Motivation and Prentice Hall

Fundamentals of Organizational Behavior, 10/e Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge Chapter 5 Motivation Concepts Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-1 After examining this section, you ought to have the option to: 1. Depict the three key components of inspiration. 2. Recognize four early hypotheses of inspiration and assess their materialness today. 3. Thoroughly analyze objective setting hypothesis and selfefficacy hypothesis. 4. Exhibit how hierarchical equity is a refinement of value hypothesis. 5. Apply the key precepts of anticipation hypothesis to inspiring representatives. . Disclose to what degree inspiration hypotheses are culture bound. Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-2 What Is Motivation? The procedures that represents an individual’s force, course, and perseverance of exertion toward accomplishing a hierarchical objective ? Power †the measure of exertion set forth to meet the objective ? Heading †endeavors are directed toward authoritative objectives ? Steadiness †to what extent the exertion is kept up Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-3 Early Theories of Motivation Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory †¢ McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y †¢ Herzberg’s Two-Factor (Motivation-Hygiene) Theory †¢ McClellan’s Theory of Needs (Three Needs Theory) Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-4 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory Self-Actualization Upper Esteem Social Safety Psychological 5-5 Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall Lower Douglas McGregor’s X and Y Theory X Theory Y †¢ Inherent abhorrence for work and will endeavor to maintain a strategic distance from it †¢ Must be forced, controlled or undermined with discipline View fill in as being as normal as rest or play †¢ Wi ll practice self-course and restraint whenever focused on destinations 5-6 Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory Not Dissatisfied Satisfied Motivation Factors †¢ Quality of management †¢ Pay †¢ Company strategies †¢ Physical working conditions †¢ Relationships †¢ Job security Hygiene Factors †¢ Promotional open doors †¢ Opportunities for self-awareness †¢ Recognition †¢ Responsibility †¢ Achievement Dissatisfied Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall Not Satisfied 5-7 McClelland's Theory of Needs †¢ Need for Achievement (nAch) The drive to exceed expectations †¢ Need for Power (nPow) The need to cause others to carry on in a manner they would not have acted in any case †¢ Need for Affiliation (nAff) The longing for benevolent and close relational connections Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-8 McClelland's High Achievers †¢ High achievers incline toward occupations with: ? Moral duty ? Input ? Moderate level of hazard (50/50) †¢ High achievers are not really acceptable supervisors High nPow and low nAff is identified with administrative achievement Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-9 Contemporary Theories of Motivation †¢ Cognitive Evaluation Theory †¢ Goal-Setting Theory ? The executives by Objectives †¢ Self-Efficacy Theory †¢ Equity Theory †¢ Expectancy Theory Copyrig ht  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-10 Cognitive Evaluation Theory †¢ Proposes that the presentation of outward compensations for work (pay) that was beforehand naturally remunerating will in general diminishing by and large inspiration Verbal prizes increment inherent inspiration, while unmistakable prizes sabotage it Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-11 Goal-Setting Theory †¢ Goals increment execution when the objectives are: ? Explicit ? Troublesome, yet acknowledged by representatives ? Joined by criticism (particularly selfgenerated input) †¢ Contingencies in objective setting hypothesis: ? Objective Commitment †open objectives better! ? Errand Characteristics †basic and natural better! ? National Culture †Western culture suits best! Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-12 Management by Objectives (MBO) †¢ Converts in general authoritative targets into explicit goals for work units and people †¢ Common fixings: ? ? ? ? Objective particularity Explicit timeframe Performance criticism Participation in dynamic 5-13 Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall Self-Efficacy or Social Learning Theory Individual’s conviction that the person in question is equipped for playing out an assignment Self-adequacy expanded by: ? Enactive authority †gain experience ? Vicarious displaying †see another person carry out the responsibility ? Verbal influence †somebody persuades you that you have the right stuff ? Excitement †get invigorated Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-14 Equity Theory †¢ Employees weigh what they put into an occupation circumstance (contribution) against what they get from it (result). †¢ They contrast their info result proportion and the information result proportion of applicable others. My Output My Input Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall Your Output Your Input 5-15 Equity Theory and Reactions to Inequitable Pay Employee responses in contrast with fairly paid representatives Employees are: Paid by: Piece Time Will create more Produce less yield or yield of more unfortunate quality 5-16 Will deliver Over-Rewarded less, however higherquality units Produce huge Undernumber of low Rewarded quality units Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall Equity Theory: Forms of Justice Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-17 Expectancy Theory Three key connections: 1. Exertion Performance: saw likelihood that applying exertion prompts effective execution 2. Execution Reward: the conviction that fruitful presentation prompts wanted result 3. Prizes Personal Goals: the engaging quality of hierarchical result (reward) to the individual Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-18 Global Implications Are inspiration hypotheses culture-bound? ? ? ? ? Most were produced for and by the United States Goal-setting and anticipation hypotheses accentuate objective achievement and sound individual idea Maslow’s Hierarchy may change request McClelland's nAch surmises acknowledgment of a moderate level of hazard worry for execution Equity hypothesis intently attached to American compensation rehearses Hertzberg’s two-factor hypothesis accomplishes appear to work across societies 5-19 ? Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall Implications for Managers †¢ Look past need speculations Goal setting prompts higher efficiency Organizational equity has bolster Expectancy hypothesis is a useful asset, yet may not exceptionally sensible sometimes †¢ Goal- setting, authoritative equity, and anticipation speculations all give handy proposals to inspiration Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-20 Keep in Mind†¦ †¢ Make objectives explicit and troublesome †¢ Motivation can be expanded by bringing mployee certainty up in their own capacities (self-viability) choices, particularly when the result is probably going to be seen contrarily 5-21 †¢ Openly share data on portion Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall Summary 1. Portrayed the three key components of inspiration. 2. Distinguished four early hypotheses of inspiration and assessed their appropriateness today. 3. Thoroughly analyzed objective setting hypothesis and self-adequacy hypothesis. 4. Exhibited how authoritative equity is a refinement of value hypothesis. 5. Applied the key principles of hope hypothesis to inspiring workers. 6. Disclosed to what degree inspiration speculations are culture bound. Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-22 All rights saved. No piece of this distribution might be duplicated, put away in a recovery framework, or transmitted, in any structure or using any and all means, electronic, mechanical, copying, recording, or something else, without the earlier composed consent of the distributer. Imprinted in the United States of America. Copyright  ©2010 Pearson Education, Inc. Distributing as Prentice Hall 5-23