Literature review of concepts and theories of Motivation

literary productions re watch of suppositions and theories of inciteIn the fierce era of competition, organizations nowadays atomic add together 18 more(prenominal) emphasizing on the manage workforcet of Human Resources (Robert. L, 2008). Motivation a key strategy in Human Resource Management has helped pr procedureiti wizrs mostly enough to subj electroshock therapy the term Motivation for a discussion. Steers et al. (2004), maintain that employee pauperism plays a vital inditeity in the management field twain theoretically and practically. It is state that one of the key functions of human resource managing director is to ensure byplay dedication at the live onplace, which discharge only be achieved by with(predicate) demand (Petcharak, 2002).Based on these reasoning, this paper shall include uninflected and empirical studies to reveal the discrepancies and feasibility aspect of the domain, as Rai (2004) put in the premise indispensability is crucial for good exploit and indeed it is increasingly important to study what motivates employees for better performance. This section offers a review of literature, which explores the c formerlypts, types and theoretical aspects including substance and functioning theories, theories of motif work uped in early(a)(a) psychological atomic number 18as as comfortably as empirical conclusions in organizational contexts.2.1 MotivationMotivation is defined as a human psychological characteristic that join on to a soulfulnesss decimal point of commitment. It is the management function of inuencing employees fashion. (Badu, 2005)Conversely, Bartol and Martin (1998) relate motivation to the force that stimulates deportment, provide direction to air, and underlies the tendency to prevail. In former(a) wrangle individuals must be sufficiently stimulated and energetic, must retain a clear heighten on what is to be achieved, and must be automatic to commit their energy for a long period of clock time to form their aim in society to achieve goals.However, other than motivation being a force that stimulates behavior, Vroom (1964) emphasized on the voluntary actions. back up by Steers et al. (2004), Vroom (1964) defined motivation as a deal g overning choice made by personsamong alternative forms of voluntary activity. similarly Kreitner and Kinicki (2004) assumed that motivation incorporate those psychological serve welles that create the arousal, direction and pains of voluntary actions that ar goal oriented.Quite differently from the other definitions, Locke and Latham (2004) determine that motivation influence tidy sums acquisition of acquisitions and the extent to which they use their ability. jibe to the causations the concept of motivation refers to inherent factors that impel action and to extraneous factors that can act as inducements to action. The three aspects of action that motivation can affect argon direction (choice), intensity (effort), and duration (persistence). Motivation can affect some(prenominal) the acquisition of peoples skills and abilities and in like manner the extent to which they utilize their skills and abilities (Locke and Latham, 2004).In a lump shell, different originators postulate put forward the concept of motivation differently. Nonetheless(prenominal), these definitions arrive at three common aspects, that is, they ar all principally concerned with factors or events that stimulate, channel, and prolong human behavior over time (Steers et al. 2004).2.2 Intrinsic and adventitious motivationFollowing Lakhani and Wolf (2005), Lakhani and Von Hippel (2003) and Lemer and Tirole (2004), the current scholarly thinking favors a framework that call backs two components of motivation given by intrinsic and alien components. fitly, Lawler (1969) intrinsic motivation is the ground level to which feelings of esteem, growth, and competence be expected to turn outgrowth from success ful travail performance. This view bounds intrinsic motivation to an hope approach and prevision speculation which clearly indicates that intrinsic and extrinsic motivations numerate ( porters beer Lawler, 1968). barely, as per to Amabile et al. (1993) Individuals are said to be in and of itself move when they seek, interest, triumph of curiosity, self expression, or personal challenge in the work. On the other hand individuals are said to be extrinsically motivated when they engaged in the work to gain some goal that is part of the work itself. As per to the source this definition of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is ground on the individual perception of the individual perception of task and his or her reasons for savory in it. barely, Amabile et al. still argued that intrinsic motivators arise from an individuals feelings with regards to the activity and they are collectful to adhere to the work itself. Conversely, extrinsic motivators although they may be dru g-addicted on the work, they are non logically an inherent part of the work.Furthermore, in confines with the concept of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, De Charms (1968) suggest that outside rewards might break intrinsic motivation. He further proposed that individuals seek for personal causation and because of the relish to be the origin of his behavior man keeps struggling against the constraint of external forces. Thus, De Charms hypothesized that when a man perceives his behavior as originating from his own choice, he allow for value that behavior and its results but when he perceives his behavior as originating from external forces, that behavior and its results, even though identical in other esteem to behavior of his own choosing, pull up stakes be devalued. De Charms (1968) further argued that intrinsic and extrinsic motivation may interact, rather than summate that is the introduction of extrinsic rewards for the behaviors that was intrinsically rewarding may de crease rather than enhance the overall motivation. The reference argued that the introduction of an extrinsic reward put the individual in a dependent position relative to the source of the reward. The locus of causality for his behavior changes from self to the external reward and thus the individuals perception of self- surmount, free choice, and commitment deteriorate and hence do his motivation.In addition Frey (1997) note that advanced intrinsic work motivation evolving from work which is interesting leases the trust and loyalty of personal relationships and is participatory. However, under certain circumstances, intrinsic motivation can be diminished, or crowded-out by external interventions like monitoring or wage-for-performance inducing schemes. This was similarly supported by Frey and Jegen (2001) who reviewed the literature on intrinsic motivations and implant that the evidence does suggest that bonuss sometimes do crowd-out intrinsic motivations. Besides, Frey (19 97) suggests that the important involvement is whether the external intervention is in the form of a command or a reward. Commands are most controlling in the sense that they secure self-determination from the agent, while rewards might still allow autonomy of action.The maximization of employees motivation to attain the organizations goals can only be obtained through a complete understanding of motivation theories (Reid 2002). There is a wide modification of theoretical frameworks that prevail been developed in the essays to explain the issues related to motivation. Stoner, Edward and Daniel (1995) has describe two different views on motivation possibleness, given by the earliest views and the con short approach which can further be subdivided into content and serve up theories.2.3 Theories of Motivation2.3.1 The earliest views of motivationOne of the earliest views of motivation is Frederick W Taylor et al. (1911) scientific management conjecture. Taylor (1911) with reg ards to employee motivation proposed a paterna itemizationic approach to managing thespians and argued that workers are economic men and in sanctify to motivate them, workers should be remunerateing higher takes. The author too argued that the higher is the wage rate, the higher go out be the train motivation and productivity. Furthermore, Taylor points out that many payment methods were ineffective, as they did not reward efficiency and he believed that a differential piece-work incentive placement should be replaced with a piece rate incentive system (Wren, 2005). In other words workers should be paid according to the number of units produced in recount to motivate them to work.On the other hand in lineage with building on the concept of motivation Elton Mayo (1953) came up with the Human Relations approach whereby the dialect is laid on non-economic motivators. gibe to Elton Mayo (1953), if objectives of organizations are to be met, it must attempt to understand, respe ct and consider the emotions, sense of recognition and bliss that is the non-monetary ask of workers. He believed that employees are not just concern with money but to a fault they need to have their social ask to be met in order to be motivated to work. He is of view that workers enjoy interactions and managers should treat them as people who have worthwhile opinions.Furthermore, McGregor (1960) postulates Theory X and Theory Y which is based on assumptions about people and work. According to this conjecture, on that point are two types of assumption made with regards to employees whereby possibility X assumes that employees are lazy and so theory X suggests that in order to motivate employees a more dominating style of management is required. On the other hand theory Y assumes that workers enjoy work, perpetrate to objectives of the organization and willing apply self control and self directed in the pursuit of organizational objectives and therefore does not require ex ternal control.2.3.2 Content theories of motivationContent theories tend to condense on individual needs and attempt to explain the factors at heart a person that stimulate and stop behavior (Reid, 2002). According to Bassett-Jones and Lloyd (2005), content theory assume a more complex interaction between both(prenominal) internal and external factors, and explored the circumstances in which individuals react to different types of internal and external stimuli.The most well cognize content theory of motivation is the power structure of needs which has been put forward by Abraham Maslow (1943). According to Maslow, people are motivated by 5 types of needs and in order to motivate people to work more productively there is a need to offer them opportunity to satisfy those needs. He proposed that basic needs are organized in a hierarchy of prepotency and probability of carriage (Wahba and Bridwell, 1973). These needs include physiological needs, safety needs, social needs, self-es teem and self-actualization. Maslow argued that once a lower order need is fulfilled, the next train of needs in the hierarchy comes into play that is once employees satisfy the lower order needs they will next consider the next level of needs. The author further argued that unfulfilled lower needs dominate ones thinking and behavior until they are satisfied (Berl et al. 1984).However this theory has also been criticized to a bigger extent, for example Wahba and Bridwell (1973) argued that based on the ten factor analytic studies that have attempted to test Malows theory there is no clear evidence that human needs are classified into five different categories, or that these categories are organized in a special hierarchy. The authors contradict Malows proposal of marriage and points out that, none of the studies has shown all of Maslows five need categories as autarkical factors, for example some studies have showed that the self-actualization needs may emerge as an independent category. They also argued that studies have also turn out the issue of need deprivation and the domination of behavior to be different from that suggested by Maslow. Moreover results have also proved that either self-actualization or security are the least satisfied needs and social needs are the most satisfied. Therefore it is difficult to determine the general pattern of the degree of gaiety and these trends are not the same as proposed by Maslow (Wahba and Bridwell, 1973).Conversely, Alderfer (1972) in the attempt to address the short comings of Malows theory proposed an alternative to Maslows theory which he termed as the ERG theory and postulate a three level hierarchy. Alderfer grouped Maslows five categories of needs into three categories given by Existence, Relatedness and Growth. According to the author, people are motivated by these three groups of core needs and he asserted that as one level of need is satisfied another takes over but if a need is not satisfied on a co ntinuous basis, the individual may decide to give such(prenominal) a need a low priority.Nonetheless, while Maslow and Alderfer presented the concept of motivation in a hierarchy, McClelland (1961, 1971), ignored the concept of hierarchy and put forward a theory cognize as the acquired need theory that emphasize on three types of needs namely, need for affiliation, need for achievement and need for power. McClelland is of view that individuals causes are acquired through life experiences that is they are learned. According to this theory individuals induce several needs, and when these needs are activated they serve to motivate behavior and this is to the contrary of Maslows proposition of a continuous progression throughout the hierarchy of needs (Steers et al. 2004).Moreover, also put differently Herzberg et al. (1959) sought to understand how work activities and the nature of an employees business organisation influence motivation and performance. They proposed a theory that involves what they termed as motivators and hygienics factors. According to Herzberg the most crucial difference between the motivators and the hygiene factors is that the motivator factors involve psychological growth while the hygiene factors involve physical and psychological pain avoidance. The authors examined motivators and hygiene factors in the workplace and proposed that where wrinkle satisfaction was high there would be corresponding high motivation. Herzberg (1959) further argued that work motivation is influenced to a large extent by the degree to which a job is intrinsically thought-provoking and provides opportunities for recognition and reinforcement.However notwithstanding that Herbergs theory has been widely accepted by managers (e.g Latham 2007, Miner 2005, Steers and gatekeeper 1983), this theory has been criticized by many authors. For example Reid (2002) argued that the work of Herzberg is an examination of job satisfaction rather than motivation of employ ees. Reid also argued that no matter how much emphasis is laid on factors that are intrinsically rewarding, if hygiene factors such as low pay is not addressed, their full effect cannot be felt. Moreover, also Brenner et al. (1971) contradict Herzberg proposition that motivation factors increase job satisfaction and hygiene factors leads to job dissatisfaction and points out that his study and others indicated that the employees received job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction from both the make and the hygiene factors. Similarly Locke (1976) assessed Herzberg two factor theory and argued that job satisfaction and dissatisfaction result from different causes.2.3.3 Emperical studies of content theoriesZakeri et al. (1997) carried out seek in the Iranian construction industry to find out level of Maslows hierarchy of needs are the most motivate factors and whether these factors are motivating factors or just hygiene factors as proposed by Herzberg. A list of 20 factors was chosen according to Maslows classification of needs and the lists were presented to the construction crafts- men and operatives whereby Zakeri et al. (1997) found five most motivating factors in descending order namely fairness of pay, Incentive and financial rewards, on-time payment, good working facilities and safety. The authors argued that notwithstanding Herzbergs proposition that money is not a satisfier, this survey along with others proved that money is the most motivating factor.In addition Arnolds and Boshoff (2002) conducted search in a number of firms in South Africa to investigate the impact of need satisfaction on self-esteem and of self-esteem on performance innovation as suggested by Alderfer (1972). According to the empirical results, self-esteem was found as a world-shattering determinant of employee job performance and results showed that providing frontline employees opportunities to perform challenging work, allow participation and teaching them impudently things on the job will enhance their self-esteem as well as their performance intentions (Arnolds and Boshoff, 2002). The authors argued that the investigate also showed that the satisfaction of fringe benefits does not have a significant impact on performance intentions via self-esteem as an intervening multivariate and this support Herzbergs et al. (1959) theory.2.3.4 Process theories of motivationAlong with the content theories, there are also different process theories. According to Viorel et al. (2009) the content theories emphasize on specific factors that motivate workers with regards to certain necessities and aspirations, while the process theories emphasize on the processes and the psychological forces that have an impact on motivation. They start from the premise that motivation starts with the desire to do something. The process theories provide more realistic principles with regards to motivation techniques and therefore they are more useful to managers compared to content t heories (Viorel et al. 2009).Vroom (1964), in the interest to study motivation developed an alternative to the content theories which is known as the expectancy theory. Vroom suggest that there are three mental components that are considered as instigating and directing behavior and these are referred to as Valence, Instrumentality, and Expectancy. He argued that employees rationally analyze different on-the-job work behaviors and whence choose those behaviors which they believe will lead to their most valued work-related rewards and outcomes. Moreover, Porter and Lawler (1968) expanded Vrooms work to identify the role of individual differences for example employee abilities and skills and the role clarity in relating job effort to actual job performance. Porter and Lawler also explained the relationship between performance and satisfaction and argued that this relationship is negotiate by the extent and quality of the rewards that employees receive in return for their job perform ance.In addition to expectancy theory Adams (1963), developed the equity theory to clarify how employees respond cognitively and behaviorally with regards to seediness in the workplace. Adams suggested that employees develop beliefs about what constitutes a fair and equitable return for their job performance and contributions therefore employees always compare their efforts and the associated rewards with that of other employees and in case there is a situation whereby there is an element of injustice or unfairness there is an imbalance that is a perception of inequity will result. The author is therefore of view that when perception of inequity occurs the employee will get engaged in activities and do effort in order to reduce the inequity.On the other hand, quite differently Latham and Locke (1979) came up with the goal prospect theory. According to Latham (2004), the rudimentary premise of the goal setting theory is that ones conscious goals affect what one achieves. The autho r argued that this is because a goal is said to be the objective or aim of an action and having a specific goal result to amend performance. Employees with specific hard goals tend to perform better compared to those with vague goals and that a goal is a standard for assessing an individuals performance. Moreover, Latham also suggested that to the extent that the goal is met or exceeded, satisfaction increases and conversely, to the extent that performance falls short of the goal, ones satisfaction decreases. epoch content theories have tended to focus on needs of people and process theories have focused on factors motivating people, Adair (2006) have brought some new issues in the field of employee motivation and developed a new theory of motivation known as the Fifty-Fifty rule. Unlike the authors of content and process theories, Adair is of view that motivation lies both within an individual as well as external to the individual. According to the author, 50 percent of motivation lies within a person and fifty percent lies outside the person even Adair points out that this theory does not assert for the exactly fifty-fifty equaliser in the equation but it only emphasized on the brain that a considerable part of motivation lies within a person while a considerable part lies outside and beyond its control.2.3.5 Emperical studies of process theoriesWith regards to Adams Equity theory, Levine (1993) calculated wage residuals for more than 8,000 manufacturing employees. Wage residuals reect employees wages relative to employees with similar demographics and human capital in legal injury of education and training (Ambrose and Kulik, 1999). Levine found that employees with higher wage residuals reported that they were less likely to leave, were more satised with their pay, were willing to work harder than they had to, and were more committed to the organization. Therefore in line with this argument, the author pointed out that employees with low wage residuals might be expected to experience inequity or unfairness relative to similar others and exhibit negative responses.Moreover Arnolds and Boshoff (2002) conducted research in a number of South African firms whereby they analyzed the application of the expectancy theory put forward by Vroom (1964) and they argued that the satisfaction with pay and fringe benefits does not impact on the performance intentions of frontline employees because these need satisfactions do not have any esteem valence for these employees. In other words, frontline employees do not have a higher regard of themselves if they are getting enough pay to fulfill basic necessities (Arnolds and Boshoff, 2002).Besides based on the Goal Setting theory, Stanseld and Longenecker (2006) performed a study in a traditional manufacturing plant in the Midwestern USA to develop a model of efficient and effective goal setting and feedback practices for manufacturing. According to the authors the study showed that an information s ystem, facilitating goal setting and feedback can play a vital role in improving individual performance levels. Stansfield and Longenecker also found that employee motivation and performance were both improved in the study, which lead to better organizational performance and protability. The authors also argued that goal setting and feedback can create competitive advantage for manufacturers with a minimum investiture of time and capital if they implement these practices with proper coordination.2.3.6 Reinforcement TheoryB.F. mule driver (1953) compared to need and process theories, came up with a different theory known as the reinforcement theory in which he proposed that peoples behavior is dependent upon its consequences. He suggested that if consequences of behavior is positive then such behavior will be repeated and vice-versa. Skinner (1953) argued that behavior can thus be reinforced through different forms of reinforcement or rewards. According to him individuals can be in fluenced in four different ways given by positive reinforcement (a reward such as praise so that the person repeat the behavior), negative reinforcement (rewarding employees by removing unclaimed consequences), defunctness (deliberately withheld positive reinforcement to discourage unwanted behavior) and punishment (applying undesirable consequences for unwanted behaviors).Through these theories, it can be said that work motivation has been characterized by dimensions such as interesting job, ability to perform, recognition, adequate pay, and feedback on performance (Dwivedula and Bredillet, 2010). However according to Meyer et al. (2004) it is also very important to consider differences in the psychological states, or mindsets that can accompany motivation. Therefore, Meyer et al. (2004) argued that motivation theories developed in other areas of psychology render a convincing case that motivation is multidimensional.2.3.7 Adaptation-Level TheoryBowling et al. (2005) argued that the adaptation-level theory (Helson, 1948, 1964a, 1964b), offers one potential explanation for the temporal role stability of job satisfaction. Bowling explained that the theory postulates that someones evaluation of an outcome is said to be a function of previous experiences outcomes. For example, an employee who has worked for years without a pay raise would be expected to respond positively to even a small pay increase because this change in pay would be different from that individuals adaptation level, however the positive response would be temporary as the individuals adaptation level would eventually change as the experience of the pay increase is integrated into the employees adaptation level (Bowling et al. 2005).2.3.8 Self-Regulatory TheoryMoreover quite differently, Higgins (1997, 1998) proposed the regulatory focus theory that draw important differences in the processes through which individuals approach pleasure and avoid pain. Huggins proposed that individuals have two types of motivational systems given by a system that regulates rewards (promotion focus) and one that regulates punishments ( stripe focus). According to the author people who operate primarily within the promotion focus are concerned with accomplishments, are sensible towards the existence or absence of rewards, put one over a goal attainment strategy, are more creative and are more willing to take risks. However, people who operate within the prevention focus tend to be more concerned with duties and responsibilities and are more sensitive to the existence or absence of punishments. Moreover the regulatory focus is ascertained both by situational and chronic factors (Higgins, 1997, 1998).2.3.9 Activation theoryOn the other hand Anderson (1976, 1983) came up with the energizing theory whereby he argued that the strongest motivating factor is the work itself however over time as the worker get used with the surround and learns the responses required in the repetitive task there ma y be a fall in the activation level or job stimulation. It is important to highlight that over time all work tends to become repetitive after the job has been estimable and therefore a wide range of dysfunctional and non-task activities must be pursued to offset the fall in the job stimulation level (Milbourn 1984). Moreover according to Milbourn (1984), if dysfunctional activities are addressed, managers can consider enriching jobs through job redesign to reduce monotony at work in order to maintain job stimulation.2.4 Motivational practices in Organizational environmentAccording to Islam and Ismail (2008) the theories mentioned continue to offer the foundation for organization and managerial victimisation practices to a large extent. Along with the above theories, during the last decade, based on employees motivation many empirical studies have been carried out (Islam and Ismail, 2008). For example, Bent et al. (1999) carried out research in small food manufacturing businesses w hereby respondents were asked to complete, using a five-point Likert plate about how they felt motivated and then how satisfied they were with their jobs and the authors found that the degree of positive motivation was high. According to Bent et al. (1999) the employees were either very or moderately motivated with their jobs, however it was important to note that no respondents verbalize that they were either very motivated or very dissatisfied with their job. The authors also argued that issues which are associated with individual management style include lack of admiration from management to feel for the work of employees and that there was also poor communicating contributing to low job satisfaction and this contrasts with the identification by employees, of the motivating or satisfying qualities of a good management style.Moreover Vaitkuvien- (2010) conducted research in two Swedish manufacturing companies given by, the company Frilight AB and Enitor Plast AB and reported tha t the workers were found satisfied with the working conditions, training of staffs and career opportunities. The author argued that the Swedish employees were motivated and that the employees do not avoid responsibilities and follow directions. Vaitkuvien- (2010) also found that almost all employees are stimulated with the organizing of recreational tours, holidays and events. According to the author more than half of employees in the Sweden manufacturing companies are stimulated through gifts on various occasions (birthdays, holidays), free meals at work, health insurance coverage, work, clothes, equipment, travels for the company employees, days off, recognition and good working conditions and therefore the author pointed out that the employees of the manufacturing companies consider non-financial motivation tools to be more important.Eventually, Dwivedula and Bredillet (2010), in line with the authors Cummings and Blumberg (1987) pointed out that studies from the manufacturing s ector emphasize on the importance of providing autonomy, and skill variety to the employees which are otherwise absent. On the other hand Adler (1991) observe and concluded that manufacturing firms rely on job rotation, and voluntary job shifting to motivate the employees. Moreover, Galia (2008) supported by Dwivedula and Bredillet (2010) reported that more recently it has been discover that, in a survey of 5000 manufacturing rms by SESSI (Industrial Statistics Department of the French Ministry of Economics, Finance, and Industry), practices such as autonomy at work, incentives to promote creativity have been widely adopted in order to motivate the workers.