do similarities in workplace attitudes andbehaviour outweigh differences? A number of writers have questioned whether motivationaltheories and models originating in one culture are amenable to transference to other partsof the world. Francesco and Gold devote a substantial proportion of a discussion of motiv-ation to examining the extent to which American motivation theories are applicable outsidethe United States.

When discussing Maslow’s contribution to this topic and, in particular, the concept of a hierarchy of needs, Francesco and Gold suggest: ‘In an international context the circum-stances and values of a particular culture can influence the ordering and importance ofneeds. The values of individualism and collectivism can make the hierarchy more or less relevant.’51 In evaluating McClelland’s work, Francesco and Gold question whether themeaning of an underlying concept, in this case achievement, can even be understood world-wide in the sense it was intended: ‘Another concern with Learning Needs Theory is that theconcept of achievement is difficult, if not impossible, to translate into languages other thanEnglish.’52 A study of motivation and job satisfaction among hotel workers in Brazil foundthat a number of Herzberg’s hygiene and motivating factors did not affect job satisfaction ordissatisfaction. A main cause of this difference appeared to be the influence of organisationalculture.53

It has already been suggested that one criticism of content theories of motivation cen-tres on its relative applicability in different circumstances, and the suggestion that there may be variations across cultures falls within this line of reasoning. However, perhaps less obviously, process theories of motivation have also been criticised for being culture-bound. As they focus on process rather than content, such theories may appear to be more applicable in diverse cultural contexts. Nonetheless it has been suggested that processtheories of motivation contain certain inbuilt assumptions that are themselves culturallyderived.

Adler reminds us that expectancy models of motivation assume that individuals believethat they can, to some extent, control their environment and influence their fate. If, as in the cases of more fatalistic cultures such as China, people do not have the same sense of


282

internal attribution, the expectancy model may have less force and therefore less applicabil-ity. When Adams’s equity theory is applied across the world, differences in interpretationhave been recorded.54 Chen suggests that while individualistic cultures place a high regard onequity, collectivist cultures value equality more than equity. Again we see here the possibilitythat while a theory of motivation may be essentially valid in principle, it is legitimate tothink about the ways in which national culture can intervene in terms of its interpretationin different societies.55

Critical reflection

‘Motivation and job satisfaction are very subjective and affected by many variablesincluding cultural influences, unknown domestic situations and personal relationshipsoutside of work. Generalised management models cannot meet all individualcircumstances and are therefore a complete waste of your study time.’

To what extent do you agree?

JOB SATISFACTION

The meaning and nature of job satisfaction

Attempting to understand the nature of job satisfaction and its effects on work performanceis not easy. Job satisfaction is a complex and multifaceted concept, which can mean differ-ent things to different people. It is usually linked with motivation, but the nature of this relationship is not clear. Satisfaction is not the same as motivation. Job satisfaction is moreof an attitude, an internal state. It could, for example, be associated with a personal feelingof achievement, either quantitative or qualitative.

It is often suggested that job satisfaction is necessary in order to achieve a high level ofmotivation and performance. However, although the level of job satisfaction may well affectstrength of motivation, this is not always the case. The relationship between job satisfactionand performance is an issue of continuing debate and controversy. One view, associatedwith the early human relations approach, is that satisfaction leads to performance. An alter-native view is that performance leads to satisfaction. Reeves draws attention to the relation-ship between accomplishment at work and the need to ‘work harder’.

All this busy-ness and stress is creating more heat than light. It is a sign not of work being too hard buttoo shallow. Human nature is driven by a desire to accomplish things, and so the fewer opportunitiesfor accomplishment a job contains, the more likely we are to fill the void by tearing around in a frenzyin an effort to persuade ourselves and others that our work has a purpose, that it is important.56

Dimensions of job satisfaction

There is some doubt whether job satisfaction consists of a single dimension or a number ofseparate dimensions. Some workers may be satisfied with certain aspects of their work anddissatisfied with other aspects. Job satisfaction is itself a complex concept and difficult tomeasure objectively. The level of job satisfaction is affected by a wide range of variables relat-ing to individual, social, cultural, organisational and environmental factors.

■ Individual factors include personality, education and qualifications, intelligence andabilities, age, marital status, orientation to work.

■ Social factors include relationships with co-workers, group working and norms, oppor-tunities for interaction, informal organisation.

■ Cultural factors include underlying attitudes, beliefs and values.

Table 7.3 Five contractual areas relating to job satisfaction

The knowledge contract

The psychological contract

The efficiency/rewards contract

The ethical (social value) contract

The task structure contract

The firm

Needs a certain level of skill andknowledge in its employees if it isto function efficiently

Needs employees who aremotivated to look after its interests

Needs to implement generalisedoutput, quality standards andreward systems

Needs employees who will acceptthe firm’s ethos and values

Needs employees who will accepttechnical and other constraintswhich produce task specificity ortask differentiation

The employee

Wishes the skills and knowledge they bringwith them to be used and developed

Seeks to further interests private to self, e.g. to secure: achievement, recognition,responsibility, status

Seeks a personal, equitable effort–rewardbargain and controls, including supervisoryones, which are perceived as acceptable

Seeks to work for an employer whose valuesdo not contravene their own

Seeks a set of tasks which meets theirrequirements for task differentiation, e.g. which incorporate variety, interests, targets,feedback, task identity and autonomy

Source: Mumford, E. ‘Job Satisfaction: A Method of Analysis’, Personnel Review, vol. 20, no. 3, p. 14, 1991. Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited. All RightsReserved. Reproduced with permission.


283

■ Organisational factors include nature and size, formal structure, HR policies and proce-dures, employee relations, nature of the work, technology and work organisation, super-vision and styles of leadership, management systems, working conditions.

■ Environmental factors include economic, social, technical and governmental influences.

These different factors all affect the job satisfaction of certain individuals in a given set ofcircumstances but not necessarily in others. For example in times of economic depressionand fears of high unemployment, job security is likely to be the prominent concern for manymembers of staff. According to the FreshMinds survey discussed in Chapter 3, when it comesto job satisfaction it pays to be older. Apparently 100 per cent of older boomers (bornbetween 1946 and 1963) are satisfied with their job, but only 66 per cent of Generation Y(typified by travel first, then a career) feel the same way. And Generation Y want more atwork such as gym membership and sabbaticals.57

A survey by the Chartered Management Institute found that organisational culture andvalues emerged as very strong motivational drivers, and a manager’s relationship with theirline manager had a powerful impact on job satisfaction and related measures.58

Five contractual areas

Mumford examines job satisfaction in two ways:

1 in terms of the fit between what the organisation requires and what the employee is seeking; and

2 in terms of the fit between what the employee is seeking and what they are actually receiving.

On the basis of various schools of thought on job satisfaction, Mumford identifies five contractual areas by which this organisational/employee relationship can be examined: theknowledge contract, the psychological contract, the efficiency/reward contract, the ethicalcontract and the task structure contract (see Table 7.3).59


284

The work environment

An increasingly important issue affecting job satisfaction and efficiency is the nature of thework environment and workplace facilities. Handy argues that an inspired workplace willresult in inspired workers and draws attention to the importance for work performance ofthe atmosphere, quality and style of buildings and offices.60

A 2003 study by the Chartered Management Institute reports on UK managers’ attitudesto and experiences of their physical working environment. The study was undertaken amonga random sample of 4,000 managers across all levels and sectors and size of organisation.Topics addressed included hours worked, commuting and travel, flexible working, the exist-ing and preferred layout of offices and the use of new technologies. Concerns were expressedabout the need for more quiet areas, under-equipped meeting rooms, lack of adequate meet-ing space, and their offices not making a good impression on clients and visitors. Nearly halfof those surveyed would relinquish one week’s annual leave for a better office, and sizeablenumbers would forgo £1,000 in salary or private medical insurance for a significantlyupgraded workspace. And even if the role, salary and benefits were no better, 45 per centwould contemplate changing companies in return for an improved work environment.61

More than any other element, fun is the secret of Virgin’s success. I am aware that the idea ofbusiness being fun and creative goes right against the grain of convention, and it’s certainly nothow they teach it at some of those business schools, where business means hard grind and lotsof ‘discounted cash flows’ and ‘net present values’ . . . For us, our employees matter most. Itjust seems common sense to me that, if you start off with a happy, well motivated workforce,you’re much more likely to have happy customers. And in due course the resulting profits willmake your shareholders happy.

Richard Branson62

According to De Vita, well-being at work pays because employees who are happy andhealthy take fewer days off sick, are more productive and more likely to stay with their organisation. The starting point to supporting and promoting well-being in the workplacehas to be good people management and effective work organisation. Good line managementis the most important of the characteristics of a high-quality workplace that has high levelsof commitment and low absence rates.63

Flexible working arrangements

An increasingly significant aspect of motivation and job satisfaction is flexible working.According to CIPD, ‘This relates to an organisation’s working arrangements in terms of working time, working location and the pattern of working.’64 Moves towards greater flexi-bility may afford opportunities for employees to have more freedom and control over theirworking arrangements and have noticeable effects on their job satisfaction and performance.Flexible working arrangements are discussed in Chapter 15.

Broader approaches

Broader approaches to job satisfaction aim to give the person improved empowerment andjob enrichment through greater autonomy and authority over the planning, execution andcontrol of their work. It focuses attention on intrinsic satisfaction. Job enrichment increasesthe complexity of the work. It should provide the person with a more meaningful and challenging job and offer greater opportunities for psychological growth.

The main methods of achieving job enrichment include the following:

■ permitting workers greater freedom and control over the scheduling and pacing of theirwork as opposed to machine pacing;


285

■ allowing workers to undertake a full task cycle, build or assemble a complete product orcomponent, or deliver a complete service;

■ providing workers with tasks or jobs which challenge their abilities and make fuller useof their training, expertise and skills;

■ giving workers greater freedom to work in self-managing teams with greater responsibilityfor monitoring their own performance and the minimum of direct supervision; and

■ providing workers with the opportunity to have greater direct contact with clients, consumers or users of the product or service.

In an organisation, empowerment means that each staff member is responsible for creating thatorganisation’s culture. There aren’t many motivating forces more potent than giving your staff anopportunity to exercise and express their idealism.

Anita Roddick65

ALIENATION AT WORK

One main approach to job satisfaction is in terms of frustration and alienation at work. Jobsatisfaction can be seen as the obverse of frustration at work (discussed earlier in this chap-ter). Alienation refers to the detachment of the person from their work role. The concept ofalienation at work is associated originally with the views of Marx.66 He saw the division oflabour in pursuit of profit, and exploitation by employers, as a denial of the workers’ needfor self-expression. Workers become estranged from the product of their work. Work nolonger provided a satisfying experience in itself, but represented a means of satisfying other external demands. The concept of alienation has been extended by Blauner.67 He describesalienation in terms of four dimensions: powerlessness, meaninglessness, isolation and self-estrangement.

■ Powerlessness denotes the workers’ lack of control over management policy, immediatework processes, or conditions of employment.

■ Meaninglessness stems from standardisation and division of labour. It denotes theinability to see the purpose of work done or to identify with the total production processor finished product.

■ Isolation is not belonging to an integrated work group or to the social work organisationand not being guided by group norms of behaviour.

■ Self-estrangement is the failure to see work as an end in itself or as a central life issue.Workers experience a depersonalised detachment and work is seen solely as a means toan end.

In recent years attention to job satisfaction has also become more closely associated with broader approaches to improved job design and work organisation, and the quality of working life movement, and with stress and the work/life balance (discussed in Chapter 3).

A concept map of job satisfaction is set out in Figure 7.14.

A COMPREHENSIVE MODEL OF JOB ENRICHMENT

Attempts to improve intrinsic motivation must not only include considerations of job characteristics but also take account of individual differences and attributes, and people’sorientation to work. A popular and comprehensive model of job enrichment has been developed by Hackman and Oldham (see Figure 7.15).68 The model views job enrichment

Figu

re 7

.14

Con

cept

map

of

job

satis

fact

ion

Sou

rce:

Cop

yrig

ht ©

200

8 Th

e V

irtua

l Lea

rnin

g M

ater

ials

Wor

ksho

p.

Rep

rod

uced

with

per

mis

sion

.


286

Figure 7.15 A job characteristics model of work motivation

Source: Hackman, J. R. and Oldham, G. R. Work Redesign, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc. (1980), Figure 4.6, p. 90.Reproduced with permission from Pearson Education, Inc.


287

in terms of increasing five core job dimensions: skill variety, task identity, task significance,autonomy and feedback. These core job characteristics create three psychological states:

■ experienced meaningfulness of the work;■ experienced responsibility for the outcomes of the work; and■ knowledge of the actual results of the work activities.

Five core dimensions

The five core job dimensions can be summarised as follows:

■ skill variety – the extent to which a job entails different activities and involves a range ofskills and talents;

■ task identity – the extent to which a job involves completion of a whole piece of workwith a visible outcome;

■ task significance – the extent to which a job has a meaningful impact on other people,either inside or outside the organisation;

■ autonomy – the extent to which a job provides freedom, independence and discretion inplanning the work and determining how to undertake it;

■ feedback – the extent to which work activities result in direct and clear information onthe effectiveness of job performance.

An example of a job with little enrichment could be that of a production assembly lineworker or a kitchen porter, where all five core characteristics are likely to score low. An exampleof an enriched job could be that of a parish priest who draws upon a wide range of socialskills and talents, who can usually identify with the whole task and whose job has clear andimportant meaning and significance. There is a very high level of autonomy and likely to bedirect and clear feedback.


288

Motivating potential score

From these five core job dimensions, Hackman and Oldham have developed an equationwhich gives a single index of a person’s job profile. By answering a questionnaire – the JobDiagnostic Survey (JDS) – and by giving a score (between 1 and 7) to each job dimension,the person can calculate an overall measure of job enrichment, called the motivating poten-tial score (MPS).

Examples of questions from the JDS are:

■ How much variety is there in your job?■ To what extent does your job involve doing a whole and identifiable piece of work?■ In general, how significant or important is your job?■ How much autonomy is there in your job?■ To what extent does doing the job itself provide you with information about your work

performance?

MPS = × Autonomy × Feedback

The first three job dimensions of skill variety, task identity and task significance are averaged, since it is the combination of these dimensions which contributes to experiencedmeaningfulness of work. The remaining two job dimensions, autonomy and feedback, standon their own. Since scores for skill variety, task identity and task significance are additive,this means that the absence of one dimension can be partially offset by the presence of theother dimensions. However, if either autonomy or feedback is absent then, because of themultiplicative relationship, the MPS would be zero. The job would offer no potential tomotivate the person.

Empirical support for the model

Empirical support for the model is mixed. From their studies, Hackman and Oldham claim that people with enriched jobs and high score levels on the Job Diagnostic Surveyexperienced more satisfaction and internal motivation. The core job dimensions of skill variety, task identity and task significance combined to predict the level of experiencedmeaningfulness of the work. The core dimensions of autonomy and feedback did not relate so clearly to experienced responsibility and knowledge of results. Some of the otherdimensions were as good, or better, in predicting these psychological conditions. In general,however, the results of their studies showed that jobs that scored high on the core dimen-sions were associated with high levels of personal and work outcomes.

Luthans et al. report on evidence from a number of studies of American workers that thejob design approach leads to improvement in motivation and performance, but also that theapproach did not work in the Russian factory study discussed earlier in this chapter.69

In a study of a sample of six hotels (with between 35 and 65 bedrooms) in GreatYarmouth, Lee-Ross undertook an examination of the reliability of the JDS among seasonalworkers. From an analysis of 163 questionnaires, Lee-Ross concludes that in general, reliability scores were compatible with those of Hackman and Oldham. The JDS appears tohold just as well for hotel workers as for workers in other industries.70

Based on integrating Hackman and Oldham’s job characteristics model with Maslow’shierarchy of needs, Roe et al. propose a general model of work motivation, tested withBulgarian, Hungarian and Dutch workers. The model indicates that situational characteris-tics lead to critical psychological factors, inducing two main motivational factors – jobinvolvement and organisational commitment – which in turn lead to two proximal out-comes of work motivation – effort and job satisfaction – which affect performance, stressand tendency to leave the organisation. Although there were some differences that drawattention to cultural variables, there was also a large degree of similarity in results across thethree countries.71

{Skill variety + Task identity + Task significance}3


289

CONTEXTUAL FACTORS IN JOB DESIGN

The different methods of job design are not necessarily separate approaches. They are inter-related and there is some overlapping among them. For example, goal-setting is sometimesviewed as another approach to job design. Goal-setting involves building goals, feedbackand incentives into the structure of the job. In addition, there are many other associated(contextual) factors which affect job design, including, for example: organisational culture,structure, systems of management and style of leadership, trade unions, HR policies and procedures, communications, group norms, ergonomics, the management of change, andthe working environment.

The potential benefits of improved job design are unlikely to be realised if attention isfocused on the content of jobs alone. Of equal, if not more, importance is the process bywhich redesign is carried out. This has led to recognition of the importance of managementstyle and, increasingly, of organisation culture.72 Central to improving the quality of work-ing life is a participative, open style of management involving employees in decisions thataffect them, including the design or choice of technology. Management should attempt todevelop a relationship of trust among all members and sections of the organisation and a meaningful partnership approach with trade unions.

Theories of work motivation and job satisfaction have influenced management systemsand styles of leadership, and developments in HR policies and procedures. The humanresource management function is centred on people’s needs while working in an organisa-tion and ways in which their work promotes or frustrates the fulfilment of these needs.73 Thepractice of modern human resource management is directed towards providing conditionsunder which people work willingly and effectively, and contribute to the success of theorganisation. This involves concern for employee motivation and job satisfaction.

Critical reflection

‘Individuals have a variety of changing, and often conflicting, needs and expectationswhich they attempt to satisfy in a number of ways at different times.’

What are the most powerful influences on your own work motivation and jobsatisfaction? How do you think these will change in five years’ time?

SYNOPSIS

■ The study of motivation is concerned, basically, withwhy people behave in a certain way. The underlyingconcept of motivation is some driving force withinindividuals by which they attempt to achieve some goalin order to fulfil some need or expectation. Individualshave a variety of changing, and often competing, needsand expectations which they attempt to satisfy in anumber of ways. If a person’s motivational driving forceis blocked and they are unable to satisfy their needs andexpectations, this may result either in constructive,problem-solving behaviour or in frustration-inducedbehaviour.

■ There are many competing theories that attempt to explain motivation at work. The different theories

may be divided into two contrasting groups: contenttheories and process theories. Content theories placeemphasis on what motivates and are concerned withidentifying people’s needs and their relative strengths,and the goals they pursue in order to satisfy these needs.Main content theories include Maslow’s hierarchy ofneeds model, Alderfer’s modified need hierarchy model,Herzberg’s two-factor theory and McClelland’s achieve-ment motivation theory.

■ Process theories place emphasis on the actual process of motivation. These theories are concernedwith the relationships among the dynamic variablesthat make up motivation, and with how behaviour isinitiated, directed and sustained. Many of the process

1 Explain what you understand by the underlying concept of motivation. Summarise the main needs andexpectations to be taken into account in considering the motivation of people at work.

2 What do you understand by frustration-induced behaviour? Give a practical example, preferably from yourwork experience, of each of the main forms of this behaviour.

3 Critically assess the practical value of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs model to improving the motivation ofpeople at work. Give examples of the extent to which the theory could meaningfully be applied to staff inyour own organisation.

4 Debate critically the validity of the contention that the motivation for staff to work well depends on more thana high salary and good working conditions.

5 Explain your understanding of expectancy-based theories of motivation. Use a simple diagram to help explainan expectancy theory of your choice. What implications do expectancy theories of motivation have for themanager?

6 Give detailed practical examples of situations in which each of the following theories of motivation might beappropriate: (i) achievement motivation; (ii) equity theory; (iii) goal theory.

7 What exactly do you understand by job satisfaction? What are the main dimensions of job satisfaction? Give specific examples of causes of both job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction that you have experienced.

8 Evaluate critically the relationship between motivation, job satisfaction and effective work performance. Givereasons in support of your views.

REVIEW AND DISCUSSION QUESTIONS


290

theories cannot be linked to a single writer, but majorapproaches under this heading include expectancy-based models, equity theory, goal theory and attribu-tion theory. Another possible approach to motivationis organisational behaviour modification (OBMod).

■ These different theories are not conclusive. How-ever, it is because of the complexity of motivation thatthese different theories are important to the manager,and many writers still expound their relevance today.They help demonstrate the many motives thatinfluence people’s behaviour at work. They provide aframework within which to direct attention for howbest to motivate and reward staff to work willinglyand effectively. One major doubt concerning the different theories of motivation is about their uni-versality, on the grounds that they do not adequatelyaddress the factor of culture.

■ Attempting to understand the nature of job satis-faction and links with work performance is not easy.Although the level of job satisfaction may well affect

the strength of motivation, this is not always the case.Job satisfaction is more of an internal state and couldbe associated, for example, with a feeling of personalachievement. Job satisfaction is a complex conceptand difficult to measure objectively. The level of jobsatisfaction is affected by a wide range of individual,social, organisational and cultural variables.

■ Broader approaches to satisfaction aim to give theperson improved empowerment and job enrichmentthrough greater autonomy and control over their work.Attention has also been given to a comprehensivemodel of job enrichment and five core dimensions.Moves towards greater flexibility may have noticeableeffects on job satisfaction and performance of staff.Despite many theories and studies there are still doubtsas to how best to manage an organisation so that staff have both high job satisfaction and productivity.Account must also be taken of contextual factors,including management style and culture, and develop-ments in human resource management.

Top marks for the best employee awardsRhymer Rigby

MANAGEMENT IN THE NEWS

Employee of the month (or the week, or the year)awards have a bad image. They are popularlyassociated with low-paid, low-status service sectorjobs – a dollop of worthless recognition on top of an already low-value package. Implemented properly,they can be a valuable form of recognition thatmotivates staff, especially in today’s reward-constrained climate. Handled wrongly, however, they can backfire and foster cynicism.

Stephen Carella, a team leader at Kwik-Fit FinancialServices, an insurance intermediary, was its Employeeof the Year 2008. ‘It was a goal I’d set myself at the startof the year,’ he explains. Once he had won six employeeof the month awards, he knew he was in with a goodchance. He adds: ‘It’s a great incentive and what reallymotivated me is the recognition you get. It’s a fantasticthing to put on your CV.’ Mr Carella was presentedwith his award at a dinner for 100 of the company’stop performers and their partners at Edinburgh’sBalmoral Hotel. He also received a cash prize of£10,000. ‘It was,’ he says, ‘the best night of my life.’

The scheme, explains Brendan Devine, KFFS groupmanaging director, has been running for four yearsand is part of a complex structure of recognition. Eachdepartment has an employee of the month award,which accords privileges such as free food in the staffbistro, gym membership and parking. From these aredrawn quarterly qualifiers who could make it on to a shortlist for employee of the year. ‘It’s part of anoverall strategy to identify who top performers are,’says Mr Devine, adding that at the dinner, the 34departmental winners of the annual title also receiveawards and £1,000. ‘In a way, the recognition is themost important part though – [the] reward goesbeyond your pay packet.’

Ben Williams, a corporate psychologist, says suchschemes can be valuable but cautions that they mustbe implemented properly. He says: ‘By and large they’rea good thing and encourage beliefs and behaviours thecompany might want to promote such as high sales orgreat customer care. In industries where people moveround, they can encourage them to stay.’ However, hesays: ‘You need to avoid a celebrity-like cult of theindividual. Teams need to be considered together. Ifeveryone’s a high performer, it can be divisive to onlyreward the single highest performer.’

There is also the vexed question of recognitionversus material reward. The key is getting the underlyingcorporate culture right. If it is wrong, says Williams,‘recipients can be made to look obsequious sycophants,

like swots at school’. Still, no matter what you do, therewill always be groups that are damning about suchrecognition: ‘That’s one of the reasons to give cashrewards – you get buy-in from the cynical brigade.’

But for all the organisations that take theseconsiderations on board, there are still plenty that do not. ‘I was the best-performing employee of thequarter,’ says one salesman at another company, ‘andI went up on stage and was given a £20 M&S voucher– which makes you feel a bit like a monkey performingfor bananas.’ He spent his voucher on strawberriesand a few months later he won employee of the year.Soon after he left the company.

Source: Rigby, R. ‘Top Marks for the Best Employee Award’,Financial Times, 11 May 2009. Copyright © 2009 The FinancialTimes Limited, reproduced with permission.

Discussion questions1 What evidence is there in the article that

employee award schemes can help meet theneeds and expectations of people at workoutlined in Figure 7.2?

2 Explain which two motivation theories you thinkare most useful for a manager who is planning an employee award scheme both to decide whatto include in the scheme and what to avoid.


291

Employee award schemes can be a valuable form of recognisingthe contributions of employees but if handled badly can backfireand foster cynicism. How can employers strike the right balance in both deciding what to do and what to avoid?

Sou

rce:

iSto

ckph

oto

FT

a List, as far as possible in rank order, the specific needs and expectations that are most important to you asan individual. (Do not include basic physiological needs such as to satisfy thirst or hunger, or a minimalstandard of accommodation.)

b Explain, briefly, to what extent these needs and expectations are met currently by your present work situationand/or to what extent you anticipate they will be met by your future career ambitions.

c Think of any work experience that you have had – even a short-term, vacation or part-time job. Brieflydescribe those aspects of the job and/or experiences that:

(i) motivated you to work well and to the best of your ability; and

(ii) had a demotivating influence on your behaviour and performance.

Be prepared to share your feelings and comments as part of a class discussion.

ASSIGNMENT 1

a Write a brief description of what you think is happening to thepeople in the picture and what you think will happen to themin the future.

b After you have written your description, compare yourresponse with those of your colleagues.

ASSIGNMENT 2

ObjectivesCompleting this exercise should help you to enhance the following skills:

■ Analyse and review what determines motivation to work.

■ Reflect upon your perceptions about the motives of other people.

■ Take account of individual needs and expectations at work.

Exercise1 First, undertake Assignment 1 and bear in mind your responses to the assignment. Exchange accounts with

a partner before proceeding further.

PERSONAL AWARENESS AND SKILLS EXERCISE


292

2 Now assume you are the newly appointed general manager of a privately owned 50-room seaside hotel withrestaurant. You have been brought in as a trouble shooter and at interview you were informed there is seriousconcern about the generally poor level of work performance, that morale is low and there is a disturbing highlevel of staff turnover.

■ Detail fully the likely actions you would take to help overcome the present situation.

■ Indicate clearly the priorities you would have in mind.

■ Make clear any necessary, reasonable assumptions.

■ Explain how you might draw upon those theories/studies you consider relevant.

3 Write, fully and honestly, the extent to which there is disparity between your own motives and, based on the above, motivating other people. How would you explain and rationalise differences?

4 Compare and discuss critically accounts with your partner, and be prepared to explain and justify your views.

Discussion■ How far did you avoid generalisations about what motivates other people?

■ What assumptions did you make about the work ethic of staff at the hotel?

■ To what extent where you able to distance your own motivations?

■ What conclusions do you draw from this exercise?

Don’t get mad, get on-line!

CASE STUDY

In 2005 the word ‘blog’, meaning an on-line journal orweb log which is regularly updated by the author,entered the Oxford English Dictionary for the first time.Figures collected by internet monitoring organisationssuggest that by the time the word made it into thedictionary there were about 30 million blogs inexistence, and the numbers were increasing at the rateof about 70,000 per day.74 Add to this the emergence ofsocial networking and communication sites such asFacebook and Twitter and there has never been such awide range of possible ways to launch personalthoughts into a waiting cyberworld. Not all are aboutwork, but the fact that life in the office or workplace is asignificant part of many people’s lives means that manyblogs, posts and tweets include references to work,bosses, colleagues and customers alongside othernormal daily experiences, opinions about news eventsand so on. A number of blogs are specifically aboutwork, and these are the ones which tend to hit theheadlines, usually when an employee gets into troublefor airing their opinions about the organisation theywork for in the blogosphere.

Why do individuals blog about work? At one level,blogging is no different from gossip. Many bloggersexpect to have small audiences, possibly of like-minded

people who have similar experiences to discuss; thecontent of blogs may be much like the discussions withcolleagues that are routinely held in the round the watercooler or coffee machine, or with friends in a pub or


293

Is it acceptable to blog, post or tweet about your company? Socialnetworking and communication sites provide a wide range of ways toshare personal thoughts in a public venue resulting in organisationalresponses that can range from accepting to creative to hostile.

Sou

rce:

CJG

/Ala

my


294

bar after work. Most blogs include opportunities foremail and on-line discussion, and so become a livelymix of intimate diary items and chatroom-stylecomments. For some authors the aim is to give aninsight into their working life, perhaps discussing a type of job which many people know about but fewreally understand. In the UK, at least one chief policeconstable and a number of ambulance service workersare known to blog primarily about their work.75

However, many see it as a way of letting off steamabout aspects of their work which enrage them, be it theorganisation, their individual managers, their annoyingcolleagues or – as often – the absurd behaviour ofmembers of the general public and customers inparticular.76 This can make blogging a particularly riskyactivity, at least if the blogger wishes to keep their job.

Careless blogging can get you doocedIn 2004 Ellen Simonetti hit the headlines77 when shewas sacked by her employer, the American DeltaAirlines, essentially for identifying them as the companyabout which she was blogging on her ‘Queen of the Sky’ website. The offence which got her sacked was not the blog itself, but the fact that by postingphotographs of herself draped across the seats of anaircraft in her uniform (pictures which were describedby the company as ‘inappropriate’) she identified theorganisation itself, and therefore was considered to havebrought it into disrepute. In January 2005, in a similarBritish case, Joe Gordon, an employee of Waterstone’sbookshop in Edinburgh of 11 years’ standing, wasdismissed for gross misconduct78 after ‘bringing thecompany into disrepute’ by complaining about his ‘evilboss’ at the fictionalised but nevertheless sufficientlyrecognisable bookstore ‘Bastardones’ in his blog ‘The Wolamaloo Gazette’.79

The term ‘doocing’ has since been used to describethe phenomenon of being sacked for blogging, a fatewhich also befell Catherine Sanderson or ‘La PetiteAnglaise’ who was dismissed from the Parisian branchof British accounting firm Dixon Wilson in July 2006for committing the ‘real and serious’ offence of bloggingmischievously but anonymously about her boss andcolleagues.80 As with Simonetti, it was when she postedphotographs of herself on the site that the companydecided that she, and therefore it, could be identified,and that it had to act against its employee. MarketSentinel offers an internet monitoring service (muchlike that of a press agency) to companies who want toknow what is being posted about them, and be alertedto potential threats posed to their brand image incyberspace. This too can result in disciplinary action as 13 cabin crew at Virgin Atlantic discovered to their cost when they were dismissed for postingderogatory comments about Virgin customers onFacebook.81

Learning to love bloggersNot every organisation has reacted with hostility tobloggers. The chief constable and the ambulanceworkers mentioned above are at least tolerated and atbest supported by their employers (the chief constable’sblog is hosted by the North Wales Police website). Thesame was also true for Robert Scoble, at Microsoft,whose blog (Scobleizer) not only turned him into acyber-celebrity, but also acted to help humanise thepreviously monolithic corporate face of the company.82

Other organisations have actively embraced blogculture, and sought to use it to their advantage, mainlyto aid recruitment. Dell, the US computer giant, hasalso created its own blog (Direct2Dell) as a means ofengaging with customer criticism. An increasing numberof organisations have recognised the impossibility ofcontrolling employees’ private blogs, but have offeredguidance and codes of practice for their workforce as a means of setting out company policy and therebysetting boundaries of acceptable behaviour. IBM, forexample has developed a set of eleven guidelines for itsstaff, some of which are summarised below:83

■ Know and follow IBM’s Business ConductGuidelines.

■ IBMers are personally responsible for their posts.■ You must make it clear that you are speaking for

yourself and not on behalf of IBM.■ Respect copyright, fair use and financial disclosure

laws.■ Don’t provide IBM’s or another’s confidential or

other proprietary information.■ Don’t use ethnic slurs, personal insults, obscenity

etc.; and show proper consideration for others’privacy and topics that may be consideredobjectionable or inflammatory such as politics andreligion.

■ Don’t pick fights, be the first to correct your ownmistakes and don’t alter previous posts withoutindicating that you have done so.

■ Try to add value. Provide worthwhile informationand perspective.

A great many organisations have seized the opportunityto communicate with staff, customers, members andothers via website-based blogs.

Organisational consequences: possibilities andchallengesIBM’s approach, the development of guidelines foremployees, is increasingly being seen as the wayforward for organisations which are concerned aboutblogging. It prevents them from appearing heavy-handed, avoids the adverse publicity that cansometimes be stirred up by a sacking, and might alsopreclude legal challenges, for instance on the grounds ofunfair dismissal, or as an attempt to curtail freedom of


295

Your tasks1 Using a basic model of expectancy theory such as that in Figure 7.8 or one of goal-setting theory such as

Locke’s (Figure 7.12) assess the various motivational forces which might be operating when employees blogabout their employer.

2 It seems that for some people, blogging about work can be viewed as a form of frustration-inducedbehaviour. Critically review the process of blogging as a method of expressing job dissatisfaction. How doyou think managers should respond to cases of work-related blogging by frustrated employees?

3 Organisational responses to employee blogs or Facebook posts outlined in the case might be categorised aseither hostile (sack and sue); accepting (control and monitor); or creative (encourage and use). For each ofthese approaches, identify some basic guidelines for handling cases such as those of Simonetti, Gordon andSanderson, bearing in mind the motivational effects that your proposals might have on both bloggers andother employees.

speech. Simonetti, Gordon and Sanderson allchallenged their dismissals using employment tribunalsor their equivalents, opening the question of thevalidity of dismissal for blogging. The existence ofcompany guidelines which have clearly been breachedby a blogger is likely to support an employer’s case fordismissal.

The UK Chartered Institute of Personnel andDevelopment considers that there are occasions whenblogging might be easily identifiable as a disciplinaryoffence but would not necessarily support a dismissal;for instance, the abuse of company equipment and timeby workers ‘blogging or tweeting on the job’ might notbe deemed to warrant dismissal by an employmenttribunal unless the post additionally caused harm to theorganisation’s reputation and interests.84 On the otherhand, disclosure of confidential information might wellbreach company data protection policies; and dismissalfor libellous or defamatory comments might stand upto the test of a tribunal. The spectre of cyber-bullying isanother concern, since social networking sites likeFacebook have the potential for defamatory andlibellous comments and even illicit recordings to beposted for circulation to a specified group. Similarly, itseems possible that if employees are using blogs to airtheir work grievances rather than using the morenormal (and in the UK statutorily required) grievanceprocedures, then they might well be risking fairdismissal. However, it is also worth considering how far disgruntled employees’ blogs indicate thatorganisational grievance procedures or other employee

feedback mechanisms (such as attitude surveys) are notoperating very successfully and that importantinformation about employee morale and jobdissatisfaction is being overlooked.

Finally it might also be necessary to consider how farblogs are acceptable as a form of whistleblowing, andwhether employees who use blogs in this way would beprotected by relevant legislation such as the PublicInterest Disclosure Act (PIDA) of 1998 in the UK. ThePIDA extends protection to whistleblowers, butnormally on the basis that they have already exhaustedinternal organisational methods of raising theirconcerns before going public. Here again, blogs mightbe of enormous value to senior managers within anorganisation whose ability to monitor the reality ofworking life in relation to aims regarding (for example)employee morale or issues of corporate socialresponsibility is limited.

The last word should perhaps go to an anonymousblogger who reported to Personnel Today magazine:

Blogging – with its potential audience of millions, is an easy way to exercise my creativity and make my viewsheard. I’m dissatisfied with my job and unhappy with theway recent restructuring and management decisions haveled to low morale, although I do not have an ‘evil boss’like the Waterstone’s employee. Most of my work-relatedmoans on my blog are minor, everyday niggles aboutannoying colleagues or the dull nature of my employment,but I am not afraid to occasionally pull out the big gunsover issues I feel passionately about.85


296

Notes and references

1 Krech, D., Crutchfield, R. S. and Ballachey, E. L. Individualin Society, McGraw-Hill (1962).

2 Mitchell, T. R. ‘Motivation: New Directions for Theory,Research, and Practice’, Academy of Management Review, vol. 7, no. 1, January 1982, pp. 80–8.

3 ‘Motivating Your Staff in a Time of Change’, Checklist 068, Chartered Management Institute, March 2006.

4 Kreitner, R., Kinicki, A. and Buelens, M. OrganizationalBehaviour, first European edition, McGraw-Hill (1999).

5 Farren, C. ‘Mastery: The Critical Advantage’, in Chowdhury, S. (ed.) Management 21C, Financial TimesPrentice Hall (2000), p. 95.

6 See, for example, Rudolph, P. A. and Kleiner, B. H. ‘The Artof Motivating Employees’, Journal of Managerial Psychology,vol. 4, no. 5, 1989, pp. i–iv.

7 Kets de Vries, M. ‘Beyond Sloan: trust is at the core ofcorporate values’ in Pickford, J. (ed.) Financial TimesMastering Management 2.0, Financial Times Prentice Hall(2001), pp. 267–70.

8 For a fuller discussion, see Mullins, L. J. HospitalityManagement and Organisational Behaviour, fourth edition,Longman (2001).

9 Weaver, T. ‘Theory M: Motivating with Money’, CornellHRA Quarterly, vol. 29, no. 3, November 1988, pp. 40–5.

10 Kusin, G. ‘A 360-Degree Spin’, Hemisphere United, October2005, p. 76.

11 Templar, R. The Rules of Management, Pearson Prentice Hall(2005), p. 66.

12 Grayson, D. and Hodges, A. Everybody’s Business: ManagingRisks and Opportunities in Today’s Global Society, FinancialTimes (2001), p. 76.

13 Gratton, L. Hot Spots, Financial Times Prentice Hall (2007),p. 133.

14 Waller, D. ‘Are You What You Do?’, Management Today,October 2008, pp. 42–6.

15 See, for example, Brown, J. A. C. The Social Psychology ofIndustry, Penguin (1954 and 1986).

16 Cited in Crainer, S. ‘Re-engineering the Carrot’,Management Today, December 1995, p. 66.

17 Maslow, A. H. ‘A Theory of Human Motivation’,Psychological Review, 50, July 1943, pp. 370–96 andMaslow, A. H. Motivation and Personality, third edition,Harper and Row (1987).

18 Steers, R. M. and Porter, L. W. Motivation and WorkBehaviour, fifth edition, McGraw-Hill (1991).

19 Saunders, A. ‘Keep Staff Sweet’, Management Today, June2003, p. 75.

20 Adair, J. Leadership and Motivation, Kogan Page (2006).21 Alderfer, C. P. Existence, Relatedness and Growth, Collier

Macmillan (1972).22 Herzberg, F., Mausner, B. and Snyderman, B. B. The

Motivation to Work, second edition, Chapman and Hall(1959).

23 Crainer, S. and Dearlove, D. (eds) Financial Times Handbookof Management, second edition, Financial Times PrenticeHall (2001), p. 361.

24 McClelland, D. C. Human Motivation, CambridgeUniversity Press (1988).

25 For examples of pictures, see Osland, J. S., Kolb, D. A. andRubin, I. M. Organizational Behaviour: An ExperimentalApproach, seventh edition, Prentice Hall (2001).

26 See, for example, Spangler, W. D. ‘Validity ofQuestionnaire and TAT Measures of Need for Achievement:Two Meta-Analyses’, Psychological Bulletin, July 1992, pp. 140–54.

27 McClelland, D. C. ‘Business Drive and NationalAchievement’, Harvard Business Review, vol. 40, July–August 1962, pp. 99–112.

28 McClelland, D. C. and Burnham, D. H. ‘Power Is the Great Motivation’, Harvard Business Review, vol. 54,March–April 1976, pp. 100–10.

29 Vroom, V. H. Work and Motivation, Wiley (1964); alsopublished by Krieger (1982).

30 Porter, L. W. and Lawler, E. E. Managerial Attitudes andPerformance, Irwin (1968).

31 Lawler, E. E. Motivation in Work Organizations, Brooks/Cole (1973).

32 Lundin, S., Paul, H. and Christensen, J. Fish: A RemarkableWay to Boost Morale and Improve Results, Hyperion Press(2001), p. 37.

33 Adams, J. S. ‘Injustice in Social Exchange’, in Berkowitz, L.(ed.) Advances in Experimental and Social Psychology,Academic Press (1965). Abridged in Steers, R. M. andPorter, L. W. Motivation and Work Behavior, second edition,McGraw-Hill (1979), pp. 107–24.

34 Werner, G., Schmittberger, R. and Schwarze, B. ‘AnExperimental Analysis of Ultimatum Bargaining’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, vol. 3, no. 4,December 1982, pp. 367–88.

35 Locke, E. A. ‘Towards a Theory of Task Motivation andIncentives’, Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,vol. 3, 1968, pp. 157–89.

36 Locke, E. A. ‘Personal Attitudes and Motivation’, AnnualReview of Psychology, vol. 26, 1975, pp. 457–80.

37 Gratton, L. Living Strategy: Putting People at the Heart ofCorporate Purpose, Financial Times Prentice Hall (2000), p. 193.

38 Hannagan, T. Management, fourth edition, Financial TimesPrentice Hall (2005), p. 363.

39 Reis, D. and Pena, L. ‘Reengineering the Motivation toWork’, Management Decision, vol. 39, no. 8, 2001, pp. 666–75.

40 ‘Motivating Your Staff in a Time of Change’, ManagementChecklist 068, Chartered Management Institute, March2006.

41 Flores, G. N. and Utley, R. ‘Management Concepts in Use – a 12-Year Perspective’, Engineering ManagementJournal, vol. 12, no. 3, September 2000, pp. 11–17.

42 Adair, J. Leadership and Motivation, Kogan Page (2006), p. 38.

43 Luthans, F. and Kreitner, R. Organisational BehaviorModification and Beyond, second edition, Scott Foresman(1985), p. 36.

44 Stajkovic, A. D. and Luthans, F. ‘Differential Effects ofIncentive Motivators on Work Performance’, Academy ofManagement Journal, vol. 44, no. 3, 2001, pp. 580–90.

45 Luthans, F., Stajkovic, A., Luthans, B. C. and Luthans, K. W.‘Applying Behavioral Management in Eastern Europe’,European Management Journal, vol. 16, no. 4, August 1998,pp. 466–74.

46 Tampoe, M. ‘Knowledge Workers – The New ManagementChallenge’, Professional Manager, November 1994, pp. 12–13.


297

47 Lucas, E. ‘Turning On the Knowledge Workers’, ProfessionalManager, May 1999, pp. 10–12.

48 ‘Managing Knowledge Workers: The HR Dimension’,Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, January 2002.

49 Whitmore, Sir J. ‘Breaking Down the Barriers toManagement Creativity’, Manager, The British Journal of Administrative Management, May/June 2002, pp. 24–6.

50 See, for example, Cheng, T., Sculli, D. and Chan, F. S.‘Relationship Dominance – Rethinking ManagementTheories from the Perspective of MethodologicalRelationalism’, Journal of Managerial Psychology, vol. 16, no. 2, 2001, pp. 97–105.

51 Francesco, A. M. and Gold, B. A. InternationalOrganizational Behavior, second edition, Pearson PrenticeHall (2005), p. 126.

52 Ibid., p. 129.53 Sledge, S., Miles, A. K. and Coppage, S. ‘What Role Does

Culture Play? A Look at Motivation and Job Satisfactionamong Hotel Workers in Brazil’, International Journal of Human Resource Management, vol. 19, no. 2, September 2008, pp. 1667–82.

54 Adler, N. J. International Aspects of Organizational Behaviour,third edition, South Western College Publishing (1997).

55 Chen, C. C. ‘New Trends in Reward Allocation Preferences:A Sino-US Comparison’, The Academy of ManagementJournal, vol. 38, no. 2, 1995, pp. 402–28.

56 Reeves, R. ‘Reality Bites’, Management Today, May 2003, p. 37.

57 Stern, S. ‘My Generation’ Management Today, March 2008,pp. 40–6.

58 Worrall, L. and Cooper, C. ‘The Quality of Working Life2007’, Chartered Management Institute, October 2007.

59 Mumford, E. ‘Job Satisfaction: A Method of Analysis’,Personal Review, vol. 20, no. 3, 1991, pp. 11–19.

60 Handy, C. ‘Boring Workplace, Boring Worker’, ManagementToday, November 1997, p. 29.

61 ‘The Workplace Survey’, Chartered Management Institute,March 2003; Myerson, J. ‘Workspace Heaven?’,Management Today, June 2003, pp. 53–61.

62 Branson, R. Losing My Virginity, Virgin Publishing (1998),pp. 431, 444.

63 De Vita, E. ‘Best Fit’, Management Today, September 2008,pp. 54–8.

64 ‘Flexible Working: The Implementation Challenge’, CIPD,October 2005, p. 6.

65 Roddick, A. Business As Unusual, Thorsons (2000), p. 70.66 Marx, K. ‘The Notion of Alienation’, in Coser, L. A. and

Rosenburg, B. Sociological Theory, Collier Macmillan(1969), pp. 505–10.

67 Blauner, R. Alienation and Freedom, University of ChicagoPress (1964).

68 Hackman, J. R. and Oldham, G. R. Work Redesign, Addison-Wesley (1980).

69 Luthans, F., Stajkovic, A., Luthans, B. C. and Luthans, K. W.‘Applying Behavioral Management in Eastern Europe’,European Management Journal, vol. 16, no. 4, August 1998,pp. 466–74.

70 Lee-Ross, D. ‘The Reliability and Rationale of Hackmanand Oldham’s Job Diagnostic Survey and JobCharacteristics Model among Seasonal Hotel Workers’,International Journal of Hospitality Management, 17, 1998,pp. 391–406.

71 Roe, R. A., Zinovieva, I. L., Dienes, E. and Ten Horn, L. A.‘A Comparison of Work Motivation in Bulgaria, Hungary and the Netherlands: Test of a Model’, AppliedPsychology: An International Review, vol. 49, 2000, pp. 658–87.

72 See, for example, Cartwright, J. Cultural Transformation,Financial Times Prentice Hall (1999).

73 See, for example, Torrington, D., Hall, L. and Taylor, S.Human Resource Management, sixth edition, Financial TimesPrentice Hall (2005).

74 Personnel Today ‘Blogging: Waste of Time or CorporateTool?’, published 21 March 2006 and available atwww.personneltoday.com (accessed 28 July 2009).

75 The Chief Constable of North Wales at http://www.north-wales.police.uk/portal/blogs/ and twoblogs by members of the London Ambulance service,Random Acts of Reality (www.randomreality.blogware.com)and Nee Naw (www.neenaw.co.uk).

76 E.g. waiterrant.net for those in the restaurant trade.77 BBC News website ‘US Blogger Fired by Her Airline’,

http://news.bbc.co.uk, dated 3 November 2004 (accessed28 July 2009).

78 Personnel Today ‘Don’t Blog Your Way into Trouble’, published 17 January 2005 and available atwww.personneltoday.com (accessed 28 July 2009).

79 The Wolamaloo Gazette, www.wolamaloo.org.uk.80 Smith-Spark, L. ‘How to Blog and Keep Your Job’, BBC

news website, http://news.bbc.co.uk 20 July 2006 (accessed 28 July 2009).

81 BBC News website ‘Crew Sacked over Facebook Posts’, 31 October 2008.

82 Watkins, D. ‘How Big Business Barged In On the Bloggers’,The Guardian, 20 March 2006.

83 For the full guidelines and discussion about how theyshould be managed, visit http://www.snellspace.com/IBM_Blogging_Policy_and_Guidelines.pdf.

84 Spencer, S. ‘Illegal Blogging’, People Management, 27 January 2005.

85 Personnel Today ‘Don’t Blog Your Way Into Trouble’,published 17 January 2005 and available atwww.personneltoday.com.

Now that you have finished reading this chapter, visit MyManagementLab atwww.pearsoned.co.uk/mymanagementlab to find more learning resourcesto help you make the most of your studies and get a better grade.INSTANT ACCESS TO INTERACTIVE LEARNING

ACADEMIC VIEWPOINT

Below you will find the title and abstract of a recent article in an academic journal which explores a topicrelevant to the chapters in Part 2.

Inkpen, A. ‘Knowledge Transfer and International Joint Ventures: The Case of NUMMI andGeneral Motors’, Strategic Management Journal, vol. 29, 2008, pp. 447–53.

AbstractUsing a case study of NUMMI, a joint venture between General Motors (GM) and Toyota, thisresearch note examines alliances and knowledge transfer with a focus on the organizational processes used to transfer knowledge. The results suggest two possible explanations for the knowledge transfer outcome. The primary explanation is that the systematic implementation of knowledge transfer mechanisms can overcome the stickiness and causal ambiguity of newknowledge. A second explanation is that creating successful knowledge transfer should be viewed from a change management perspective in which trial and error learning experiences andexperimentation support the transfer outcome.

CommentaryIdeas about organisational learning and knowledgetransfer are gaining increasing significance in a worldwhere tacit knowledge (the everyday assumptions,habits and experiences which individuals acquireduring the experience of work) often holds the key to effective performance or improvements inorganisational processes. The article describes aspecific experiment designed to promote knowledgetransfer of the ‘Toyota Production System’ (TPS) intoGeneral Motors (GM) which began in 1984. The jointventure site, a disused GM manufacturing plant inFremont, California, allowed Toyota access toexperience of managing an American workforce andgave GM the opportunity to study successfulJapanese manufacturing processes at close hand. Theexperience is described, and the problems of the initialphase (to about 1990) might seem to suggest that inthe short term the experiment was unsuccessful.However, it is also made clear that seniormanagement commitment from 1992 onwardsresulted in a better organised process, and thedevelopment of an effective network of TPS-experienced managers within GM. This network

supported the creation of a systematic knowledgetransfer process that ultimately enhanced GM’sperformance.

The article might prompt you to consider thefollowing questions.

■ What was the nature of the initial problemsencountered by the Fremont experienced managerswhen attempting to transfer their new knowledgeback into GM?

■ The article explains how the creation of a specificset of activities by the Technical Liaison Officehelped to improve the knowledge transfer process.How did these activities contribute to itseffectiveness?

■ What are the implications of the article’s findingsfor the social aspects of managing knowledgetransfer within an organisation?

■ Does knowledge transfer always have to take solong? Can anything be learned from the articlewhich would help an organisation speed up theprocess?


298

Something rather spectacular happened on 26 June2006: Warren Buffet, the world’s second wealthiestman, announced that he intended to give 85 per cent ofhis fortune to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.There, it will join the billions that Bill Gates, the world’swealthiest man, has already pledged, to make anenormous sum of money to support good worksaround the world. A few months earlier, the late Anita Roddick, who founded and built up Body ShopInternational, had announced her intention to giveaway half of her fortune. Philanthropy has long been anoble and admirable part of the capitalist tradition andnow seems to be back in the news.

Why is this sort of philanthropy of interest tostudents of organisational behaviour? Several reasonscan be suggested:

■ Firstly, of course, the wealth that is given away isoften the result of setting up and running anorganisation that successfully fulfils its purpose overa long period: the profits that flow to the owner resultfrom customers choosing and paying for its output.

■ Also, the generosity of wealthy individuals makes an interesting contrast with the more familiarconcept of ‘corporate social responsibility’, whichsometimes involves donations of company, ratherthan personal money.

■ The charitable foundations, together with theirexternal relationships, are of interest in their ownright.

The word philanthropy is derived from the Greekand is defined as ‘love of humankind; the disposition oreffort to promote the happiness of and well-being ofone’s fellow-people.1 The practice of philanthropy waswell-established before that of capitalism of course, butthe early stages of the growth of the American economysaw a significant surge in the social custom ofphilanthropy. Although it may have been no part oftheir aim, the names of some of America’s mostsignificant philanthropists are as well-known for theirgiving as for the business careers that made the money.Two celebrated examples from the same era provide aview of the way a philanthropic life can be lived.

From Carnegie and Rockefeller to Bill and MelindaGatesAndrew Carnegie (1835–1919) was born inDunfermline, Scotland. He was the son of a weaver and

the family emigrated to the United States in 1848. Likemany at that time, Carnegie started work at the age of13 doing a number of jobs until 1865, when he startedhis own business. This was to become the foundation of the steel industry in Pittsburgh and the origin ofCarnegie’s fortune. At the turn of the new century,Carnegie sold the business for $480m and spent the restof his life devoted to his philanthropic interests. Thesewere diverse, but centred around the theme of theprovision of public libraries and education.2 Over hislife, Carnegie gave away more than $350m (multiply byabout twenty for today’s values). Some of the quotesattributed to him3 show the combination of hard-nosedbusiness acumen and the strong sense of social dutythat characterises this type of philanthropist:

And while the law of competition may be sometimes hardfor the individual, it is best for the race, because itensures the survival of the fittest in every department.

Surplus wealth is a sacred trust which its possessor isbound to administer in his lifetime for the good of thecommunity.

I would as soon leave my son a curse as the almightydollar.

Philanthropy: the resurgence of personalsocial responsibility?

PART 2CASE STUDY

Bill Gates and his wife set up the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundationwith part of the personal fortune he had earned from the success ofMicrosoft.

Sou

rce:

Adr

ian

Wyl

d/A

P/P

ress

Ass

ocia

tion

Imag

es

299


300

As will be seen, similar sentiments and valuescontinue to motivate today’s philanthropists. John D.Rockefeller (1839–1937) was born in the United Statesto a farming family. In his business career, he foundedand developed the Standard Oil Company, whichbecame the leading force in the fast-growing oilindustry. At the age of 57, Rockefeller decided that heshould step aside from the day-to-day leadership ofStandard Oil and devote himself to philanthropy. Thishad been important to him from his early life, but alsobecause of his religious convictions and his approach tofinance:

I believe it is every man’s religious duty to get all he canhonestly and to give all he can.

Like Carnegie, his philanthropic interests centred oneducation, with substantial donations to found anddevelop universities and research institutes, as well asthe establishment of trusts and foundations for theimprovement of education at all levels. Over his life, hegave away some $540m.4 Again, some of the quotesattributed to the man5 show a mixture of hard-headedness and generosity that is far from sentimental:

Charity is injurious unless it helps the recipient to becomeindependent of it.

I believe that every right implies a responsibility; everyopportunity, an obligation; every possession, a duty.

The emerging philanthropists of the twenty-firstcentury have often made their money throughbusinesses that were not even heard of in the lifetimesof Carnegie and Rockefeller. Bill Gates, for example, isone of the founders of the enormously successfulMicrosoft Corporation, whose information products areabout as far from steel and oil as can be imagined. Thiscase is mainly concerned with the Bill and MelindaGates Foundation (BMGF), which was established in1994 with an initial gift of about $94m from the twofounders.6 It grew rapidly from 1999 to a value of$29.2bn by 2005, by which time a cumulative total of$10.2bn had been awarded. In 2006, it had 270employees in three offices (Seattle, Washington andDelhi).

The organisation is organised around its three mainpriorities, which are: global development; global health;and US programmes. In a letter published on theFoundation’s website,7 Bill and Melinda Gates explaintheir aims in respect of global health, pointing out thathealth is fundamental to economic development:

When health takes hold, life improves by all measures.Conversely, poor health aggravates poverty, povertydeepens disease, and nations trapped in this spiral willnot escape without the world’s help. In Africa, the cost ofmalaria in terms of treatment and lost productivity isestimated to be $12 billion a year. The continent’s gross

domestic product could be $100 billion higher today ifmalaria had been eliminated in the 1960s. And if HIVinfection rates continue at their present levels, the worldwill likely see 45 million new infections by 2010 and losenearly 70 million people by 2020. That’s 70 million ofthe most productive members of society – health workers,educators, and parents.

Therefore, the foundation’s Global Health programworks to ensure that lifesaving advances in health arecreated and shared with those who need them most. Ourprimary focus areas are HIV/AIDS, TB, malaria, childsurvival and childhood immunization, and maternal andreproductive health.

To begin, we invest heavily in research to help discovernew and better products, particularly vaccines. Thefoundation also supports work to develop products thatcan be manufactured and distributed. Then, once a product is developed, we work to make sure that thereare systems in place to adopt and sustain these new drugsas they become available. The foundation is a majorsupporter of the Global Alliance for Vaccines andImmunization (GAVI). This alliance has provided basicimmunizations to over 8 million children who would nototherwise have been immunized. As a result, GAVI hasalready saved an estimated 500,000 children’s lives.

In the world of business, as opposed tophilanthropic foundations, there has been growinginterest in recent years in the subject of corporategovernance: what the business is aiming to do and howit can be sure that its actions are consistent with thoseaims. It has been common for wealthy individuals toadopt a corporate format in making good workshappen, often by setting up and then directing adedicated foundation to look after both the strategicand operational aspects of the task. This seems toacknowledge the benefits of the corporate approach interms of efficiency and the ability to recruit and applyspecialist skills, while still retaining control by thefounder or the founding family. It is also easy toappreciate how focused and effective such anorganisation can be in pursuing the goals of thefounder, and to acknowledge the possibility that aneffective philanthropic foundation may be at least aseffective as, say, a government or international agency.

As will already be clear, some of the world’sphilanthropic foundations have multinationalcorporation-sized (even government-sized) budgets,meaning that the issue of governance is rightly of someconcern to the society within which these organisationsoperate. One does not need to be a fan of James Bondmovies to appreciate that very rich individuals usingtheir wealth to pursue their private aims is not in itselfguaranteed to be in the general interest.

In fact, foundations often go to some lengths tocommunicate their values and aims publicly. BMGF hasadopted two key values:

PART 2 CASE STUDY PHILANTHROPY: THE RESURGENCE OF PERSONAL SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

301

■ All lives – no matter where they are being led – haveequal value.

■ To whom much has been given, much is expected.

These values are the basis for fifteen principles thatguide BMGF in its operations:8

■ This is a family foundation driven by the interestsand passions of the Gates family.

■ Philanthropy plays an important but limited role.■ Science and technology have great potential to

improve lives around the world.■ We are funders and shapers – we rely on others to act

and implement.■ Our focus is clear – and limited – and prioritizes

some of the most neglected issues.■ We identify a specific point of intervention and apply

our efforts against a theory of change.■ We take risks, make big bets, and move with urgency.

We are in it for the long haul.■ We advocate – vigorously but responsibly – in our

areas of focus.■ We must be humble and mindful in our actions and

words. We seek and heed the counsel of outside voices.■ We treat our grantees as valued partners, and we treat

the ultimate beneficiaries of our work with respect.■ Delivering results with the resources we have been

given is of the utmost importance – and we seek andshare information about those results.

■ We demand ethical behaviour of ourselves.■ We treat each other as valued colleagues.■ Meeting our mission – to increase opportunity and

equity for those most in need – requires greatstewardship of the money we have available.

■ We leave room for growth and change.

As can be seen, these principles relate to the foundationin its external dealings (with other agencies, forexample, with the public in general or with its‘grantees’, i.e. recipients of aid), but also in its internalrelationships (ethical behaviour, respect andprofessional standards). BMGF is also committed inthese principles to communicating clearly what it isaiming to do and what it has achieved.

Something of the founder’s sense of responsibilitywas evident in the comments that Bill Gates made atthe announcement of Warren Buffet’s donation to theFoundation. Gates joked that there was something morescary about the possibility of making a mistake withBuffet’s money than with his own.9 These are notsentiments that politicians are often heard to express,making an interesting contrast with the mainstreamgovernment-funded approach to social projects that hascome to dominate the past fifty years.

Warren Buffet and Anita RoddickWarren Buffet’s fortune was made through the BerkshireHathaway organisation, which for many years has been

very successful in providing investment managementservices for its clients. Buffet himself is famouslymoderate in his lifestyle, with a liking for a diet ofburgers and Cherry Coke. His extraordinary wealth wasrecently augmented by his firm decision not to getinvolved in the late-90s dotcom boom and subsequentbust: his policy has always been to concentrate onbusiness fundamentals and to invest for the long term.He also has a long-standing reputation for pithy quotesand one attributed remark seemed to sum up the chaoscaused by the collapse of rapid stock market growth andthe series of corporate scandals that followed:

It’s only when the tide goes out that you can see who’sbeen swimming without their trunks on.

From remarks made by Buffet at the announcement ofhis association with the Gates Foundation,10 it seemsclear that he had been thinking about an involvementin philanthropy for some time. Some of his motivationis bound up with the American tradition ofphilanthropy by wealthy individuals, including thenotion that there is something problematic (‘almost un-American’ as he put it11) about the idea that hugewealth should result from accidents of birth. Childrenshould be left wealthy enough to do anything, but notenough to do nothing. He had also become veryimpressed by the approach taken by BMGF and by Billand Melinda themselves: the announcement coincidedwith that of the succession plans for Gates’ leadership ofMicrosoft, which will allow Gates to devote more time

The world’s most generous man? In 2006 Warren Buffet, the world’ssecond wealthiest man, promised to give 85 per cent of his fortune tosupport good works around the world.

Sou

rce:

Set

h W

enig

/AP

/Pre

ss A

ssoc

iatio

n Im

ages


302

to the Foundation. Buffet has become a trustee of theFoundation and jokingly promised at the launch not toassess Gates’ efforts more than once a day. At the samemeeting, both men acknowledged the inspirationalvalue that the news of the donation could have: onequestioner suggested that the success of organisationslike BMGF could do much to improve publicconfidence in charitable donation in general andperhaps increase the willingness of a far wider spectrumof people to give.

The decision by the UK entrepreneur Anita Roddickto join the ranks of business-based philanthropistsadded some interesting features to the discussion.Roddick was something of a business celebrity for muchof her career, having founded and built up the verysuccessful Body Shop International, a business whosemarket appeal was always strongly centred on the valuesof its founder. Its campaigns against animal testing ofcosmetics and in favour of fair trade, for example,became prominent during the 1990s. Explaining thatshe did not want to die rich, Roddick announced at theend of 2005 that she intended to give away half her£100m fortune, much of which resulted from the saleof her business to L’Oréal. This extraordinarily generousact does not register very far up the world league tableof philanthropy, but nonetheless represents a significantstep for the UK.

Anita Roddick had often been sharply critical ofsome aspects of business life in the UK, especially whereshe had assessed attitudes as being selfish and short-termist. But, in her view, the rich have to look after thepoor, and ‘I don’t think in our society we have anyunderstanding of that.’

A BBC article12 commented at the time that personalphilanthropy was less prominent in the UK than inAmerica, possibly because people in the UK regard it asa government responsibility to look after the poor, withprojects financed from general taxation and withadditional contributions from companies under theheading of ‘corporate social responsibility’. This is notto suggest that government programmes and corporatedonations are by any means unimportant in the UnitedStates, but rather to emphasise how unusual personalphilanthropy has been in the UK. The article suggestedthat personal philanthropy might be assuming greaterprominence in the UK because of a growing belief thatthe state is no longer providing an adequate safety net.Whatever the truth of this suggestion, the prospect ofmore significant philanthropic foundations in the UKwill raise some interesting questions of how public andprivate agencies can learn to work together inidentifying priorities and designing programmes ofaction to address social problems.

Corporate versus personal philanthropyMany large businesses in the UK have made significantdonations to charity from corporate funds, which maybe partly motivated by a desire for approval from somestakeholder groups. However, alongside the well-knowncompany names have been some large donations fromless prominent companies. One report in 2006,13 forexample, suggested that TCI, a leading hedge fundbusiness, had become one of the most generous UKdonors to charity, despite the very limited publicawareness of the hedge fund sector among the UKpublic. TCI seems to have been designed by its founderto generate funds for charity in this way, but othercorporate donations are made from company profits. As such, corporate philanthropy – and corporate socialresponsibility in general – has come in for criticismfrom some quarters, on the basis that it amounts to actsof generosity using other people’s money (specifically,that of the shareholders, who own the company). Theeconomist Milton Friedman has been forcefullysuggesting for some decades that business should get on with the business of business: making money for itsowners through successfully marketing products andservices within the law. From this point of view,donations to charity by individuals making choicesabout their own funds are more desirable than acts ofcorporate generosity using other people’s funds. Inreality, public opinion seems to be sympathetic towardsthe idea of corporate donations to charity, whateverscepticism may sometimes be expressed about motives.However, from any reasonable point of view, thereremains an important difference between givingpersonally and approving corporate gifts: the difference,perhaps, between signing your own and a companycheque.

Anita Roddick, founder of the Body Shop, who built a business basedon caring values, gave half of her wealth away.

Sou

rce:

Jea

n/E

mpi

cs E

nter

tain

men

t/P

ress

Ass

ocia

tion

Imag

es

PART 2 CASE STUDY PHILANTHROPY: THE RESURGENCE OF PERSONAL SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY

303

Notes and references

1 New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1993).2 http://www.carnegie.org/sub/about/biography.html (accessed 30 July 2009).3 http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/andrew_carnegie.html (accessed 30 July 2009).4 http://archive.rockefeller.edu/bio/jdrsr.php (accessed 30 July 2009).5 http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/j/john_d_rockefeller.html (accessed 30 July 2009).6 http://www.gatesfoundation.org/AboutUs/QuickFacts/Timeline/default.htm (accessed 30 July 2009).7 http://www.gatesfoundation.org/AboutUs/OurValues/GatesLetter.htm (accessed 30 July 2009).8 http://www.gatesfoundation.org/AboutUs/OurValues/GuidingPrinciples.htm (accessed 30 July 2009).9 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/27/wrich27.xml (accessed 30 July 2009).

10 See video clips at http://www.gatesfoundation.org/AboutUs/RelatedInfo/Discussion-060626.htm (accessed 30 July 2009).11 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/27/wrich27.xml (accessed 30 July 2009).12 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4524046.stm (accessed 30 July 2009).13 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5123244.stm (accessed 30 July 2009).

Your tasks■ Philanthropic foundations have often been set up to concentrate efforts in addressing particular types of

need (improving educational facilities, for example). How are these organisations likely to perform as learningorganisations and why?

■ Considering the BMGF’s statement of principles included in the case, how effective is this organisation likelyto be in attracting and harnessing a diverse range of talents and experience among its employees andpartners?

■ To some extent, philanthropic foundations are engaged in the same types of social projects as governmentagencies. How might approaches to employee motivation differ between the two types of organisation? Whatcould either type of organisation usefully learn from the other?

At a BMGF conference, Bill Gates alluded to thecelebrated work of Adam Smith, the Scottish economistwho first explained the general benefits of free marketsin identifying and providing for needs effectively andefficiently. From these ideas have come the moderneconomies that provided the context in whichorganisations like Microsoft, Berkshire Hathaway andBody Shop International can generate large amounts of wealth, mainly through providing products andservices that are attractive enough to cause people tochoose to spend their own money on them. In short,this is the main reason why recent generations have inmost cases been richer than their predecessors. Thetradition of philanthropy on the part of wealthyindividuals is by no means contrary to the desirability of free and fierce competition: rather, wealth generation and philanthropy can only go hand in hand.

What is perhaps less well known about Adam Smithis his significant contribution to moral philosophy.Perhaps the way to bring this discussion to a close iswith a quote from the beginning of Adam Smith’sTheory of Moral Sentiments, which was highlighted byBill Gates in explaining the basic importance ofphilanthropy:

How selfish soever man may be supposed, there areevidently some principles in his nature which interest himin the fortune of others and render their happinessnecessary to him though he derives nothing from it exceptthe pleasure of seeing it.

Philanthropic foundations are organisations that areinteresting in their own right, in respect of the origin oftheir funds, in their interaction with other types oforganisation and, of course, in the effects they have onthe societies within which they operate.

7 work motivation and job satisfaction

Documents

Transcript of 7 work motivation and job satisfaction