Motivation theories

1)​ Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs

●​ Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a motivational theory in psychology comprising a five-tier

model of human needs, often depicted as hierarchical levels within a pyramid.

●​ Needs lower down in the hierarchy must be satisfied before individuals can attend to
needs higher up.

●​ From the bottom of the hierarchy upwards, the needs are: physiological, safety, love
and belonging, esteem, and self-actualization.

The original hierarchy of needs five-stage model includes:

Our most basic need is for physical survival, and this will be the first thing that motivates our
behavior. Once that level is fulfilled the next level up is what motivates us, and so on.

1.​ Physiological needs - these are biological requirements for human survival, e.g. air, food,
drink, shelter, clothing, sleep.

If these needs are not satisfied the human body cannot function optimally. Maslow considered
physiological needs the most important as all the other needs become secondary until these
needs are met.

2.​Safety needs - protection from elements, security, order, law, stability, freedom from fear.

3.​ Love and belongingness needs - after physiological and safety needs have been fulfilled,
the third level of human needs is social and involves feelings of belongingness. The need for
interpersonal relationships motivates behavior

Examples include friendship, intimacy, trust, and acceptance, receiving and giving affection and
love. Affiliating, being part of a group (family, friends, work).

4.​ Esteem needs - which Maslow classified into two categories: (i) esteem for oneself
(dignity, achievement, mastery, independence) and (ii) the desire for reputation or respect from
others (e.g., status, prestige).

Maslow indicated that the need for respect or reputation is most important for children and
adolescents and precedes real self-esteem or dignity.
5.​ Self-actualization needs - realizing personal potential, self-fulfillment, seeking
personal growth and peak experiences. A desire “to become everything one is capable of
becoming”
This theory, also called the Motivation-Hygiene Theory or the dual-factor theory, was penned
by Frederick Herzberg in 1959. This American psychologist, who was very​ interested​ in
people’s motivation and job satisfaction, came up with the theory. He conducted his research
by asking a group of people about their good and bad experiences at work. He was surprised
that the group answered questions about their good experiences very differently from the ones

Based on this, he developed the theory that people’s job satisfaction depends on two kinds of
factors. Factors for satisfaction (motivators/satisfiers) and factors for dissatisfaction (hygiene
factors/ dissatisfiers).

Performance, recognition, job status, responsibility and opportunities for growth all fall under
motivators/ satisfiers.

Hygiene factors/dissatisfiers are about salary, secondary working conditions, the relationship
with colleagues, physical work place and the relationship between supervisor and employee.

In his theory, Herzberg claims these factors function on the same plane. In other words,
satisfaction and dissatisfaction aren’t polar opposites. Taking away an employee’s dissatisfaction
– for example by offering a higher salary – doesn’t necessarily mean the employee will then be
satisfied. The employee is just no longer dissatisfied.

4 different combinations can exist at work:

1: High hygiene and high motivation

This is the ideal situation. Employees are very motivated and barely have any complaints.

2: High hygiene and low motivation

Employees have few complaints, but they’re not really motivated, they see their work simply as
a pay check.
3: Low hygiene and high motivation

Employees are motivated, their job is challenging, but they have complaints about salary or
work conditions.

4: Low hygiene and low motivation

This is the worst possible situation, employees are not motivated and have a lot of complaints.

Need theory, also known as Three Needs Theory, proposed by psychologist David McClelland, is
a motivational model that attempts to explain how the needs for achievement, power, and
affiliation affect the actions of people from a managerialcontext​
Need for achievement

They prefer working on tasks of moderate difficulty, prefer work in which the results are based
on their effort rather than on anything else, and prefer to receive feedback on their work.
Achievement based individuals tend to avoid both high-risk and low-risk situations. Low-risk
situations are seen as too easy to be valid and the high-risk situations are seen as based more
on the luck of the situation rather than the achievements that individual made.[3] This
personality type is motivated by accomplishment in the workplace and an employment
hierarchy with promotional positions.[4]

Need for affiliation

People who have a need for affiliation prefer to spend time creating and maintaining social
relationships, enjoy being a part of groups, and have a desire to feel loved and accepted. People
in this group tend to adhere to the norms of the culture in that workplace and typically do not
 change the norms of the workplace for fear of rejection. This person favors collaboration over
competition and does not like situations with high risk or high uncertainty. People who have a
need for affiliation work well in areas based on social interactions like customer service or client
interaction positions.[3]

Need for power

People in this category enjoy work and place a high value on discipline. The downside to this
motivational type is that group goals can become zero-sum in nature, that is, for one person to
win, another must lose. However, this can be positively applied to help accomplish group goals
and to help others in the group feel competent about their work. A person motivated by this
need enjoys status recognition, winning arguments, competition, and influencing others. With
this motivational type comes a need for personal prestige, and a constant need for a better
personal status.[4]

4. Vroom expectancy motivation theory

Vroom's expectancy theory assumes that behavior results from conscious choices among
alternatives whose purpose it is to maximize pleasure and to minimize pain. Vroom realized that
an employee's performance is based on individual factors such as personality, skills, knowledge,
experience and abilities. He stated that effort, performance and motivation are linked in a
person's motivation. He uses the variables Expectancy, Instrumentality and Valence to account
for this.

Motivation = Valence*Expectancy*Instrumentality

Expectancy is the belief that increased effort will lead to increased performance i.e. if I work
harder then this will be better. This is affected by such things as:

1.​ Having the right resources available (e.g. raw materials, time)
2.​ Having the right skills to do the job
3.​ Having the necessary support to get the job done (e.g. supervisor support, or
correct information on the job)

Instrumentality is the belief that if you perform well that a valued outcome will be received.
The degree to which a first level outcome will lead to the second level outcome. i.e. if I do a
good job, there is something in it for me. This is affected by such things as:
1.​ Clear understanding of the relationship between performance and outcomes – e.g. the rules
of the reward 'game'
2.​ Trust in the people who will take the decisions on who gets what outcome
3.​ Transparency of the process that decides who gets what outcome
 Valence is the importance that the individual places upon the expected outcome. For the
valence to be positive, the person must prefer attaining the outcome to not attaining it. For
example, if someone is mainly motivated by money, he or she might not value offers of
additional time off.

At first glance expectancy theory would seem most applicable to a traditional-attitude work
situation where how motivated the employee is depends on whether they want the reward on
offer for doing a good job and whether they believe more effort will lead to that reward.

However, it could equally apply to any situation where someone does something because they
expect a certain outcome. For example, I recycle paper because I think it's important to
conserve resources and take a stand on environmental issues (valence); I think that the more
effort I put into recycling the more paper I will recycle (expectancy); and I think that the more
paper I recycle then less resources will be used (instrumentality)

Thus, Vroom's expectancy theory of motivation is not about self-interest in rewards but about
the associations people make towards expected outcomes and the contribution they feel they
can make towards those outcomes.

5.Adam's Equity Theory (1963)

Core Idea:​
People are motivated by fairness in the workplace. When they perceive an imbalance between their inputs and
outputs compared to others, it affects their motivation.

Key Components:

●​ Inputs: What the employee contributes to the job (e.g., effort, skill, experience, education).

●​ Outputs (Outcomes): What the employee receives in return (e.g., salary, benefits, recognition, promotions).
●​ Comparison: Employees compare their input-output ratio with that of a "referent" person or group.

Perceptions of Equity:

●​ If employees perceive equity, they are likely to be satisfied and motivated.

●​ If employees perceive inequity, they may feel:

o​ Under-rewarded, leading to dissatisfaction, frustration, or decreased performance.

o​ Over-rewarded, which may cause guilt or discomfort, although this reaction is less common.

Typical Responses to Perceived Inequity:

●​ Reducing inputs (working less).

●​ Demanding increased outputs (asking for a raise).

●​ Changing the perception of self or others.

●​ Changing the referent person for comparison.

●​ Leaving the organization.

6.McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y (1960)

Core Idea:​
Douglas McGregor proposed two contrasting theories about employee motivation and behavior at work, which
influence management styles.

Theory X (Authoritarian Approach):

Assumes that employees:

●​ Dislike work and will avoid it if possible.

●​ Require close supervision and control.

●​ Avoid responsibility and prefer direction.

●​ Are motivated primarily by money and job security.

Management style under Theory X tends to be strict, controlling, and directive.

Theory Y (Participative Approach):

Assumes that employees:

●​ Find work as natural as play or rest.

●​ Are capable of self-direction and self-control.

●​ Accept and even seek responsibility.

●​ Are motivated by internal factors such as fulfillment, autonomy, and purpose.

Management style under Theory Y is more democratic, trust-based, and empowering.