Assignment Support Materials
Prentice Hall
Boston Columbus Indianapolis New York San Francisco Upper Saddle River
Amsterdam Cape Town Dubai London Madrid Milan Munich Paris Montreal Toronto
Delhi Mexico City Sao Paulo Sydney Hong Kong Seoul Singapore Taipei Tokyo
Editorial Director: Sally Yagan
Editor in Chief: Eric Svendsen
Acquisitions Editor: Kim Norbuta
Director of Editorial Services: Ashley Santora
Editorial Project Manager: Claudia Fernandes
Editorial Assistant: Carter Anderson
Director of Marketing: Patrice Lumumba Jones
Marketing Manager: Nikki Ayana Jones
Marketing Assistant: Ian Gold
Senior Managing Editor: Judy Leale
Senior Operations Supervisor: Arnold Vila
Design Development Manager: John Christiana
Art Director: Kathryn Foot
Text and Cover Designer: Kathryn Foot
Photo Development Editor: Nancy Moudry
Editorial Media Project Manager: Denise Vaughn
MyLab Product Manager: Joan Waxman
Media Project Manager: Lisa Rinaldi
Full-Service Project Management: Sharon
Anderson/BookMasters, Inc.
Composition: Integra Software Services
Printer/Binder: Quebecor World Color/Versailles
Cover Printer: Lehigh-PhoenixColor/Hagerstown
Text Font: 10/12 TimesNewRoman
Credits and acknowledgments borrowed from other sources and reproduced, with permission, in this textbook
appear on appropriate page within text.
Copyright © 2012, 2009, 2007, 2005, 2003 Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as Prentice Hall, One Lake
Street, Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458. All rights reserved. Manufactured in the United States of
America. This publication is protected by copyright, and permission should be obtained from the publisher prior
to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means,
electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or likewise. To obtain permission(s) to use material from this
work, please submit a written request to Pearson Education, Inc., Permissions Department, One Lake Street,
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey 07458.
Many of the designations by manufacturers and sellers to distinguish their products are claimed as trademarks.
Where those designations appear in this book, and the publisher was aware of a trademark claim, the
designations have been printed in initial caps or all caps.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Robbins, Stephen P.
Management / Stephen P. Robbins, Mary Coulter. — 11th ed.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-0-13-216384-2
1. Management. I. Coulter, Mary K. II. Title.
HD31.R5647 2012
658—dc22
2010035514
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
ISBN 10:
0-13-216384-5
ISBN 13: 978-0-13-216384-2
Motivating
Employees
16.1
16.2
16.3
16.4
Define
motivation.
page 430
Compare and
contrast early
theories of
motivation.
page 431
Compare and
contrast
contemporary
theories of
motivation.
page 435
Discuss current
issues in
motivation.
page 445
LEARNING OUTCOMES
WORST PART OF MY JOB:
The feeling of defeat when my team and I do not meet our sales goal. Achieving
our sales goal can be difficult. The key is to motivate team members with incentives
that keep them pushing to achieve the goal.
BEST MANAGEMENT ADVICE EVER RECEIVED:
Be a leader and not a boss. It is important to set the tone for your expectations
and lead by example. This advice has made me successful.
429
A Manager’s Dilemma
Ministers.
Embassies.
physical fitness and well-being of its 100 employees.”At
These are the interesting “names”
Customers.
the company’s Novato, California, headquarters and
given to employees, customers, and
its Nashville, Illinois, warehouse, employees now have
retailers at gourmet tea company
access to a full-time nutritionist, on-site health screen-
Republic of Tea.1 Like many compa-
ings, and a $500 credit that can be used for gym
nies, big and small, Republic of Tea
memberships or health plans such as Weight Watch-
struggled through the economic re-
ers. With a workday walking program,employees are
cession. As the crisis intensified,“CEO
encouraged to take 10- to 15-minute walks. Some
Ron Rubin sat in his office and asked
might consider Rubin’s ideas silly, but he believes that
himself, What more can we do to
if you take care of your employees, they will take care
help our ministers?” The answer was
of your business.Although Ron Rubin has tried to make
as unexpected as the question that
Republic of Tea a better place to work for his employ-
prompted it.
ees during a challenging period, what other things
Within weeks, the company rolled
could he do?
out a program called “Healthy Ministry,
dedicated to improving the health,
What Would You Do?
Successful managers, like Ron Rubin, understand that what motivates them personally may
have little or no effect on others. Just because you’re motivated by being part of a cohesive
work team, don’t assume everyone is. Or just because you’re motivated by your job doesn’t
mean that everyone is. Effective managers who get employees to put forth maximum effort
know how and why those employees are motivated and tailor motivational practices to satisfy their needs and wants.
LEARNING OUTCOME
Define motivation.
430
16.1
What Is Motivation?
According to LinkedIn Corporation, a Web site that provides networking for more than
65 million professionals, “ninja” has far outpaced the growth of other trendy job titles.2
Although most individuals using that title are computer programmers—who attack writing code like a ninja, with tons of tools available to do battle—the term also has been
used to describe expertise in everything from customer service to furniture movers. For instance, in Salt Lake City, one business owner sells the services of “ninja workers” who will
do everything from hauling junk to personal security to house-sitting. And at Bonobos,
Inc., a New York City start-up that makes and sells men’s apparel online, customerservice employees are also called ninjas. Why would a job title matter to employees?
Many people, especially the young and young-at-heart, like vivid and unusual titles that
celebrate their hard work. And ninja, like other popular job titles before it (guru, evangelist, or even sandwich artist) shows employees that their efforts aren’t plain and ordinary,
but are appreciated.
Would you ever have thought that a job title might be motivating? Have you ever
thought about to how to motivate someone? It’s an important topic in management and researchers have long been interested in it.3 All managers need to be able to motivate their
employees, which first requires understanding what motivation is. Let’s begin by pointing
out what motivation is not. Why? Because many people incorrectly view motivation as a
personal trait; that is, they think some people are motivated and others aren’t. Our knowledge of motivation tells us that we can’t label people that way because individuals differ
in motivational drive and their overall motivation varies from situation to situation. For
instance, you’re probably more motivated in some classes than in others.
Motivation refers to the process by which a person’s efforts are energized, directed,
and sustained toward attaining a goal.4 This definition has three key elements: energy,
direction, and persistence.5
CHAPTER 16
|
MOTIVATING EMPLOYEES
The energy element is a measure of intensity, drive, and vigor. A motivated person puts
forth effort and works hard. However, the quality of the effort must be considered as well
as its intensity. High levels of effort don’t necessarily lead to favorable job performance unless the effort is channeled in a direction that benefits the organization. Effort that’s directed
toward, and consistent with, organizational goals is the kind of effort we want from employees. Finally, motivation includes a persistence dimension. We want employees to persist in
putting forth effort to achieve those goals.
Motivating high levels of employee performance is an important organizational concern and managers keep looking for answers. For instance, a Gallup poll found that a large
majority of U.S. employees—some 73 percent—are not excited about their work. As the
researchers stated, “These employees have essentially ‘checked out.’ They’re sleepwalking through their workday, putting time, but not energy or passion, into their work.”6 It’s no
wonder then that both managers and academics want to understand and explain employee
motivation.
Early Theories of Motivation
Motivating employees is important
because it contributes to positive team
morale.
16.2
We begin by looking at four early motivation theories: Maslow’s hierarchy of needs,
McGregor’s theories X and Y, Herzberg’s two-factor theory, and McClelland’s threeneeds theory. Although more valid explanations of motivation have been developed, these
early theories are important because they represent the foundation from which contemporary motivation theories were developed and because many practicing managers still
use them.
431
LEARNING OUTCOME
Compare and contrast early
theories of motivation.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory
Having a car to get to work is a necessity for many workers. When two crucial employees
of Vurv Technology in Jacksonville, Florida, had trouble getting to work, owner Derek
Mercer decided to buy two inexpensive used cars for the employees. He said, “I felt that they
were good employees and a valuable asset to the company.” One of the employees who got
Intel managers understand employee needs and
their impact on motivation. The company helps
satisfy the social needs of its young workforce in
Vietnam, where more than half of the population is
under the age of 25. Intel provides opportunities for
its young employees, who love American culture, to
have fun with their coworkers during work breaks as
ways to satisfy their needs for belongingness and
friendship. Recognizing that its employees are eager
to learn western ways of doing business and have a
strong drive for self-development and achievement,
Intel offers them training programs for personal
growth and career development to satisfy their
esteem and self-actualization needs.
motivation
The process by which a person’s efforts are
energized, directed, and sustained toward
attaining a goal
432 PART FIVE
|
LEADING
one of the cars said, “It wasn’t the nicest car. It wasn’t the prettiest car. But boy did my overwhelming feeling of dread go from that to enlightenment. The 80-hour weeks we worked
after that never meant anything. It was give and take. I was giving and the company was
definitely giving back.”7 Derek Mercer understands employee needs and their impact on
motivation. The first motivation theory we’re going to look at addresses employee needs.
The best-known theory of motivation is probably Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of
needs theory.8 Maslow was a psychologist who proposed that within every person is a
hierarchy of five needs:
1. Physiological needs: A person’s needs for food, drink, shelter, sex, and other physical requirements.
2. Safety needs: A person’s needs for security and protection from physical and
emotional harm, as well as assurance that physical needs will continue to be met.
3. Social needs: A person’s needs for affection, belongingness, acceptance, and
friendship.
4. Esteem needs: A person’s needs for internal esteem factors such as self-respect,
autonomy, and achievement and external esteem factors such as status, recognition,
and attention.
5. Self-actualization needs: A person’s needs for growth, achieving one’s potential,
and self-fulfillment; the drive to become what one is capable of becoming.
Maslow argued that each level in the needs hierarchy must be substantially satisfied before
the next need becomes dominant. An individual moves up the needs hierarchy from one level
to the next. (See Exhibit 16-1.) In addition, Maslow separated the five needs into higher and
lower levels. Physiological and safety needs were considered lower-order needs; social,
esteem, and self-actualization needs were considered higher-order needs. Lower-order needs
are predominantly satisfied externally while higher-order needs are satisfied internally.
How does Maslow’s theory explain motivation? Managers using Maslow’s hierarchy
to motivate employees do things to satisfy employees’ needs. But the theory also says that
once a need is substantially satisfied, an individual is no longer motivated to satisfy that
need. Therefore, to motivate someone, you need to understand what need level that person
is on in the hierarchy and focus on satisfying needs at or above that level.
Maslow’s need theory was widely recognized during the 1960s and 1970s, especially
among practicing managers, probably because it was intuitively logical and easy to understand. But Maslow provided no empirical support for his theory, and several studies that
sought to validate it could not.9
McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y
Andy Grove, cofounder of Intel Corporation and now a senior advisor to the company, was
known for being open with his employees. However, he was also known for his tendency to yell.
Intel’s current CEO, Paul Otellini said, “When Andy was yelling at you, it wasn’t because he
didn’t care about you. He was yelling at you because he wanted you to do better.”10 Although
managers like Andy Grove want their employees to do better, that approach might not have
been the best way to motivate employees as McGregor’s Theory X and Theory Y suggest.
EXHIBIT
16-1
Maslow’s Hierarchy
of Needs
Source: Abraham H. Maslow, Robert
D. Frager, Robert D., and James Fadiman,
Motivation and Personality, 3rd Edition,
© 1987. Adapted by permission of
Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle
River, NJ.
SelfActualization
Esteem
Social
Safety
Physiological
CHAPTER 16
|
MOTIVATING EMPLOYEES
433
Douglas McGregor is best known for proposing two assumptions about human nature:
Theory X and Theory Y.11 Very simply, Theory X is a negative view of people that assumes
workers have little ambition, dislike work, want to avoid responsibility, and need to be
closely controlled to work effectively. Theory Y is a positive view that assumes employees
enjoy work, seek out and accept responsibility, and exercise self-direction. McGregor believed that Theory Y assumptions should guide management practice and proposed that participation in decision making, responsible and challenging jobs, and good group relations
would maximize employee motivation.
Unfortunately, no evidence confirms that either set of assumptions is valid or that being a
Theory Y manager is the only way to motivate employees. For instance, Jen-Hsun Huang,
founder of Nvidia Corporation, an innovative and successful microchip manufacturer, has been
known to use both reassuring hugs and tough love in motivating employees. But he has little tolerance for screw-ups. “In one legendary meeting, he’s said to have ripped into a project team
for its tendency to repeat mistakes. ‘Do you suck?’ he asked the stunned employees. ‘Because
if you suck, just get up and say you suck.’”12 His message, delivered in classic Theory X style,
was that if you need help, ask for it. It’s a harsh approach, but in this case, it worked.
Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory
Frederick Herzberg’s two-factor theory (also called motivation-hygiene theory) proposes
that intrinsic factors are related to job satisfaction, while extrinsic factors are associated with
job dissatisfaction.13 Herzberg wanted to know when people felt exceptionally good (satisfied)
or bad (dissatisfied) about their jobs. (These findings are shown in Exhibit 16-2.) He concluded that the replies people gave when they felt good about their jobs were significantly
different from the replies they gave when they felt badly. Certain characteristics were consistently related to job satisfaction (factors on the left side of the exhibit), and others to job
EXHIBIT
Motivators
Hygiene Factors
• Achievement
• Recognition
• Work Itself
• Responsibility
• Advancement
• Growth
• Supervision
• Company Policy
• Relationship with
Supervisor
• Working Conditions
• Salary
• Relationship with Peers
• Personal Life
• Relationship with
Subordinates
• Status
• Security
Extremely Satisfied
Neutral
16-2
Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory
Source: Based on F. Herzberg,
B. Mausner, and B. B. Snyderman,
The Motivation to Work (New York:
John Wiley, 1959).
Extremely Dissatisfied
hierarchy of needs theory
esteem needs
Theory Y
Maslow’s theory that human needs—
physiological, safety, social, esteem, and selfactualization—form a sort of hierarchy
A person’s needs for internal factors such as selfrespect, autonomy, and achievement, and
external factors such as status, recognition, and
attention
The assumption that employees are creative,
enjoy work, seek responsibility, and can exercise
self-direction
physiological needs
A person’s needs for food, drink, shelter, sexual
satisfaction, and other physical needs
safety needs
A person’s needs for security and protection
from physical and emotional harm
social needs
A person’s needs for affection, belongingness,
acceptance, and friendship
self-actualization needs
A person’s need to become what he or she is
capable of becoming.
Theory X
The assumption that employees dislike work, are
lazy, avoid responsibility, and must be coerced
to perform
two-factor theory (motivation-hygiene
theory)
The motivation theory that intrinsic factors are
related to job satisfaction and motivation,
whereas extrinsic factors are associated with job
dissatisfaction
434 PART FIVE
EXHIBIT
|
LEADING
16-3
Traditional View
Contrasting Views of
Satisfaction–Dissatisfaction
Satisfied
Dissatisfied
Herzberg’s View
Motivators
Satisfaction
No Satisfaction
Hygiene Factors
No Dissatisfaction
Dissatisfaction
dissatisfaction (factors on the right side). When people felt good about their work, they tended
to cite intrinsic factors arising from the job itself such as achievement, recognition, and responsibility. On the other hand, when they were dissatisfied, they tended to cite extrinsic factors arising from the job context such as company policy and administration, supervision, interpersonal
relationships, and working conditions.
In addition, Herzberg believed that the data suggested that the opposite of satisfaction
was not dissatisfaction, as traditionally had been believed. Removing dissatisfying characteristics from a job would not necessarily make that job more satisfying (or motivating). As
shown in Exhibit 16-3, Herzberg proposed that a dual continuum existed: The opposite of
“satisfaction” is “no satisfaction,” and the opposite of “dissatisfaction” is “no dissatisfaction.”
Again, Herzberg believed that the factors that led to job satisfaction were separate and
distinct from those that led to job dissatisfaction. Therefore, managers who sought to eliminate factors that created job dissatisfaction could keep people from being dissatisfied but
not necessarily motivate them. The extrinsic factors that create job dissatisfaction were
called hygiene factors. When these factors are adequate, people won’t be dissatisfied, but
they won’t be satisfied (or motivated) either. To motivate people, Herzberg suggested
emphasizing motivators, the intrinsic factors having to do with the job itself.
Herzberg’s theory enjoyed wide popularity from the mid-1960s to the early 1980s,
despite criticisms of his procedures and methodology. Although some critics said his theory
was too simplistic, it has influenced how we currently design jobs, especially when it comes
to job enrichment, which we’ll discuss at a later point in this chapter.
Three-Needs Theory
David McClelland and his associates proposed the three-needs theory, which says there
are three acquired (not innate) needs that are major motives in work.14 These three needs include the need for achievement (nAch), which is the drive to succeed and excel in relation to a set of standards; the need for power (nPow), which is the need to make others
behave in a way that they would not have behaved otherwise; and the need for affiliation
(nAff), which is the desire for friendly and close interpersonal relationships. Of these three
needs, the need for achievement has been researched the most.
People with a high need for achievement are striving for personal achievement rather than
for the trappings and rewards of success. They have a desire to do something better or more
efficiently than it’s been done before.15 They prefer jobs that offer personal responsibility
for finding solutions to problems, in which they can receive rapid and unambiguous feedback
on their performance in order to tell whether they’re improving, and in which they can set
moderately challenging goals. High achievers avoid what they perceive to be very easy or
very difficult tasks. Also, a high need to achieve doesn’t necessarily lead to being a good
manager, especially in large organizations. That’s because high achievers focus on their own
accomplishments, while good managers emphasize helping others accomplish their goals.16
McClelland showed that employees can be trained to stimulate their achievement need by
being in situations where they have personal responsibility, feedback, and moderate risks.17
The other two needs in this theory haven’t been researched as extensively as the need
for achievement. However, we do know that the best managers tend to be high in the need
for power and low in the need for affiliation.18
CHAPTER 16
|
MOTIVATING EMPLOYEES
EXHIBIT
435
16-4
TAT Pictures
All three of these needs can be measured by using a projective test (known as the Thematic
Apperception Test or TAT) in which respondents react to a set of pictures. Each picture is
briefly shown to a person who writes a story based on the picture. (See Exhibit 16-4 for some
examples.) Trained interpreters then determine the individual’s levels of nAch, nPow, and nAff
from the stories written.
Contemporary Theories
16.3
of Motivation
The theories we look at in this section represent current explanations of employee motivation.
Although these theories may not be as well known as those we just discussed, they are supported by research.19 These contemporary motivation approaches include goal-setting theory,
reinforcement theory, job design theory, equity theory, expectancy theory, and high-involvement work practices.
LEARNING OUTCOME
Compare and contrast
contemporary theories of
motivation.
Goal-Setting Theory
At Wyeth’s research division, executive vice president Robert Ruffolo established challenging new product quotas for the company’s scientists in an attempt to bring more efficiency
to the innovation process. And he made bonuses contingent on meeting those goals.20 Before
a big assignment or major class project presentation, has a teacher ever encouraged you to
“Just do your best”? What does that vague statement, “do your best,” mean? Would your performance on a class project have been higher had that teacher said you needed to score a
hygiene factors
three-needs theory
need for power (nPow)
Factors that eliminate job dissatisfaction, but
don’t motivate
The motivation theory that says three acquired
(not innate) needs—achievement, power, and
affiliation—are major motives in work
The need to make others behave in a way that
they would not have behaved otherwise
need for achievement (nAch)
The desire for friendly and close interpersonal
relationships
motivators
Factors that increase job satisfaction and
motivation
The drive to succeed and excel in relation to a
set of standards
need for affiliation (nAff)
436 PART FIVE
|
LEADING
93 percent to keep your A in the class? Research on goalsetting theory addresses these issues, and the findings, as
pany (the world’s largest) has
you’ll see, are impressive in terms of the effect that goal
made Fortune magazine’s list of
specificity, challenge, and feedback have on performance.22
“Best Companies to Work For” for
Research provides substantial support for goal-setting
all 13 years that it’s been pubtheory, which says that specific goals increase performance
and that difficult goals, when accepted, result in higher performlished.21 “He” is John Goodnight,
ance than do easy goals. What does goal-setting theory tell us?
CEO and co-founder of Cary, North
First, working toward a goal is a major source of job
Carolina–based SAS. Goodnight
motivation. Studies on goal setting have demonstrated that
has always believed in taking care
specific and challenging goals are superior motivating
forces.23 Such goals produce a higher output than does the
of his employees. His company’s
generalized goal of “do your best.” The specificity of the
approach to giving employees
goal itself acts as an internal stimulus. For instance, when a
flexibility and perks is “so legendary that even Google uses SAS as a model.”
sales rep commits to making eight sales calls daily, this inGoodnight fashioned SAS’s culture around the idea of “trust between our emtention gives him a specific goal to try to attain.
It’s not a contradiction that goal-setting theory says that
ployees and the company.” And employees love it! Annual turnover is a low
motivation is maximized by difficult goals, whereas achieve2 percent and the company is highly profitable. There’s something to be said for
ment motivation (from three-needs theory) is stimulated by
recognizing that your employees are your most important asset!
moderately challenging goals.24 First, goal-setting theory
deals with people in general, whereas the conclusions on
achievement motivation are based on people who have a
high nAch. Given that no more than 10 to 20 percent of North
Americans are high achievers (a proportion that’s likely lower in underdeveloped countries),
difficult goals are still recommended for the majority of employees. Second, the conclusions of goal-setting theory apply to those who accept and are committed to the goals.
Difficult goals will lead to higher performance only if they are accepted.
Next, will employees try harder if they have the opportunity to participate in the
setting of goals? Not always. In some cases, participatively set goals elicit superior
performance; in other cases, individuals performed best when their manager assigned
goals. However, participation is probably preferable to assigning goals when employees
might resist accepting difficult challenges.25
Finally, we know that people will do better if they get feedback on how well they’re
progressing toward their goals because feedback helps identify discrepancies between what
they have done and what they want to do. But all feedback isn’t equally effective. Selfgenerated feedback—where an employee monitors his or her own progress—has been shown
to be a more powerful motivator than feedback coming from someone else.26
Three other contingencies besides feedback influence the goal-performance relationship: goal commitment, adequate self-efficacy, and national culture.
First, goal-setting theory assumes that an individual is committed to the goal. Commitment is most likely when goals are made public, when the individual has an internal locus
of control, and when the goals are self-set rather than assigned.27
Next, self-efficacy refers to an individual’s belief that he or she is capable of performing a task.28 The higher your self-efficacy, the more confidence you have in your ability to
succeed in a task. So, in difficult situations, we find that people with low self-efficacy are
likely to reduce their effort or give up altogether, whereas those with high self-efficacy will
try harder to master the challenge.29 In addition, individuals with high self-efficacy seem
to respond to negative feedback with increased effort and motivation, whereas those with low
self-efficacy are likely to reduce their effort when given negative feedback.30
Finally, the value of goal-setting theory depends on the national culture. It’s well adapted
to North American countries because its main ideas align reasonably well with those cultures. It assumes that subordinates will be reasonably independent (not a high score on
power distance), that people will seek challenging goals (low in uncertainty avoidance), and
that performance is considered important by both managers and subordinates (high in assertiveness). Don’t expect goal setting to lead to higher employee performance in countries
where the cultural characteristics aren’t like this.
His privately held software com-
CHAPTER 16
|
MOTIVATING EMPLOYEES
EXHIBIT
437
16-5
Goal-Setting Theory
• Goals are public
• Individual has internal
locus of control
• Self-set goals
Self-Efficacy
Committed
to Achieving
Motivation
(intention to work
toward goal)
Goals
Self-Generated
Feedback on
Progress
Higher Performance
Plus
Goal Achievement
Accepted
• Specific
• Difficult
Participation
in Setting
National
Culture
Exhibit 16-5 summarizes the relationships among goals, motivation, and performance.
Our overall conclusion is that the intention to work toward hard and specific goals is a
powerful motivating force. Under the proper conditions, it can lead to higher performance.
However, no evidence indicates that such goals are associated with increased job satisfaction.31
Reinforcement Theory
Reinforcement theory says that behavior is a function of its consequences. Those conse-
quences that immediately follow a behavior and increase the probability that the behavior
will be repeated are called reinforcers.
Reinforcement theory ignores factors such as goals, expectations, and needs. Instead, it focuses solely on what happens to a person when he or she does something. For instance, Walmart
improved its bonus program for hourly employees. Employees who provide outstanding customer
service get a cash bonus. And all Walmart hourly full- and part-time store employees are eligible
for annual “My$hare” bonuses, which are allocated on store performance and distributed quarterly so that workers are rewarded more frequently.32 The company’s intent: keep the workforce
motivated to meet goals by rewarding them when they did, thus reinforcing the behaviors.
In Chapter 14 we showed how managers use reinforcers to shape behavior, but the concept is also widely believed to explain motivation. According to B. F. Skinner, people will
most likely engage in desired behaviors if they are rewarded for doing so. These rewards are
most effective if they immediately follow a desired behavior; and behavior that isn’t rewarded, or is punished, is less likely to be repeated.33
Using reinforcement theory, managers can influence employees’ behavior by using
positive reinforcers for actions that help the organization achieve its goals. And managers
should ignore, not punish, undesirable behavior. Although punishment eliminates undesired
behavior faster than nonreinforcement does, its effect is often temporary and may have
unpleasant side effects including dysfunctional behavior such as workplace conflicts,
absenteeism, and turnover. Although reinforcement is an important influence on work
behavior, it isn’t the only explanation for differences in employee motivation.34
goal-setting theory
reinforcement theory
reinforcers
The proposition that specific goals increase
performance and that difficult goals, when
accepted, result in higher performance than do
easy goals
The theory that behavior is a function of its
consequences
Consequences immediately following a
behavior, which increase the probability that
the behavior will be repeated
self-efficacy
An individual’s belief that he or she is capable
of performing a task
438 PART FIVE
|
LEADING
Designing Motivating Jobs
It’s not unusual to find shop-floor workers at Cordis LLC’s San German, Puerto Rico, facility interacting directly with customers, especially if that employee has special skills or
knowledge that could help come up with a solution to a customer’s problem.35 One company executive said, “Our sales guys often encourage this in specific situations because they
don’t always have all the answers. If by doing this, we can better serve the customers, then
we do it.” As this example shows, the tasks an employee performs in his or her job are
often determined by different factors, such as providing customers what they need when
they need it.
Because managers want to motivate individuals on the job, we need to look at ways to
design motivating jobs. If you look closely at what an organization is and how it works,
you’ll find that it’s composed of thousands of tasks. These tasks are, in turn, aggregated
into jobs. We use the term job design to refer to the way tasks are combined to form complete jobs. The jobs that people perform in an organization should not evolve by chance.
Managers should design jobs deliberately and thoughtfully to reflect the demands of the
changing environment, the organization’s technology, and employees’ skills, abilities, and
preferences.36 When jobs are designed like that, employees are motivated to work hard.
Let’s look at some ways that managers can design motivating jobs.37
JOB ENLARGEMENT.
As we saw in the Management History Module and Chapter 10, job
design historically has been to make jobs smaller and more specialized. It’s difficult to
motivate employees when jobs are like this. An early effort at overcoming the drawbacks of
job specialization involved horizontally expanding a job through increasing job scope—
the number of different tasks required in a job and the frequency with which these tasks are
repeated. For instance, a dental hygienist’s job could be enlarged so that in addition to
cleaning teeth, he or she is pulling patients’ files, refiling them when finished, and sanitizing and storing instruments. This type of job design option is called job enlargement.
Most job enlargement efforts that focused solely on increasing the number of tasks
don’t seem to work. As one employee who experienced such a job redesign said, “Before, I
had one lousy job. Now, thanks to job enlargement, I have three lousy jobs!” However, research has shown that knowledge enlargement activities (expanding the scope of knowledge
used in a job) lead to more job satisfaction, enhanced customer service, and fewer errors.38
JOB ENRICHMENT.
The hardest part of motivating
employees is when an employee is
dealing with a situation outside of work.
Another approach to job design is the vertical expansion of a job by
adding planning and evaluating responsibilities—job enrichment. Job enrichment
increases job depth, which is the degree of control employees have over their work. In
other words, employees are empowered to assume some of the tasks typically done by their
managers. Thus, an enriched job allows workers to do an entire activity with increased
freedom, independence, and responsibility. In addition, workers get feedback so they can
assess and correct their own performance. For instance, if our dental hygienist had an
enriched job, he or she could, in addition to cleaning teeth, schedule appointments (planning) and follow up with clients (evaluating). Although job enrichment may improve the
quality of work, employee motivation, and satisfaction, research evidence has been inconclusive as to its usefulness.39
JOB CHARACTERISTICS MODEL.
Even though many organizations implemented job
enlargement and job enrichment programs and experienced mixed results, neither
approach provided an effective framework for managers to design motivating jobs. But the
job characteristics model (JCM) does.40 It identifies five core job dimensions, their
interrelationships, and their impact on employee productivity, motivation, and satisfaction.
These five core job dimensions are:
1. Skill variety, the degree to which a job requires a variety of activities so that an
employee can use a number of different skills and talents.
2. Task identity, the degree to which a job requires completion of a whole and identifiable piece of work.
CHAPTER 16
|
MOTIVATING EMPLOYEES
439
3. Task significance, the degree to which a job has a substantial impact on the lives or
work of other people.
4. Autonomy, the degree to which a job provides substantial freedom, independence,
and discretion to the individual in scheduling the work and determining the procedures to be used in carrying it out.
5. Feedback, the degree to which doing work activities required by a job results in an
individual obtaining direct and clear information about the effectiveness of his or her
performance.
The JCM is shown in Exhibit 16-6. Notice how the first three dimensions—skill variety, task
identity, and task significance—combine to create meaningful work. In other words, if these
three characteristics exist in a job, we can predict that the person will view his or her job as
being important, valuable, and worthwhile. Notice, too, that jobs that possess autonomy
give the jobholder a feeling of personal responsibility for the results and that if a job provides feedback, the employee will know how effectively he or she is performing.
The JCM suggests that employees are likely to be motivated when they learn (knowledge
of results through feedback) that they personally (experienced responsibility through autonomy of work) performed well on tasks that they care about (experienced meaningfulness
through skill variety, task identity, or task significance).41 The more a job is designed around
these three elements, the greater the employee’s motivation, performance, and satisfaction and
the lower his or her absenteeism and likelihood of resigning. As the model shows, the links
between the job dimensions and the outcomes are moderated by the strength of the individual’s growth need (the person’s desire for self-esteem and self-actualization). Individuals
with a high growth need are more likely to experience the critical psychological states and
EXHIBIT
Core Job
Dimensions
Skill Variety
Task Identity
Critical
Psychological States
Experienced
meaningfulness
of the work
Task Significance
Autonomy
Experienced responsibility
for outcomes of the work
Feedback
Knowledge of the actual
results of the work activities
Personal and
Work Outcomes
High Internal
Work Motivation
16-6
Job Characteristics Model
Source: J. R. Hackman and J. L. Suttle
(eds.), Improving Life at Work
(Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, 1977).
With permission of authors.
High-Quality
Work Performance
High Satisfaction
with the Work
Low Absenteeism
and Turnover
Strength of Employee Growth Need
job design
job depth
task significance
The way tasks are combined to form complete
jobs
The degree of control employees have over
their work
The degree to which a job has a substantial
impact on the lives or work of other people
job scope
job characteristics model (JCM)
autonomy
The number of different tasks required in a job
and the frequency with which those tasks are
repeated
A framework for analyzing and designing jobs
that identifies five primary core job dimensions,
their interrelationships, and their impact on
outcomes
The degree to which a job provides substantial
freedom, independence, and discretion to the
individual in scheduling work and determining
the procedures to be used in carrying it out
skill variety
feedback
The degree to which a job requires a variety of
activities so that an employee can use a
number of different skills and talents
The degree to which carrying out work activities
required by a job results in the individual’s
obtaining direct and clear information about his
or her performance effectiveness
job enlargement
The horizontal expansion of a job by increasing
job scope
job enrichment
The vertical expansion of a job by adding
planning and evaluating responsibilities
task identity
The degree to which a job requires completion
of a whole and identifiable piece of work
440 PART FIVE
EXHIBIT
|
LEADING
16-7
Guidelines for Job Redesign
Source: J. R. Hackman and J. L. Suttle
(eds.), Improving Life at Work
(Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, 1977).
With permission of authors.
Suggested Action
Core Job Dimension
Combine tasks
Skill variety
Form natural work units
Task identity
Establish client relationships
Task significance
Load vertically
Autonomy
Open feedback channels
Feedback
respond positively when their jobs include the core dimensions than are low-growth need individuals. This distinction may explain the mixed results with job enrichment: Individuals
with low growth need aren’t likely to achieve high performance or satisfaction by having
their jobs enriched.
The JCM provides specific guidance to managers for job design. (See Exhibit 16-7.)
These suggestions specify the types of changes that are most likely to lead to improvement
in the five core job dimensions. You’ll notice that two suggestions incorporate job enlargement and job enrichment, although the other suggestions involve more than vertical and
horizontal expansion of jobs.
1. Combine tasks. Put fragmented tasks back together to form a new, larger work module (job enlargement) to increase skill variety and task identity.
2. Create natural work units. Design tasks that form an identifiable and meaningful
whole to increase employee “ownership” of the work. Encourage employees to view
their work as meaningful and important rather than as irrelevant and boring.
3. Establish client (external or internal) relationships. Whenever possible, establish direct relationships between workers and their clients to increase skill variety, autonomy, and feedback.
4. Expand jobs vertically. Vertical expansion gives employees responsibilities and controls
that were formerly reserved for managers, which can increase employee autonomy.
5. Open feedback channels. Direct feedback lets employees know how well they’re performing their jobs and whether their performance is improving or not.
Research into the JCM continues. For instance, one recent study looked at using job redesign efforts to change job characteristics and improve employee well-being.42 Another
study examined psychological ownership—that is, a personal feeling of “mine-ness” or
“our-ness”—and its role in the JCM.43
REDESIGNING JOB DESIGN APPROACHES.44
Although the JCM has proven to be useful,
it may not be totally appropriate for today’s jobs that are more service and knowledgeoriented. The nature of these jobs has also changed the tasks that employees do in those
jobs. Two emerging viewpoints on job design are causing a rethink of the JCM and other
standard approaches. Let’s take a look at each perspective.
The first perspective, the relational perspective of work design, focuses on how
people’s tasks and jobs are increasingly based on social relationships. In jobs today, employees have more interactions and interdependence with coworkers and others both inside and
outside the organization. In doing their job, employees rely more and more on those around
them for information, advice, and assistance. So what does this mean for designing motivating jobs? It means that managers need to look at important components of those employee
relationships such as access to and level of social support in an organization, types of interactions outside an organization, amount of task interdependence, and interpersonal feedback.
The second perspective, the proactive perspective of work design, says that
employees are taking the initiative to change how their work is performed. They’re much
CHAPTER 16
|
MOTIVATING EMPLOYEES
441
The Pfizer pharmaceutical sales reps shown here use a coffee
shop with Internet access as their office to work on scheduling
visits with physicians. As more and more physicians are relying
on the Internet to find medical information, sales reps are
taking a proactive approach to how their work is performed.
They are enhancing their traditional face-to-face office
meetings with doctors to include teleconferences, webcasts,
and social media. By using digital technology, sales reps are
able to provide doctors with the accurate, relevant, and timely
information they need to make educated decisions that will
best help their patients.
more involved in decisions and actions that affect their work. Important job design factors according to this perspective include autonomy (which is part of the JCM), amount
of ambiguity and accountability, job complexity, level of stressors, and social or relationship context. Each of these has been shown to influence employee proactive behavior.
One stream of research that’s relevant to proactive work design is that on highinvolvement work practices, which are work practices designed to elicit greater input
or involvement from workers.45 The level of employee proactivity is believed to increase
as employees become more involved in decisions that affect their work. Another term for
this approach, which we discussed in an earlier chapter, is employee empowerment.
Equity Theory
Do you ever wonder what kind of grade the person sitting next to you in class makes on a
test or on a major class assignment? Most of us do! Being human, we tend to compare ourselves with others. If someone offered you $50,000 a year on your first job after graduating from college, you’d probably jump at the offer and report to work enthusiastic, ready to
tackle whatever needed to be done, and certainly satisfied with your pay. How would you
react, though, if you found out a month into the job that a coworker—another recent graduate, your age, with comparable grades from a comparable school, and with comparable
work experience—was getting $55,000 a year? You’d probably be upset! Even though in
absolute terms, $50,000 is a lot of money for a new graduate to make (and you know it!),
that suddenly isn’t the issue. Now you see the issue as what you believe is fair—what is
equitable. The term equity is related to the concept of fairness and equitable treatment
compared with others who behave in similar ways. Evidence indicates that employees compare themselves to others and that inequities influence how much effort employees exert.46
Equity theory, developed by J. Stacey Adams, proposes that employees compare what
they get from a job (outcomes) in relation to what they put into it (inputs), and then they
compare their inputs–outcomes ratio with the inputs–outcomes ratios of relevant others
(Exhibit 16-8). If an employee perceives her ratio to be equitable in comparison to those of
relevant others, there’s no problem. However, if the ratio is inequitable, she views herself as
underrewarded or overrewarded. When inequities occur, employees attempt to do something about it.47 The result might be lower or higher productivity, improved or reduced quality of output, increased absenteeism, or voluntary resignation.
relational perspective of work design
high-involvement work practices
An approach to job design that focuses on how
people’s tasks and jobs are increasingly based
on social relationships
Work practices designed to elicit greater input
or involvement from workers
proactive perspective of work design
The theory that an employee compares his or
her job’s input–outcomes ratio with that of
relevant others and then corrects any inequity
An approach to job design in which employees
take the initiative to change how their work is
performed
equity theory
442 PART FIVE
EXHIBIT
16-8
Equity Theory
|
LEADING
Perceived Ratio Comparisona
Employee’s Assessment
Outcomes B
Outcomes A
6
Inputs A
Inputs B
Inequity (underrewarded)
Outcomes B
Outcomes A
=
Inputs A
Inputs B
Equity
Outcomes A
Outcomes B
7
Inputs A
Inputs B
Inequity (overrewarded)
a
Person A is the employee, and person B is a relevant other or referent.
The referent—the other persons, systems, or selves individuals compare themselves
against in order to assess equity—is an important variable in equity theory.48 Each of the
three referent categories is important. The “persons” category includes other individuals
with similar jobs in the same organization but also includes friends, neighbors, or professional associates. Based on what they hear at work or read about in newspapers or trade
journals, employees compare their pay with that of others. The “system” category includes
organizational pay policies, procedures, and allocation. The “self ” category refers to
inputs–outcomes ratios that are unique to the individual. It reflects past personal experiences and contacts and is influenced by criteria such as past jobs or family commitments.
Originally, equity theory focused on distributive justice, which is the perceived fairness of the amount and allocation of rewards among individuals. More recent research has
focused on looking at issues of procedural justice, which is the perceived fairness of the
process used to determine the distribution of rewards. This research shows that distributive
justice has a greater influence on employee satisfaction than procedural justice, while procedural justice tends to affect an employee’s organizational commitment, trust in his or her
boss, and intention to quit.49 What are the implications for managers? They should consider
openly sharing information on how allocation decisions are made, follow consistent and
unbiased procedures, and engage in similar practices to increase the perception of procedural
justice. By increasing the perception of procedural justice, employees are likely to view
their bosses and the organization as positive even if they’re dissatisfied with pay, promotions,
and other personal outcomes.
Expectancy Theory
The most comprehensive explanation of how employees are motivated is Victor Vroom’s
expectancy theory.50 Although the theory has its critics,51 most research evidence supports it.52
Expectancy theory states that an individual tends to act in a certain way based on the
expectation that the act will be followed by a given outcome and on the attractiveness of that
outcome to the individual. It includes three variables or relationships (see Exhibit 16-9):
1. Expectancy or effort–performance linkage is the probability perceived by the individual that exerting a given amount of effort will lead to a certain level of performance.
EXHIBIT
16-9
Expectancy Model
Individual
Effort
A
Individual
Performance
A = Effort–performance linkage
B = Performance–reward linkage
C = Attractiveness of reward
B
Organizational
Rewards
C
Individual
Goals
CHAPTER 16
|
MOTIVATING EMPLOYEES
443
2. Instrumentality or performance–reward linkage is the degree to which the individual
believes that performing at a particular level is instrumental in attaining the desired
outcome.
3. Valence or attractiveness of reward is the importance that the individual places on the
potential outcome or reward that can be achieved on the job. Valence considers both
the goals and needs of the individual.
This explanation of motivation might sound complicated, but it really isn’t. It can be
summed up in the questions: How hard do I have to work to achieve a certain level of performance, and can I actually achieve that level? What reward will performing at that level of performance get me? How attractive is the reward to me, and does it help me achieve my own personal
goals? Whether you are motivated to put forth effort (that is, to work hard) at any given time
depends on your goals and your perception of whether a certain level of performance is necessary to attain those goals. Let’s look at an example. Your second author had a student many
years ago who went to work for IBM as a sales rep. Her favorite work “reward” was having an
IBM corporate jet fly into Springfield, Missouri, to pick up her best customers and her and take
them for a weekend of golfing at some fun location. But to get that particular “reward,” she had
to achieve at a certain level of performance, which involved exceeding her sales goals by a
specified percentage. How hard she was willing to work (that is, how motivated she was to put
forth effort) was dependent on the level of performance that had to be met and the likelihood that
if she achieved at that level of performance she would receive that reward. Because she “valued”
that reward, she always worked hard to exceed her sales goals. And the performance–reward
linkage was clear because her hard work and performance achievements were always rewarded
by the company with the reward she valued (access to the corporate jet).
The key to expectancy theory is understanding an individual’s goal and the linkage
between effort and performance, between performance and rewards, and finally, between rewards and individual goal satisfaction. It emphasizes payoffs, or rewards. As a result, we
have to believe that the rewards an organization is offering align with what the individual
wants. Expectancy theory recognizes that no universal principle explains what motivates
individuals and thus stresses that managers understand why employees view certain outcomes as attractive or unattractive. After all, we want to reward individuals with those things
they value positively. Also, expectancy theory emphasizes expected behaviors. Do employees know what is expected of them and how they’ll be evaluated? Finally, the theory is concerned with perceptions. Reality is irrelevant. An individual’s own perceptions of
performance, reward, and goal outcomes, not the outcomes themselves, will determine his
or her motivation (level of effort).
Integrating Contemporary Theories of Motivation
Many of the ideas underlying the contemporary motivation theories are complementary, and
you’ll understand better how to motivate people if you see how the theories fit together.53
Exhibit 16-10 presents a model that integrates much of what we know about motivation. Its
basic foundation is the expectancy model. Let’s work through the model, starting on the left.
The individual effort box has an arrow leading into it. This arrow flows from the individual’s goals. Consistent with goal-setting theory, this goals–effort link is meant to illustrate that
goals direct behavior. Expectancy theory predicts that an employee will exert a high level
of effort if he or she perceives a strong relationship between effort and performance, performance and rewards, and rewards and satisfaction of personal goals. Each of these relationships is, in turn, influenced by certain factors. You can see from the model that the level of
individual performance is determined not only by the level of individual effort but also by the
referents
procedural justice
expectancy theory
The persons, systems, or selves against which
individuals compare themselves to assess equity
Perceived fairness of the process used to
determine the distribution of rewards
The theory that an individual tends to act in a
certain way based on the expectation that the
act will be followed by a given outcome and on
the attractiveness of that outcome to the
individual
distributive justice
Perceived fairness of the amount and allocation
of rewards among individuals
444 PART FIVE
EXHIBIT
|
LEADING
16-10
Integrating Contemporary
Theories of Motivation
High
nAch
Performance
Evaluation
Criteria
Ability
Equity
Comparison
OA OB
:
IA I B
Job
Design
Job
Design
Individual
Performance
Individual
Effort
Organizational
Rewards
Objective
Performance
Evaluation
System
Individual
Goals
Dominant
Needs
Reinforcement
Goals
Direct
Behavior
individual’s ability to perform and by whether the organization has a fair and objective
performance evaluation system. The performance–reward relationship will be strong if the
individual perceives that performance (rather than seniority, personal favorites, or some other
criterion) is what is rewarded. The final link in expectancy theory is the rewards–goal relationship. The traditional need theories come into play at this point. Motivation would be high to
the degree that the rewards an individual received for his or her high performance satisfied the
dominant needs consistent with his or her individual goals.
A closer look at the model also shows that it considers the achievement–need, reinforcement, equity, and JCM theories. The high achiever isn’t motivated by the organization’s
assessment of his or her performance or organizational rewards; hence the jump from effort
to individual goals for those with a high nAch. Remember that high achievers are internally
driven as long as the jobs they’re doing provide them with personal responsibility, feedback,
and moderate risks. They’re not concerned with the effort–performance, performance–reward,
or rewards–goals linkages.
Reinforcement theory is seen in the model by recognizing that the organization’s rewards reinforce the individual’s performance. If managers have designed a reward system that is seen by
employees as “paying off ” for good performance, the rewards will reinforce and encourage continued good performance. Rewards also play a key part in equity theory. Individuals will compare
the rewards (outcomes) they have received from the inputs or efforts they made with the
inputs–outcomes ratio of relevant others. If inequities exist, the effort expended may be influenced.
Finally, the JCM is seen in this integrative model. Task characteristics (job design)
influence job motivation at two places. First, jobs that are designed around the five job
CHAPTER 16
|
MOTIVATING EMPLOYEES
445
dimensions are likely to lead to higher actual job performance because the individual’s
motivation will be stimulated by the job itself—that is, they will increase the linkage
between effort and performance. Second, jobs that are designed around the five job
dimensions also increase an employee’s control over key elements in his or her work.
Therefore, jobs that offer autonomy, feedback, and similar task characteristics help to
satisfy the individual goals of employees who desire greater control over their work.
Current Issues in Motivation
After Vincent Stevens’s church ran an experiment in which 10 members were each given $100
to help their communities, some used it as seed capital to raise thousands more. As a partner in
a Bellevue, Washington, accounting firm, he wondered what would happen if he tried the same
thing with his employees. To find out, his company launched Caring, Serving, and Giving, a program that lets employees apply for grants of up to $500 to fund community service projects.
By empowering employees to use the seed money as they saw fit, they were motivated to make
the best use of it. Another benefit that was realized was a boost in employee morale.54
Understanding and predicting employee motivation is one of the most popular areas in
management research. We’ve introduced you to several motivation theories. However, even the
contemporary theories of employee motivation are influenced by some significant workplace
issues—motivating in tough economic circumstances, managing cross-cultural challenges,
motivating unique groups of workers, and designing appropriate rewards programs.
Motivating in Tough Economic Circumstances
Zappos, the quirky Las Vegas–based online shoe retailer (now a part of Amazon.com), has
always had a reputation for being a fun place to work.55 However, during the economic recession, it, like many companies, had to cut staff—124 employees in total. CEO Tony Hsieh
wanted to get out the news fast to lessen the stress for his employees. So he announced the
layoff in an e-mail, on his blog, and on his Twitter account. Although some might think these
are terrible ways to communicate that kind of news, most employees thanked him for being
so open and so honest. The company also took good care of those being laid off. Laid-off
employees with less than two years of service were paid through the end of the year. Longertenured employees got four weeks for every year of service. All got six months of continued
paid health coverage and, at the request of the employees, got to keep their 40 percent merchandise discount through the Christmas season. Zappos had always been a model of how to
nurture employees in good times, now it showed how to treat employees in bad times.
The economic recession of the last few years was difficult for many organizations,
especially when it came to their employees. Layoffs, tight budgets, minimal or no pay raises,
benefit cuts, no bonuses, long hours doing the work of those who had been laid off—this
was the reality that many employees faced. As conditions deteriorated, employee confidence, optimism, and job engagement plummeted as well. As you can imagine, it wasn’t an
easy thing for managers to keep employees motivated under such challenging circumstances.
Managers came to realize that in an uncertain economy, they had to be creative in keeping their employees’ efforts energized, directed, and sustained toward achieving goals. They
were forced to look at ways to motivate employees that didn’t involve money or that were
relatively inexpensive.56 So they relied on actions such as holding meetings with employees to keep the lines of communication open and to get their input on issues; establishing a
common goal, such as maintaining excellent customer service, to keep everyone focused;
creating a community feel so employees could see that managers cared about them and their
work; and giving employees opportunities to continue to learn and grow. And, of course, an
encouraging word always went a long way.
Managing Cross-Cultural Motivational Challenges
Scores of employees at Denmark’s largest brewer, Carlsberg A/S, walked off their jobs in
protest after the company tightened rules on workplace drinking and removed beer coolers
from work sites.57 Now that’s a motivational challenge you don’t often see in U.S. workplaces!
16.4
LEARNING OUTCOME
Discuss current issues in
motivation.
446 PART FIVE
|
LEADING
In an uncertain economy and with less money to
spend on raises and health benefits, companies are
setting up vegetable and herb gardens as a
creative, easy, and relatively inexpensive way to
motivate employees, improve their health, and help
them save money on their food bills. In company
gardens, employees can work, take home what they
harvest, and share extra produce with their local
food bank. Some firms use their gardens for teambuilding exercises such as constructing tomato
trellises together, and others incorporate them into
their health and wellness programs. Shown here are
employees of Harvard Pilgrim Health Care planting
chard starts in raised beds at their company garden.
In today’s global business environment, managers can’t automatically assume that motivational programs that work in one geographic location are going to work in others. Most
current motivation theories were developed in the United States by Americans and about
Americans.58 Maybe the most blatant pro-American characteristic in these theories is the
strong emphasis on individualism and achievement. For instance, both goal-setting and expectancy theories emphasize goal accomplishment as well as rational and individual thought.
Let’s look at the motivation theories to see their level of cross-cultural transferability.
Maslow’s need hierarchy argues that people start at the physiological level and then
move progressively up the hierarchy in order. This hierarchy, if it has any application at
all, aligns with American culture. In countries like Japan, Greece, and Mexico, where
uncertainty avoidance characteristics are strong, security needs would be the foundational
layer of the need hierarchy. Countries that score high on nurturing characteristics—
Denmark, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, and Finland—would have social needs as
their foundational level.59 We would predict, for instance, that group work will be more
motivating when the country’s culture scores high on the nurturing criterion.
Another motivation concept that clearly has an American bias is the achievement need.
The view that a high achievement need acts as an internal motivator presupposes two cultural
characteristics—a willingness to accept a moderate degree of risk (which excludes countries
with strong uncertainty avoidance characteristics) and a concern with performance (which
applies almost singularly to countries with strong achievement characteristics). This combination is found in Anglo-American countries such as the United States, Canada, and Great
Britain.60 On the other hand, these characteristics are relatively absent in countries such as
Chile and Portugal.
Equity theory has a relatively strong following in the United States, which is not surprising given that U.S.-style reward systems are based on the assumption that workers are
highly sensitive to equity in reward allocations. In the United States, equity is meant to
closely link pay to performance. However, recent evidence suggests that in collectivist cultures, especially in the former socialist countries of Central and Eastern Europe, employees
expect rewards to reflect their individual needs as well as their performance.61 Moreover,
consistent with a legacy of communism and centrally planned economies, employees exhibited a greater “entitlement” attitude—that is, they expected outcomes to be greater than
their inputs.62 These findings suggest that U.S.-style pay practices may need to be modified
in some countries in order to be perceived as fair by employees.
Another research study of more than 50,000 employees around the world examined
two cultural characteristics from the GLOBE framework—individualism and masculinity—
(see Chapter 3 for a discussion of these characteristics) in relation to motivation.63 The researchers found that in individualistic cultures such as the United States and Canada,
CHAPTER 16
|
MOTIVATING EMPLOYEES
447
individual initiative, individual freedom, and individual achievement are highly valued. In
more collective cultures such as Iran, Peru, and China, however, employees may be less interested in receiving individual praise but place a greater emphasis on harmony, belonging,
and consensus. They also found that in masculine (achievement/assertive) cultures such as
Japan and Slovakia, the focus is on material success. Those work environments are designed
to push employees hard and then reward top performers with high earnings. However, in
more feminine (nurturing) cultures such as Sweden and the Netherlands, smaller wage
gaps among employees are common, and employees are likely to have extensive quality-oflife benefits.
Despite these cross-cultural differences in motivation, some cross-cultural consistencies are evident. For instance, the desire for interesting work seems important to almost all
workers, regardless of their national culture. In a study of seven countries, employees in
Belgium, Britain, Israel, and the United States ranked “interesting work” number one
among 11 work goals. It was ranked either second or third in Japan, the Netherlands, and
Germany.64 Similarly, in a study comparing job-preference outcomes among graduate students in the United States, Canada, Australia, and Singapore, growth, achievement, and
responsibility were rated the top three and had identical rankings.65 Both studies suggest
some universality to the importance of intrinsic factors identified by Herzberg in his twofactor theory. Another recent study examining workplace motivation trends in Japan also
seems to indicate that Herzberg’s model is applicable to Japanese employees.66
Motivating Unique Groups of Workers
At Deloitte, employees are allowed to “dial up” or “dial down” their job responsibilities to
fit their personal and professional goals.67 The company’s program called Mass Career Customization has been a huge hit with its employees! In the first 12 months after it was rolled
out, employee satisfaction with “overall career/life fit” rose by 25 percent. Also, the number of high-performing employees staying with Deloitte increased.
Motivating employees has never been easy! Employees come into organizations with
different needs, personalities, skills, abilities, interests, and aptitudes. They have different
expectations of their employers and different views of what they think their employer has a
right to expect of them. And they vary widely in what they want from their jobs. For instance,
some employees get more satisfaction out of their personal interests and pursuits and only
want a weekly paycheck—nothing more. They’re not interested in making their work more
challenging or interesting or in “winning” performance contests. Others derive a great deal
of satisfaction in their jobs and are motivated to exert high levels of effort. Given these differences, how can managers do an effective job of motivating the unique groups of employees found in today’s workforce? One thing is to understand the motivational requirements of
these groups including diverse employees, professionals, contingent workers, and low-skilled
minimum-wage employees.
The Working World in 2020
Individualized Rewards
rewards among employees as well as for indi-
Organizations have historically assumed that vidual employees over time.
“one size fits all” when it comes to allocating re-
job security, increased pension contributions,
college tuition reimbursement, personal days
Organizations control a vast number of off, help in purchasing a home, recognition
wards. Managers typically assumed that every- potential rewards that employees might find awards, paid club memberships, and workone wants more money and more vacation time. appealing. A partial list would include increased
from-home options. In the future, most orga-
But as organizations become less bureaucratic base pay, bonuses, shortened workweeks, nizations will structure individual reward
and more capable of differentiating rewards, extended vacations, paid sabbaticals, flexible
packages in ways that will maximize employee
managers will be encouraged to differentiate work hours, part-time employment, guaranteed motivation.
448 PART FIVE
|
LEADING
MOTIVATING A DIVERSE WORKFORCE.
To maximize motivation among today’s workforce, managers need to think in terms of flexibility. For instance, studies tell us that men
place more importance on having autonomy in their jobs than do women. In contrast, the
opportunity to learn, convenient and flexible work hours, and good interpersonal relations are
more important to women.68 Having the opportunity to be independent and to be exposed to
different experiences is important to Gen Y employees whereas older workers may be more
interested in highly structured work opportunities.69 Managers need to recognize that what
motivates a single mother with two dependent children who’s working full time to support
her family may be very different from the needs of a single part-time employee or an older
employee who is working only to supplement his or her retirement income. A diverse array of
rewards is needed to motivate employees with such diverse needs. Many of the work–life balance programs (see Chapter 12) that organizations have implemented are a response to the
varied needs of a diverse workforce. In addition, many organizations have developed flexible
work arrangements—such as compressed workweeks, flextime, and job sharing, which we
discussed in Chapter 11—that recognize different needs. Another job alternative that we also
discussed earlier is telecommuting. However, keep in mind that not all employees embrace
the idea of telecommuting. Some workers relish the informal interactions at work that satisfy
their social needs as well as being a source of new ideas.
Do flexible work arrangements motivate employees? Although such arrangements
might seem highly motivational, both positive and negative relationships have been found.
For instance, a recent study that looked at the impact of telecommuting on job satisfaction
found that job satisfaction initially increased as the extent of telecommuting increased, but
as the number of hours spent telecommuting increased, job satisfaction started to level off,
decreased slightly, and then stabilized.70
MOTIVATING PROFESSIONALS. In contrast to a generation ago, the typical employee
today is more likely to be a professional with a college degree than a blue-collar factory
worker. What special concerns should managers be aware of when trying to motivate a
team of engineers at Intel’s India Development Center, software designers at SAS Institute
in North Carolina, or a group of consultants at Accenture in Singapore?
Professionals are different from nonprofessionals.71 They have a strong and long-term
commitment to their field of expertise. To keep current in their field, they need to regularly
update their knowledge, and because of their commitment to their profession they rarely
define their workweek as 8 A.M. to 5 P.M. five days a week.
What motivates professionals? Money and promotions typically are low on their priority list. Why? They tend to be well paid and enjoy what they do. In contrast, job challenge
tends to be ranked high. They like to tackle problems and find solutions. Their chief reward
is the work itself. Professionals also value support. They want others to think that what they
are working on is important. That may be true for all employees, but professionals tend to
be focused on their work as their central life interest, whereas nonprofessionals typically
have other interests outside of work that can compensate for needs not met on the job.
MOTIVATING CONTINGENT WORKERS.
We discussed in Chapter 11 the increased
number of contingent workers employed by organizations. There’s no simple solution for
motivating these employees. For that small set of individuals who prefer the freedom of
their temporary status, the lack of stability may not be an issue. In addition, temporariness might be preferred by highly compensated physicians, engineers, accountants, or
financial planners who don’t want the demands of a full-time job. But these individuals
are the exceptions. For the most part, temporary employees are not temporary by choice.
What will motivate involuntarily temporary employees? An obvious answer is the opportunity to become a permanent employee. In cases in which permanent employees are selected from a pool of temps, the temps will often work hard in hopes of becoming
permanent. A less obvious answer is the opportunity for training. The ability of a temporary
employee to find a new job is largely dependent on his or her skills. If an employee sees that
the job he or she is doing can help develop marketable skills, then motivation is increased.
From an equity standpoint, when temps work alongside permanent employees who
earn more and get benefits too for doing the same job, the performance of temps is likely
CHAPTER 16
|
MOTIVATING EMPLOYEES
449
to suffer. Separating such employees or perhaps minimizing interdependence between them
might help managers counteract potential problems.72
MOTIVATING LOW-SKILLED, MINIMUM-WAGE EMPLOYEES. Suppose that in your first
managerial position after graduating, you’re responsible for managing a work group of
low-skilled, minimum-wage employees. Offering more pay to these employees for high
levels of performance is out of the question: your company just can’t afford it. In addition,
these employees have limited education and skills. What are your motivational options at
this point?
One trap we often fall into is thinking that people are motivated only by money.
Although money is important as a motivator, it’s not the only reward that people seek and
that managers can use. In motivating minimum-wage employees, managers might look at
employee recognition programs. Many managers also recognize the power of praise although
these “pats on the back” must be sincere and given for the right reasons.
My biggest motivation challenge is
motivating employees who do not
want to be motivated.
Designing Appropriate Rewards Programs
Blue Cross of California, one of the nation’s largest health insurers, pays bonuses to doctors serving its health maintenance organization members based on patient satisfaction and
other quality standards. FedEx’s drivers are motivated by a pay system that rewards them for
timeliness and how much they deliver.73 Employee rewards programs play a powerful role
in motivating appropriate employee behavior.
OPEN-BOOK MANAGEMENT.
Within 24 hours after managers of the Heavy Duty
Division of Springfield Remanufacturing Company (SRC) gather to discuss a multi-page
financial document, every plant employee will have seen the same information. If the
employees can meet shipment goals, they’ll all share in a large year-end bonus.74 Many
organizations of various sizes involve their employees in workplace decisions by opening
up the financial statements (the “books”). They share that information so that employees
will be motivated to make better decisions about their work and better able to understand
the implications of what they do, how they do it, and the ultimate impact on the bottom
line. This approach is called open-book management and many organizations are using
it.75 For instance, at Parrish Medical Center in Titusville, Florida, CEO George Mikitarian
was struggling with the prospect of massive layoffs, facilities closing, and profits declining. So he turned to “town hall meetings” in which employees received updates on the
financial condition of the hospital. He also told his employees that it would require their
commitment to help find ways to reduce expenses and cut costs.76
The goal of open-book management is to get employees to think like an owner by seeing the impact their decisions have on financial results. Since many employees don’t have
the knowledge or background to understand the financials, they have to be taught how to
read and understand the organization’s financial statements. Once employees have this
knowledge, however, managers need to regularly share the numbers with them. By sharing
this information, employees begin to see the link between their efforts, level of performance,
and operational results.
EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION PROGRAMS.
Employee recognition programs consist of
personal attention and expressing interest, approval, and appreciation for a job well done.78
They can take numerous forms. For instance, Kelly Services introduced a new version of its
points-based incentive system to better promote productivity and retention among its
open-book management
employee recognition programs
A motivational approach in which an
organization’s financial statements (the
“books”) are shared with all employees
Personal attention and expressing interest,
approval, and appreciation for a job well done
77
by the numbers
54
percent of employees say
that their colleagues are the
ones who appreciate them
the most at work.
70
percent of employees say
that their relationship with
their manager is important to
their level of engagement.
47
50
percent of employees say that
their employer doesn’t provide any forms of motivation.
42
percent of employees say
that verbal recognition is
their most preferred form of
recognition at work.
27
51
percent of employees say that
the work itself is what makes
going to work worthwhile.
percent of employees say
that the perk they’d most like
from their employer is free
soda or water.
percent of employees say
they’re underpaid for the
work they do.
450 PART FIVE
|
LEADING
Guidelines for being a good motivator
include:
• Lead by example.
• Have a positive attitude.
• Be able to recognize positive
behaviors.
• Allow your team to be a part of the
planning and problem-solving
process.
employees. The program, called Kelly Kudos, gives employees more choices of awards and
allows them to accumulate points over a longer time period. It’s working. Participants generate three times more revenue and hours than employees not receiving points do.79 Nichols
Foods, a British manufacturer, has a comprehensive recognition program. The main hallway
in the production department is hung with “bragging boards” on which the accomplishments of employee teams are noted. Monthly awards are presented to people who have been
nominated by peers for extraordinary effort on the job. And monthly award winners are
eligible for further recognition at an off-site meeting for all employees.80 Most managers,
however, use a far more informal approach. For example, when Julia Stewart, currently the
president and CEO of IHOP International, was president of Applebee’s Restaurants, she
would frequently leave sealed notes on the chairs of employees after everyone had gone
home.81 These notes explained how important Stewart thought the person’s work was or
how much she appreciated the completion of a project. Stewart also relied heavily on voice
mail messages left after office hours to tell employees how appreciative she was for a job
well done. And recognition doesn’t have to come only from managers. Some 35 percent of
companies encourage coworkers to recognize peers for outstanding work efforts.82 For
instance, managers at Yum Brands Inc. (the Kentucky-based parent of food chains Taco
Bell, KFC, and Pizza Hut) were looking for ways to reduce employee turnover. They found
a successful customer-service program involving peer recognition at KFC restaurants in
Australia. Workers there spontaneously rewarded fellow workers with “Champs cards, an
acronym for attributes such as cleanliness, hospitality, and accuracy.” Yum implemented the
program in other restaurants around the world, and credits the peer recognition with reducing hourly employee turnover from 181 percent to 109 percent.83
A recent survey of organizations found that 84 percent had some type of program to recognize worker achievements.84 And do employees think these programs are important? You
bet! In a survey conducted a few years ago, a wide range of employees was asked what they
considered the most powerful workplace motivator. Their response? Recognition, recognition, and more recognition!85
Consistent with reinforcement theory, rewarding a behavior with recognition immediately following that behavior is likely to encourage its repetition. And recognition can take
many forms. You can personally congratulate an employee in private for a good job. You
can send a handwritten note or e-mail message acknowledging something positive that the
employee has done. For employees with a strong need for social acceptance, you can publicly recognize accomplishments. To enhance group cohesiveness and motivation, you can
celebrate team successes. For instance, you can do something as simple as throw a pizza
party to celebrate a team’s accomplishments. During the economic recession, managers
got quite creative in how they showed employees they were appreciated.86 For instance,
employees at one company got to take home fresh vegetables from the company vegetable
garden. In others, managers treated employees who really put forth efforts on a project to a
special meal or movie tickets. Also, managers can show employees that no matter what his
or her role may be, that their contributions matter. Some of these things may seem simple,
but they can go a long way in showing employees they’re valued.
PAY-FOR-PERFORMANCE. Here’s a survey statistic that may surprise you: 40 percent of
employees see no clear link between performance and pay.87 So what are the companies
where these employees work paying for? They’re obviously not clearly communicating performance expectations.88 Pay-for-performance programs are variable compensation
plans that pay employees on the basis of some performance measure.89 Piece-rate pay plans,
wage incentive plans, profit-sharing, and lump-sum bonuses are examples. What differentiates these forms of pay from more traditional compensation plans is that instead of paying a
person for time on the job, pay is adjusted to reflect some performance measure. These
pay-for-performance programs
Variable compensation plans that pay
employees on the basis of some performance
measure
CHAPTER 16
|
MOTIVATING EMPLOYEES
451
performance measures might include such things as individual productivity, team or
work group productivity, departmental productivity, or the overall organization’s profit
performance.
Pay-for-performance is probably most compatible with expectancy theory. Individuals
should perceive a strong relationship between their performance and the rewards they receive
for motivation to be maximized. If rewards are allocated only on nonperformance factors—
such as seniority, job title, or across-the-board pay raises—then employees are likely to
reduce their efforts. From a motivation perspective, making some or all an employee’s pay
conditional on some performance measure focuses his or her attention and effort toward
that measure, then reinforces the continuation of the effort with a reward. If the employee’s
team’s or organization’s performance declines, so does the reward. Thus, there’s an incentive to keep efforts and motivation strong.
Pay-for-performance programs are popular. Some 80 percent of large U.S. companies
have some form of variable pay plan.90 These types of pay plans have also been tried in
other countries such as Canada and Japan. About 30 percent of Canadian companies and
22 percent of Japanese companies have company-wide pay-for-performance plans.91
Do pay-for-performance programs work? For the most part, studies seem to indicate
that they do. For instance, one study found that companies that used pay-for-performance
programs performed better financially than those that did not.92 Another study showed that
pay-for-performance programs with outcome-based incentives had a positive impact on
sales, customer satisfaction, and profits.93 If an organization uses work teams, managers
should consider group-based performance incentives that will reinforce team effort and
commitment. But whether these programs are individual based or team based, managers
need to ensure that they’re specific about the relationship between an individual’s pay
and his or her expected level of appropriate performance. Employees must clearly understand exactly how performance—theirs and the organization’s—translates into dollars on
their paychecks.94
Let’s Get Real:
What Would You
Do?
My Response to A Manager’s Dilemma, page 430
I would determine what motivates the employees to perform well by
doing a survey. Based upon the survey results, I would create a contest with rewards that motivate the employees. I would also focus on
rewarding great behavior. Everyone deserves to be rewarded for their
hard work and effort toward achieving the goal. When companies
award their employees, it proves to the employees that they are appreciated. Therefore, the employees will work harder and do better. If you
take care of your team, the team will take care of you.
Aisha Warren
Retail Store Manager
Dots, LLC
Warren, MI
Management
R I C H A R D L . DA F T
Va n d e r b i l t Un i ve r s i t y
N I NT H E DI T I O N
Australia • Brazil • Japan • Korea • Mexico • Singapore • Spain • United Kingdom • United States
Management, Ninth Edition
Richard L. Daft, with the assistance of
Patricia G. Lane
Vice President of Editorial, Business: Jack
W. Calhoun
Editor-in-Chief: Melissa S. Acuña
Executive Editor: Joe Sabatino
Managing Developmental Editor: Emma
Newsom
Developmental Editor: Erin Berger
Editorial Assistant: Ruth Belanger
Executive Marketing Manager: Kimberly
Kanakes
Marketing Manager: Clint Kernen
© 2010, 2008 South-Western, Cengage Learning
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the copyright hereon
may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means—graphic, electronic,
or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, Web distribution,
information storage and retrieval systems, or in any other manner—except as
may be permitted by the license terms herein.
For product information and technology assistance, contact us at
Cengage Learning Customer & Sales Support, 1-800-354-9706
For permission to use material from this text or product,
submit all requests online at www.cengage.com/permissions
Further permissions questions can be emailed to
[email protected]
Library of Congress Control Number: 2008943508
Sr. Marketing Coordinator: Sarah Rose
Student Edition ISBN 13: 978-0-324-59584-0
Sr. Marketing Communications Manager:
Jim Overly
Student Edition ISBN 10: 0-324-59584-0
Sr. Content Project Manager: Martha Conway
South-Western Cengage Learning
5191 Natorp Boulevard
Mason, OH 45040
USA
Media Editor: Rob Ellington
Sr. Frontlist Buyer, Manufacturing: Doug Wilke
Production Service: Macmillan Publishing
Solutions
Sr. Art Director: Tippy McIntosh
Cover and Internal Designer: Joe Devine, Red
Hangar Design
Cover Image: BLOOMimage, Getty Images
Photography Manager: Don Schlotman
Photo Researcher: Chris Caperton, O’Donnell
and Associates; Susan Van Etten
Text Permissions Manager: Margaret
Chamberlain-Gaston
Text Permissions Researcher: James Reidel
Printed in Canada
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 13 12 11 10 09
Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by Nelson Education, Ltd.
For your course and learning solutions, visit www.cengage.com
Purchase any of our products at your local college store or at our preferred
online store www.ichapters.com
chapter15
Are You Engaged or Disengaged?
The Concept of Motivation
Content Perspectives on Motivation
The Hierarchy of Needs
ERG Theory
A Two-Factor Approach to Motivation
Acquired Needs
Process Perspectives on Motivation
Goal Setting
Equity Theory
Expectancy Theory
New Manager Self-Test: Your Approach to
Motivating Others
Reinforcement Perspective on Motivation
Job Design for Motivation
Job Simplification
Job Rotation
Job Enlargement
Job Enrichment
Job Characteristics Model
Innovative Ideas for Motivating
Empowering People to Meet Higher Needs
Giving Meaning to Work Through
Engagement
Learning Outcomes
Chapter Outline
© GE T TY IMAGES/DIGITAL VISION
pt5
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:
1. Define motivation and explain the difference between intrinsic and extrinsic rewards.
2. Identify and describe content theories of motivation based on employee
needs.
3. Identify and explain process theories of motivation.
4. Describe the reinforcement perspective and how it can be used to motivate employees.
5. Discuss major approaches to job design and how job design influences
motivation.
6. Explain how empowerment heightens employee motivation.
7. Describe ways that managers can create a sense of meaning and importance through employee engagement.
1
Introduction
Motivating Employees
ARE YOU ENGAGED OR DISENGAGED?1
Mostly
True
1. I made sure to study on a regular
basis.
3. I found ways to make the course
material relevant to my life.
2
3
Planning
2. I put forth effort.
Mostly
False
SCORING AND INTERPRETATION: Engagement
means that people involve and express themselves in
their work, going beyond the minimum effort required.
Engagement typically has a positive relationship with
both personal satisfaction and performance. If this relationship was true for your classes, the number of “1s” in
the Mostly True column will be higher than the number of
“2s.” You might expect a score of 6 or higher for a course
in which you were engaged, and possibly 3 or lower if you
were disengaged.
The challenge for a new manager is to learn to engage
subordinates in the same way your instructors in your
favorite classes were able to engage you. Teaching is similar to managing. What techniques did your instructors
use to engage students? Which techniques can you use to
engage people when you become a new manager?
Environment
The term employee engagement is becoming popular in the
corporate world. To learn what engagement means, answer
the following questions twice—(1) once for a course you
both enjoyed and performed well and (2) a second time for
a course you did not enjoy and performed poorly. Please
mark a “1” to indicate whether each item is Mostly True
or Mostly False for the course you enjoyed and performed
well. Please mark a “2” to indicate whether each item is
Mostly True or Mostly False for the course you did not
enjoy and performed poorly.
4. I found ways to make the course
interesting to me.
5. I raised my hand in class.
6. I had fun in class.
7. I participated actively in small
group discussions.
4
Organizing
8. I helped fellow students.
Most people begin a new job with energy and enthusiasm, but employees can lose
their drive if managers fail in their role as motivators. It can be a problem for even
the most successful of organizations and the most admired of managers, when experienced, valuable employees lose the motivation and commitment they once felt,
causing a decline in their performance. One secret for success in organizations is
motivated and engaged employees.
Motivation is a challenge for managers because motivation arises from within
employees and typically differs for each person. For example, Janice Rennie makes
$350,000 a year selling residential real estate in Toronto; she attributes her success to
the fact that she likes to listen carefully to clients and then find houses to meet their
needs. Greg Storey is a skilled machinist who is challenged by writing programs
for numerically controlled machines. After dropping out of college, he swept floors
in a machine shop and was motivated to learn to run the machines. Frances Blais
sells educational books and software. She is a top salesperson, but she doesn’t care
about the $50,000-plus commissions: “I’m not even thinking money when I’m selling.
I’m really on a crusade to help children read well.” In stark contrast, Rob Michaels
gets sick to his stomach before he goes to work. Rob is a telephone salesperson who
spends all day trying to get people to buy products they do not need, and the rejections are painful. His motivation is money; he earned $120,000 in the past year and
cannot make nearly that much doing anything else.2
5
Leading
6
Controlling
441
442
P AR T 5 L EADING
Rob is motivated by money, Janice by her love of listening and problem solving,
Frances by the desire to help children read, and Greg by the challenge of mastering
numerically controlled machinery. Each person is motivated to perform, yet each has
different reasons for performing. With such diverse motivations among individuals,
how do managers find the right way to motivate employees toward common organizational goals?
This chapter reviews several approaches to employee motivation. First, we define
motivation and the types of rewards managers use. Then, we examine several models
that describe the employee needs and processes associated with motivation. We also
look at the use of reinforcement for motivation, as well as examine how job design—
changing the structure of the work itself—can affect employee satisfaction and productivity. Finally, we discuss the trend of empowerment and look at how managers
imbue work with a sense of meaning by fostering employee engagement.
THE CONCEPT OF MOTIVATION
PHOTO COURTESY OF THE CONTAINER STORE
Most of us get up in the morning, go to school or work, and behave in ways that are
predictably our own. We respond to our environment and the people in it with little
thought as to why we work hard, enjoy certain classes, or find some recreational activities so much fun. Yet all these behaviors are motivated by something. Motivation
refers to the forces either within or external to a person that arouse enthusiasm and
motivation The ar
arous
ousal
al,,
persistence to pursue a certain course of action. Employee motivation affects producdirection, and persistence of
tivity, and part of a manager’s job is to channel motivation toward the accomplishbehavior.
ment of organizational goals.3 The study of motivation helps managers understand
intrinsic reward The satiswhat prompts people to initiate action, what influences their choice of action, and
faction received in the process
of performing an action.
why they persist in that action over time.
A simple model of human motivation is illustrated in Exhibit 15.1. People have
extrinsic reward A reward
giv
g
iv
i en byy another person.
needs—such as for recognition, achievement, or monetary gain—that translate into
an internal tension that motivates specific behaviors with which to fulfill the need.
To the extent that the behavior is successful,
the person is rewarded in the sense that the
need is satisfied. The reward also informs
the person that the behavior was appropriate and can be used again in the future.
Rewards are of two types: intrinsic and
extrinsic. Intrinsic rewards are the satisfactions a person receives in the process of
performing a particular action. The completion of a complex task may bestow a pleasant feeling of accomplishment, or solving
a problem that benefits others may fulfill a
personal mission. Frances Blais sells educational materials for the intrinsic reward
of helping children read well. Extrinsic
rewards are given by another person, typically a manager, and include promotions,
pay increases, and bonuses. They originate
externally, as a result of pleasing others. Rob
The Container Store has the motto that one great
Michaels, who hates his sales job, nevertheperson equals three good people. Here, an employee and Elfa storage system designer
less is motivated by the extrinsic reward of
works with a couple to design a custom storage plan. Getting hired is quite competitive
at the retailer that has been on Fortune magazine’s list of 100 Best Companies to
high pay. Although extrinsic rewards are
Work for in America year after year since 2000. Employees get intrinsic rewards from
important, good managers strive to help
knowing they were selected to work for this winning company. The Container Store
people achieve intrinsic rewards as well.
also puts its money where its motto is—providing the extrinsic rewards of entry level
The most talented and innovative employees
pay that is 50 to 100 percent higher than average retail pay, a 40 percent merchandise
are rarely motivated exclusively by rewards
discount, and health insurance for part-time as well as full-time employees.
C HAPTER 15 M OTIVATING E MPLOYEES
EXHIBIT
15 .1
443
A Simple Model of Motivation
such as money and benefits, or even praise and recognition. Instead, they seek satisfaction from the work itself.4 For example, at Google, people are motivated by an idealistic
goal of providing “automated universal transference,” which basically means unifying
data and information around the world and totally obliterating language barriers via
the Internet. People are energized by the psychic rewards they get from working on
intellectually stimulating and challenging technical problems, as well as by the potentially beneficial global impact of their work.5
As a new manager, remember that people will be more engaged when they do things
they really like. To reinforce this understanding, refer back to your answers on the
questionnaire at the beginning of this chapter.
TakeaMoment
The importance of motivation as illustrated in Exhibit 15.1 is that it can lead to
behaviors that reflect high performance within organizations. Studies have found
that high employee motivation goes hand-in-hand with high organizational performance and profits.6 It is the responsibility of managers to find the right combination
of motivational techniques and rewards to satisfy employees’ needs and simultaneously encourage high work performance.
Some ideas about motivation, referred to as content theories, stress the analysis of
underlying human needs and how needs can be satisfied in the workplace. Process
theories concern the thought processes that influence behavior. They focus on how
people seek rewards in work circumstances. Reinforcement theories focus on employee
learning of desired work behaviors. In Exhibit 15.1, content theories focus on the
concepts in the first box, process theories on those in the second, and reinforcement
theories on those in the third.
CONTENT PERSPECTIVES ON MOTIVATION
The Hierarchy of Needs
Probably the most famous content theory was developed by Abraham Maslow.7
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory proposes that people are motivated by multiple
Leading
Content theories emphasize the needs that motivate people. At any point in time,
people have a variety of needs. These needs translate into an internal drive that
motivates specific behaviors in an attempt to fulfill the needs. In other words,
our needs are like a hidden catalog of the things we want and will work to get. To
the extent that managers understand employees’ needs, they can design reward
systems to meet them and direct employees’ energies and priorities toward
attaining organizational goals.
5
content theories A group
of theories that emphasize the
needs that motivate people.
hierarchy of needs theory
A content theory that proposess
that peoplle are moti
tivated
t d by fivee
catego
tegorie
riess o
off n
need
eedss—phys
physiol
iologi
ogica
caall,,
safety
sa
fety, belo
belongi
ngingn
ngness
ess, este
esteem
em,
and self-actualization—that
exist in a hierarchical order.
444
P AR T 5 L EADING
needs and that these needs exist in a hierarchical order, as illustrated in Exhibit 15.2.
Maslow identified five general types of motivating needs in order of ascendance:
1. Physiological needs. These most basic human physical needs include food, water,
and oxygen. In the organizational setting, they are reflected in the needs for adequate heat, air, and base salary to ensure survival.
2. Safety needs. These needs include a safe and secure physical and emotional environment and freedom from threats—that is, for freedom from violence and for an
orderly society. In an organizational workplace, safety needs reflect the needs for
safe jobs, fringe benefits, and job security.
3. Belongingness needs. These needs reflect the desire to be accepted by one’s peers,
have friendships, be part of a group, and be loved. In the organization, these
needs influence the desire for good relationships with coworkers, participation in
a work group, and a positive relationship with supervisors.
4. Esteem needs. These needs relate to the desire for a positive self-image and to
receive attention, recognition, and appreciation from others. Within organizations, esteem needs reflect a motivation for recognition, an increase in responsibility, high status, and credit for contributions to the organization.
5. Self-actualization needs. These needs include the need for self-fulfillment, which is
the highest need category. They concern developing one’s full potential, increasing
one’s competence, and becoming a better person. Self-actualization needs can be
met in the organization by providing people with opportunities to grow, be creative,
and acquire training for challenging assignments and advancement.
According to Maslow’s theory, low-order needs take priority—they must be satisfied before higher-order needs are activated. The needs are satisfied in sequence:
Physiological needs come before safety needs, safety needs before social needs, and
so on. A person desiring physical safety will devote his or her efforts to securing a
safer environment and will not be concerned with esteem needs or self-actualization
needs. Once a need is satisfied, it declines in importance and the next higher need is
activated.
A study of employees in the manufacturing department of a major health-care
company in the United Kingdom provides some support for Maslow’s theory. Most
line workers emphasized that they worked at the company primarily because of the
good pay, benefits, and job security. Thus, employees’ lower-level physiological and
safety needs were being met. When questioned about their motivation, employees
indicated the importance of positive social relationships with both peers and supervisors (belongingness needs) and a desire for greater respect and recognition from
management (esteem needs).8
EXHIBIT
15 . 2
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs
445
C HAPTER 15 M OTIVATING E MPLOYEES
As a new manager, recognize that some people are motivated primarily to satisfy
lower-level physiological and safety needs, while others want to satisfy higher-level
needs. Learn which lower- and higher-level needs motivate you by completing the
experiential exercise on pages 463–464.
TakeaMoment
ERG Theory
Clayton Alderfer proposed a modification of Maslow’s theory in an effort to simplify
it and respond to criticisms of its lack of empirical verification.9 His ERG theory identified three categories of needs:
1. Existence needs. The needs for physical well-being.
2. Relatedness needs. The needs for satisfactory relationships with others.
3. Growth needs. The needs that focus on the development of human potential and
the desire for personal growth and increased competence.
The ERG model and Maslow’s need hierarchy are similar because both are in hierarchical form and presume that individuals move up the hierarchy one step at a time.
However, Alderfer reduced the number of need categories to three and proposed
that movement up the hierarchy is more complex, reflecting a frustration-regression
principle, namely, that failure to meet a high-order need may trigger a regression
to an already fulfilled lower-order need. Thus, a worker who cannot fulfill a need
for personal growth may revert to a lower-order need and redirect his or her efforts
toward making a lot of money. The ERG model therefore is less rigid than Maslow’s
need hierarchy, suggesting that individuals may move down as well as up the hierarchy, depending on their ability to satisfy needs.
Need hierarchy theory helps explain why organizations find ways to recognize
employees, encourage their participation in decision making, and give them opportunities to make significant contributions to the organization and society. At Sterling
Bank, with headquarters in Houston, Texas, there are no bank tellers. These positions
are now front-line managers who have the opportunity to make decisions and contribute ideas for improving the business.10 USAA, which offers insurance, mutual
funds, and banking services to five million members of the military and their families, provides another example.
A recent survey found that employees who contribute ideas at work, such as customer service reps at USAA, are more likely to feel valued, committed, and motivated.
In addition, when employees’ ideas are implemented and recognized, a motivational
effect often ripples throughout the workforce.12
Many companies are finding that creating a humane work environment that allows
people to achieve a balance between work and personal life is also a great high-level
frustration-regression
principle The idea that failuree
to meet a high-order need mayy
cause a regression to an alreadyy
satisfied lower-order need.
sa
USAA
5
Leading
Innovative Way
USAA’s customer service agents are on the front lines in helping families challenged by war
and overseas deployment manage their financial responsibilities. Managers recognize that
the most important factor in the company’s success is the relationship between USAA members and these front-line employees.
To make sure that relationship is a good one, USAA treats customer service reps, often
considered the lowest rung on the corporate ladder, like valued professionals. People have a
real sense that they’re making life just a little easier for military members and their families,
which gives them a feeling of pride and importance. Employees are organized into small,
tightly knit “expert teams” and are encouraged to suggest changes that will benefit customers. Service reps don’t have scripts to follow, and calls aren’t timed. Employees know they can
take whatever time they need to give the customer the best possible service.
Giving people the opportunity to make genuine contributions has paid off. In a study by
Forrester Research, 81 percent of USAA customers said they believe the company does what’s
best for them, rather than what’s best for the bottom line. Compare that to about 20 percent
of customers for other financial services firms.11
ERG theory A modification
of the needs hierarchy theory
that prop
propose
osess tthre
hreee ccate
ategor
gories
ies
of nee
needs:
ds: ex
exist
istenc
encee, rel
relate
atedne
dness
sss,
and gr
growt
owth
h.
446
P AR T 5 L EADING
motivator. Flexibility in the workplace, including options such as telecommuting,
flexible hours, and job sharing, is highly valued by today’s employees because it
enables them to manage their work and personal responsibilities. Flexibility is good
for organizations too. Employees who have control over their work schedules are
significantly less likely to suffer job burnout and are more highly committed to their
employers, as shown in Exhibit 15.3. This idea was supported by a survey conducted
at Deloitte, which found that client service professionals cited workplace flexibility as
a strong reason for wanting to stay with the firm. Another study at Prudential Insurance found that work-life satisfaction and work flexibility directly correlated to job
satisfaction, organizational commitment, and employee retention.13
A Two-Factor Approach to Motivation
hygiene factors Fac
Factor
torss that
thatt
involv
in
volv
olvee the
the pre
presen
sence
sen
ce or abs
absenc
encee
enc
of job dissatisfiers, including
working conditions, pay, company policies, and interpersonaal
relationships.
motivators Factors that influence job satisfaction based on
fulfillment of high-level needs
fu
such as achievement, recognition, responsibility, and opportu-nit
ni
n
it
i y for gro
g wth.
EXHIBIT
Frederick Herzberg developed another popular theory of motivation called the twofactor theory.14 Herzberg interviewed hundreds of workers about times when they
were highly motivated to work and other times when they were dissatisfied and
unmotivated. His findings suggested that the work characteristics associated with
dissatisfaction were quite different from those pertaining to satisfaction, which
prompted the notion that two factors influence work motivation.
The two-factor theory is illustrated in Exhibit 15.4. The center of the scale is neutral, meaning that workers are neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. Herzberg believed
that two entirely separate dimensions contribute to an employee’s behavior at work.
The first, called hygiene factors, involves the presence or absence of job dissatisfiers,
such as working conditions, pay, company policies, and interpersonal relationships.
When hygiene factors are poor, work is dissatisfying. However, good hygiene factors
simply remove the dissatisfaction; they do not in themselves cause people to become
highly satisfied and motivated in their work.
The second set of factors does influence job satisfaction. Motivators focus on
high-level needs and include achievement, recognition, responsibility, and opportunity for growth. Herzberg believed that when motivators are absent, workers are
neutral toward work, but when motivators are present, workers are highly motivated
and satisfied. Thus, hygiene factors and motivators represent two distinct factors that
influence motivation. Hygiene factors work only in the area of dissatisfaction. Unsafe
working conditions or a noisy work environment will cause people to be dissatisfied, but their correction will not lead to a high level of motivation and satisfaction.
Motivators such as challenge, responsibility, and recognition must be in place before
employees will be highly motivated to excel at their work.
15 . 3
The Motivational Benefi ts
of Job Flexibility
SOURCE: WFD Consulting data, as reported in Karol Rose,
“Work-Life Effectiveness,” Fortune (September 29, 2003): S1–S17.
447
C HAPTER 15 M OTIVATING E MPLOYEES
EXHIBIT
15 . 4
Herzberg’s Two-Factor
Theory
The implication of the two-factor theory for managers is clear. On one hand, providing hygiene factors will eliminate employee dissatisfaction but will not motivate workers
to high achievement levels. On the other hand, recognition, challenge, and opportunities for personal growth are powerful motivators and will promote high satisfaction and
performance. The manager’s role is to remove dissatisfiers—that is, to provide hygiene
factors sufficient to meet basic needs—and then to use motivators to meet higher-level
needs and propel employees toward greater achievement and satisfaction.
Acquired Needs
The acquired needs theory, developed by David McClelland, proposes that certain types
of needs are acquired during the individual’s lifetime. In other words, people are not
born with these needs but may learn them through their life experiences.15 The three
needs most frequently studied are these:
Early life experiences typically determine whether people acquire these needs.
If children are encouraged to do things for themselves and receive reinforcement,
they will acquire a need to achieve. If they are reinforced for forming warm human
relationships, they will develop a need for affiliation. If they get satisfaction from
controlling others, they will acquire a need for power.
For more than 20 years, McClelland studied human needs and their implications
for management. People with a high need for achievement are frequently entrepreneurs. People who have a high need for affiliation are successful integrators, whose
job is to coordinate the work of several departments in an organization.16 Integrators
include brand managers and project managers who must have excellent people skills.
A high need for power often is associated with successful attainment of top levels in the
5
Leading
1. Need for achievement. The desire to accomplish something difficult, attain a high
standard of success, master complex tasks, and surpass others.
2. Need for affiliation. The desire to form close personal relationships, avoid conflict, and establish warm friendships.
3. Need for power. The desire to influence or control others, be responsible for others, and have authority over others.
448
process theories A group
p
of the
theori
ories
es tha
thatt expl
expl
p ain ho
how
w
emplloyees sellectt beha
h viors
i
with which to meet their needss
and determine whether their
choices were successful.
goal-setting theory A moti-vation theory in which specific,,
challenging goals increase
motivation and performance
when the goals are accepted byy
subordinates and these subordinates receive feedback to
indicate their progress toward
goa
go
g
oa
o l achievement.
P AR T 5 L EADING
organizational hierarchy. For example, McClelland studied managers at AT&T for 16
years and found that those with a high need for power were more likely to follow a path
of continued promotion over time. More than half of the employees at the top levels
had a high need for power. In contrast, managers with a high need for achievement but
a low need for power tended to peak earlier in their careers and at a lower level. The
reason is that achievement needs can be met through the task itself, but power needs
can be met only by ascending to a level at which a person has power over others.
In summary, content theories focus on people’s underlying needs and label those
particular needs that motivate behavior. The hierarchy of needs theory, the ERG theory, the two-factor theory, and the acquired needs theory all help managers understand what motivates people. In this way, managers can design work to meet needs
and hence elicit appropriate and successful work behaviors.
PROCESS PERSPECTIVES ON MOTIVATION
Process theories explain how people select behavioral actions to meet their needs
and determine whether their choices were successful. Important perspectives in this
area include goal-setting, equity theory, and expectancy theory.
Goal-Setting
© ALISON ALIANO
Recall from Chapter 6 our discussion of the importance
and purposes of goals. Numerous studies have shown that
specific, challenging targets significantly enhance people’s
motivation and performance levels.17 You have probably
noticed in your own life that you are more motivated
when you have a specific goal, such as making an A on a
final exam, losing 10 pounds before spring break, or earning enough money during the summer to buy a used car.
Goal-setting theory, described by Edwin Locke and
Gary Latham, proposes that managers can increase motivation and enhance performance by setting specific, challenging goals, then helping people track their progress toward
goal achievement by providing timely feedback. Key components of goal-setting theory include the following: 18
At Computerized Facility Integration, clear, specific goals enhance employee motivation and
commitment. CFI’s turnover is 4 percent, dramatically lower than
the industry average of 30 percent. Every employee—from clerical
help to senior management—receives a monthly bonus for meeting
established targets. “It varies by role, of course, but we clearly
state what everyone should be achieving, and we reward people
accordingly,” says founder and CEO Robert Verdun. “One of the
big advantages of this bonus system is that it obliges us to keep
communicating.” The Southfield, Michigan, company installs and
services technology systems in office buildings and factories.
▪ Goal specificity refers to the degree to which goals are
concrete and unambiguous. Specific goals such as “visit
one new customer each day,” or “sell $1,000 worth of
merchandise a week” are more motivating than vague
goals such as “keep in touch with new customers” or
“increase merchandise sales.” For example, a lack of
clear, specific goals is cited as a major cause of the failure
of pay-for-performance incentive plans in many organizations.19 Vague goals can be frustrating for employees.
▪ In terms of goal difficulty, hard goals are more motivating than easy ones. Easy goals provide little challenge
for employees and don’t require them to increase their
output. Highly ambitious but achievable goals ask
people to stretch their abilities and provide a basis for
greater feelings of accomplishment and personal effectiveness. A study in Germany found that, over a threeyear period, only employees who perceived their goals
as difficult reported increases in positive emotions and
feelings of job satisfaction and success.20
C HAPTER 15 M OTIVATING E MPLOYEES
449
▪ Goal acceptance means that employees have to “buy into” the goals and be committed
to them. Having people participate in setting goals is a good way to increase acceptance and commitment. At Aluminio del Caroni, a state-owned aluminum company in southeastern Venezuela, plant workers felt a renewed sense of commitment
when top leaders implemented a co-management initiative that has managers and
lower-level employees working together to set budgets, determine goals, and make
decisions. “The managers and the workers are running this business together,” said
one employee who spends his days shoveling molten aluminum down a channel
from an industrial oven to a cast. “It gives us the motivation to work hard.”21
▪ Finally, the component of feedback means that people get information about how
well they are doing in progressing toward goal achievement. It is important for
managers to provide performance feedback on a regular, ongoing basis. However,
self-feedback, where people are able to monitor their own progress toward a goal,
has been found to be an even stronger motivator than external feedback.22
Why does goal setting increase motivation? For one thing, it enables people to
focus their energies in the right direction. People know what to work toward, so
they can direct their efforts toward the most important activities to accomplish the
goals. Goals also energize behavior because people feel compelled to develop plans
and strategies that keep them focused on achieving the target. Specific, difficult goals
provide a challenge and encourage people to put forth high levels of effort. In addition, when goals are achieved, pride and satisfaction increase, contributing to higher
motivation and morale.23
As a new manager, use specific, challenging goals to keep people focused and motivated.
Have team members participate in setting goals and determining how to achieve them.
Give regular feedback on how people are doing.
TakeaMoment
Equity Theory
▪ Change work effort. A person may choose to increase or decrease his or her inputs
to the organization. Individuals who believe they are underpaid may reduce their
level of effort or increase their absenteeism. Overpaid people may increase effort
on the job.
5
Leading
Equity theory focuses on individuals’ perceptions of how fairly they are treated compared with others. Developed by J. Stacy Adams, equity theory proposes that people
are motivated to seek social equity in the rewards they expect for performance.24
According to equity theory, if people perceive their compensation as equal to
what others receive for similar contributions, they will believe that their treatment is
fair and equitable. People evaluate equity by a ratio of inputs to outcomes. Inputs to
a job include education, experience, effort, and ability. Outcomes from a job include
pay, recognition, benefits, and promotions. The input-to-outcome ratio may be compared to another person in the work group or to a perceived group average. A state of
equity exists whenever the ratio of one person’s outcomes to inputs equals the ratio
of another’s outcomes to inputs.
Inequity occurs when the input-to-outcome ratios are out of balance, such as
when a new, inexperienced employee receives the same salary as a person with a
high level of education or experience. Interestingly, perceived inequity also occurs
in the other direction. Thus, if an employee discovers she is making more money
than other people who contribute the same inputs to the company, she may feel the
need to correct the inequity by working harder, getting more education, or considering lower pay. Studies of the brain have shown that people get less satisfaction from
money they receive without having to earn it than they do from money they work to
receive.25 Perceived inequity creates tensions within individuals that motivate them
to bring equity into balance.26
The most common methods for reducing a perceived inequity are these:
equity theory A process the-ory that focuses on individuals’’
perceptions of how fairly they
aarre tr
treat
eated
ed rel
relati
ative
ve to oth
others
ers.
equity A situ
situati
ation
on tha
thatt eexis
xists
ts
when
hen the
the rat
ratio
io of one pe
perso
rson’s
ns
outcomes
outcom
es to inp
inputs
uts eq
equal
ualss tthat
hatt
of another’s.
450
P AR T 5 L EADING
▪ Change outcomes. A person may change his or her outcomes. An underpaid person may request a salary increase or a bigger office. A union may try to improve
wages and working conditions to be consistent with a comparable union whose
members make more money.
▪ Change perceptions. Research suggests that people may change perceptions of
equity if they are unable to change inputs or outcomes. They may artificially
increase the status attached to their jobs or distort others’ perceived rewards to
bring equity into balance.
▪ Leave the job. People who feel inequitably treated may decide to leave their jobs
rather than suffer the inequity of being under- or overpaid. In their new jobs, they
expect to find a more favorable balance of rewards.
expectancy theory A processs
ss
theory thatt proposes th
thatt motitivation depends on individuals’
expectations about their abilityy
to perform tasks and receive
desired rewards.
E ➞ P expectancy Expectancy that putting effort into
a given task will lead to high
per
pe
p
er
e formance.
TakeaMoment
The implication of equity theory for managers is that employees indeed evaluate the
perceived equity of their rewards compared to others’. Inequitable pay puts pressure
on employees that is sometimes almost too great to bear. They attempt to change their
work habits, try to change the system, or leave the job.27 Consider Deb Allen, who went
into the office on a weekend to catch up on work and found a document accidentally
left on the copy machine. When she saw that some new hires were earning $200,000
more than their counterparts with more experience, and that “a noted screw-up” was
making more than highly competent people, Allen began questioning why she was
working on weekends for less pay than many others were receiving. Allen became so
demoralized by the inequity that she quit her job three months later.28
As a new manager, be alert to feelings of inequity among your team members. Don’t
play favorites, such as regularly praising some while overlooking others making similar
contributions. Keep equity in mind when you make decisions about compensation and
other rewards.
© AP PHOTO/JEFF CHIU
Expectancy Theory
Circuit City managers are using expectancy theory principles to
help meet employees’ needs while attaining organizational goals. By creating an incentive program that is a commission-based plan designed
to provide the highest compensation to sales
counselors who are committed to serving every
customer, Circuit City achieves its volume and
profitability objectives. The incentive program
is also used in other areas such as distribution,
where employees are recognized for accomplishment in safety, productivity, and attendance.
Expectancy theory suggests that motivation depends on individuals’
expectations about their ability to perform tasks and receive desired
rewards. Expectancy theory is associated with the work of Victor Vroom,
although a number of scholars have made contributions in this area.29
Expectancy theory is concerned not with identifying types of needs but
with the thinking process that individuals use to achieve rewards. Consider Amy Huang, a university student with a strong desire for a B in
her accounting course. Amy has a C+ average and one more exam to
take. Amy’s motivation to study for that last exam will be influenced by:
(1) the expectation that hard study will lead to an A on the exam and
(2) the expectation that an A on the exam will result in a B for the course.
If Amy believes she cannot get an A on the exam or that receiving an A
will not lead to a B for the course, she will not be motivated to study
exceptionally hard.
Expectancy theory is based on the relationship among the individual’s effort, the individual’s performance, and the desirability of outcomes
associated with high performance. These elements and the relationships
among them are illustrated in Exhibit 15.5. The keys to expectancy theory are the expectancies for the relationships among effort, performance,
and the value of the outcomes to the individual.
E ➞ P expectancy involves determining whether putting effort into
a task will lead to high performance. For this expectancy to be high,
the individual must have the ability, previous experience, and necessary equipment, tools, and opportunity to perform. Let’s consider a
simple sales example. If Carlos, a salesperson at the Diamond Gift Shop,
believes that increased selling effort will lead to higher personal sales,
C HAPTER 15 M OTIVATING E MPLOYEES
EXHIBIT
15 . 5
451
Major Elements of Expectancy Theory
As a new manager, how would you manage expectations and use rewards to motivate
subordinates to perform well? Complete the New Manager Self-Test on page 452 to
learn more about your approach to motivating others.
5
P ➞ O expectancy Expectanccy
that
at succ
success
essful
ful pe
perfo
rforma
rmance
nce of
a task wi
will
ll lea
lead
d to
to the
the des
desire
ired
d
outcom
utcomee.
valence The value or attraction an individual has for an
ou
o
utcome.
TakeaMoment
Leading
we can say that he has a high E ➞ P expectancy. However, if Carlos believes he has
neither the ability nor the opportunity to achieve high performance, the expectancy
will be low, and so will be his motivation.
P ➞ O expectancy involves determining whether successful performance will
lead to the desired outcome or reward. If the P ➞ O expectancy is high, the individual
will be more highly motivated. If the expectancy is that high performance will not
produce the desired outcome, motivation will be lower. If Carlos believes that higher
personal sales will lead to a pay increase, we can say that he has a high P ➞ O expectancy. He might be aware that raises are coming up for consideration and talk with
his supervisor or other employees to see if increased sales will help him earn a better
raise. If not, he will be less motivated to work hard.
Valence is the value of outcomes, or attraction to outcomes, for the individual.
If the outcomes that are available from high effort and good performance are not
valued by employees, motivation will be low. Likewise, if outcomes have a high
value, motivation will be higher. If Carlos places a high value on the pay raise,
valence is high and he will have a high motivational force. On the other hand, if
the money has low valence for Carlos, the overall motivational force will be low.
For an employee to be highly motivated, all three factors in the expectancy model
must be high.30
Expectancy theory attempts not to define specific types of needs or rewards
but only to establish that they exist and may be different for every individual.
One employee might want to be promoted to a position of increased responsibility, and another might have high valence for good relationships with peers.
Consequently, the first person will be motivated to work hard for a promotion
and the second for the opportunity of a team position that will keep him or her
associated with a group. Recent studies substantiate the idea that rewards need
to be individualized to be motivating. A recent finding from the U.S. Department
of Labor shows that the number 1 reason people leave their jobs is because they
“don’t feel appreciated.” Yet Gallup’s analysis of 10,000 workgroups in 30 industries found that making people feel appreciated depends on finding the right kind
of reward for each individual. Some people prefer tangible rewards or gifts, while
others place high value on words of recognition. In addition, some want public
recognition while others prefer to be quietly praised by someone they admire and
respect.31
New ManagerSelf-Test
452
P AR T 5 L EADING
Your Approach to
Motivating Others
Think about situations in which you were in a
student group or organization. Think about your
informal approach as a leader and answer the
questions below. Indicate whether each item
below is Mostly False or Mostly True for you.
SCORING AND INTERPRETATION: The questions above represent two related aspects of
motivation theory. For the aspect of expectancy
theory, sum the points for Mostly True to the oddnumbered questions. For the aspect of reinforcement theory, sum the points for Mostly True for
the even-numbered questions. The scores for my
approach to motivation are:
My use of expectancy theory _____
My use of reinforcement theory _____
1. I ask the other person what rewards they value
for high performance.
2. I only reward people if their performance is up
to standard.
3. I find out if the person has the ability to do
what needs to be done.
4. I use a variety of rewards (treats, recognition)
to reinforce exceptional performance.
5. I explain exactly what needs to be done for the
person I’m trying to motivate.
6. I generously and publicly praise people who
perform well.
7. Before giving somebody a reward, I find out
what would appeal to that person.
8. I promptly commend others when they do a
better-than-average job.
rreinforcement
e
theory A
motivation theory based on thee
relationship between a given
behavior and its consequ
q ences..
behavior modification The
set of techniques by which
reinforcement theory is used to
o
modify human behavior.
law of effect The assumption
n
that positively reinforced behavio
or
tends to be repeated, and unreinforced or negatively reinforced
d
behavior tends to be inhibited.
reinforcement Anything thatt
causes a given behavior to be
repeated or inhibited.
positive reinforcement The
administration of a pleasant
and rewarding consequence
following a desired behavior.
These two scores represent how you apply the
motivational concepts of expectancy and reinforcement in your role as an informal leader. Three
or more points on expectancy theory means you
motivate people by managing expectations. You
understand how a person’s effort leads to performance and make sure that high performance leads
to valued rewards. Three or more points for reinforcement theory means that you attempt to modify
people’s behavior in a positive direction with
frequent and prompt positive reinforcement. New
managers often learn to use reinforcements first,
and as they gain more experience are able to apply
expectancy theory.
SOURCES: These questions are based on D. Whetten and K.
Cameron, Developing Management Skills, 5th ed. (Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2002), pp. 302–303; and P. M.
Podsakoff, S. B. Mackenzie, R. H. Moorman, and R. Fetter,
“Transformational Leader Behaviors and Their Effects on
Followers’ Trust in Leader, Satisfaction, and Organizational
Citizenship Behaviors,” Leadership Quarterly 1, no. 2 (1990):
107–142.
REINFORCEMENT PERSPECTIVE ON MOTIVATION
The reinforcement approach to employee motivation sidesteps the issues of employee
needs and thinking processes described in the content and process theories.
Reinforcement theory simply looks at the relationship between behavior and its
consequences. It focuses on changing or modifying employees’ on-the-job behavior
through the appropriate use of immediate rewards and punishments.
Behavior modification is the name given to the set of techniques by which reinforcement theory is used to modify human behavior.32 The basic assumption underlying behavior modification is the law of effect, which states that behavior that is
positively reinforced tends to be repeated, and behavior that is not reinforced tends
not to be repeated. Reinforcement is defined as anything that causes a certain behavior to be repeated or inhibited. The four reinforcement tools are positive reinforcement,
avoidance learning, punishment, and extinction, as summarized in Exhibit 15.6.
▪ Positive reinforcement is the administration of a pleasant and rewarding consequence following a desired behavior, such as praise for an employee who
453
C HAPTER 15 M OTIVATING E MPLOYEES
EXHIBIT
15 . 6
Changing Behavior with Reinforcement
SOURCE: Based on Richard L. Daft and Richard M. Steers, Organizations: A Micro/Macro Approach (Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman, 1986), p. 109.
© CLAY PETERSON/THE CALIFORNIAN/ASSOCIATED PRESS
arrives on time or does a little extra
work. Research shows that positive
reinforcement does help to improve
performance. Moreover, nonfinancial
reinforcements such as positive feedback, social recognition, and attention
are just as effective as financial incentives.33 One study of employees at fastfood drive-thru windows, for example,
found that performance feedback and
supervisor recognition had a significant effect on increasing the incidence
of “up-selling,” or asking customers
to increase their order.34 Indeed, many
people value factors other than money.
Nelson Motivation Inc. conducted a
survey of 750 employees across various industries to assess the value
they placed on various rewards. Cash
Farm managers apply positive reinforcement by basing
and other monetary awards came in
a fruit or vegetable picker’s pay on the amount he or she harvests. A variation on this
individual piece-rate system is a relative incentive plan that bases each worker’s pay on
dead last. The most valued rewards
the ratio of the individual’s productivity to average productivity among all co-workers.
involved praise and manager support
A study of Eastern and Central European pickers in the United Kingdom found that
35
and involvement.
workers’ productivity declined under the relative plan. Researchers theorized that fast
workers didn’t want to hurt their slower colleagues, so they reduced their efforts. The
▪ Avoidance learning is the removal of
study authors suggested a team-based scheme—where everyone’s pay increased if the
an unpleasant consequence following
team did well—would be more effective.
a desired behavior. Avoidance learning
is sometimes called negative reinforcement. Employees learn to do the right thing
by avoiding unpleasant situations. Avoidance learning occurs when a supervisor
avoidance learning The
stops criticizing or reprimanding an employee once the incorrect behavior has
removal of an unpleasant constopped.
sequence when an undesirablee
▪ Punishment is the imposition of unpleasant outcomes on an employee. Punishb havior is corrected.
beh
d
ment typically occurs following undesirable behavior. For example, a supervisor
punishment The
h imposition
may berate an employee for performing a task incorrectly. The supervisor expects
of an unp
of
pleasant outcome ffollthat the negative outcome will serve as a punishment and reduce the likelihood
lowing undesirable behavior.
5
Leading
454
P AR T 5 L EADING
of the behavior recurring. The use of punishment in organizations is controversial and often criticized because it fails to indicate the correct behavior. However, almost all managers report that they find it necessary to occasionally impose
forms of punishment ranging from verbal reprimands to employee suspensions
or firings.36
▪ Extinction is the withdrawal of a positive reward. Whereas with punishment,
the supervisor imposes an unpleasant outcome such as a reprimand, extinction
involves withholding pay raises, bonuses, praise, or other positive outcomes. The
idea is that behavior that is not positively reinforced will be less likely to occur
in the future. A good example of the use of extinction comes from Cheektowaga
(New York) Central Middle School, where students with poor grades or bad attitudes are excluded from extracurricular activities such as athletic contests, dances,
crafts, or ice-cream socials.37
Reward and punishment motivational practices dominate organizations. According to the Society for Human Resource Management, 84 percent of all companies
in the United States offer some type of monetary or nonmonetary reward system,
and 69 percent offer incentive pay, such as bonuses, based on an employee’s performance.38 However, in other studies, more than 80 percent of employers with incentive programs have reported that their programs are only somewhat successful or not
working at all.39 Despite the testimonies of organizations that enjoy successful incentive programs, criticism of these “carrot-and-stick” methods is growing, as discussed
in the Manager’s Shoptalk.
TakeaMoment
As a new manager, remember that reward and punishment practices are limited
motivational tools because they focus only on extrinsic rewards and lower-level
needs. Using intrinsic rewards to meet higher level needs is important too.
JOB DESIGN FOR MOTIVATION
A job in an organization is a unit of work that a single employee is responsible for performing. A job could include writing tickets for parking violators in New York City,
performing MRIs at Salt Lake Regional Medical Center, reading meters for Pacific
Gas and Electric, or doing long-range planning for the WB Television Network. Jobs
are an important consideration for motivation because performing their components
may provide rewards that meet employees’ needs. Managers need to know what
aspects of a job provide motivation as well as how to compensate for routine tasks that
have little inherent satisfaction. Job design is the application of motivational theories
to the structure of work for improving productivity and satisfaction. Approaches to
job design are generally classified as job simplification, job rotation, job enlargement,
and job enrichment.
extinction The withdrawal off
a positive
p
reward.
job design Th
The applicati
li ion
of motivational theories to the
structure of work for improving
g
productivity and satisfaction.
job simplification A job design whose purpose is to improvve
task efficiency by reducing the
number of tasks a single person
n
must do.
Job Simplification
Job simplification pursues task efficiency by reducing the number of tasks one person
must do. Job simplification is based on principles drawn from scientific management
and industrial engineering. Tasks are designed to be simple, repetitive, and standardized. As complexity is stripped from a job, the worker has more time to concentrate
on doing more of the same routine task. Workers with low skill levels can perform
the job, and the organization achieves a high level of efficiency. Indeed, workers are
interchangeable because they need little training or skill and exercise little judgment.
As a motivational technique, however, job simplification has failed. People dislike
routine and boring jobs and react in a number of negative ways, including sabotage,
455
Manager’sShoptalk
C HAPTER 15 M OTIVATING E MPLOYEES
The Carrot-and-Stick Controversy
Everybody thought Rob Rodin was crazy when he
decided to wipe out all individual incentives for his
sales force at Marshall Industries, a large distributor of
electronic components based in El Monte, California.
He did away with all bonuses, commissions, vacations, and other awards and rewards. All salespeople
would receive a base salary plus the opportunity for
profit sharing, which would be the same percent of
salary for everyone, based on the entire company’s
performance. Six years later, Rodin says productivity per person has tripled at the company, but still he
gets questions and criticism about his decision.
Rodin is standing right in the middle of a big
controversy in modern management. Do financial and other rewards really motivate the kind of
behavior organizations want and need? A growing
number of critics say no, arguing that carrot-andstick approaches are a holdover from the Industrial
Age and are inappropriate and ineffective in today’s
economy. Today’s workplace demands innovation
and creativity from everyone—behaviors that rarely
are inspired by money or other financial incentives.
Reasons for criticism of carrot-and-stick approaches
include the following:
1. Extrinsic rewards diminish intrinsic rewards.
When people are motivated to seek an extrinsic
reward, whether it is a bonus, an award, or the
approval of a supervisor, generally they focus
on the reward rather than on the work they
do to achieve it. Thus, the intrinsic satisfaction
people receive from performing their jobs actually declines. When people lack intrinsic rewards
in their work, their performance stays just adequate to achieve the reward offered. In the worst
case, employees may cover up mistakes or cheat
to achieve the reward. One study found that
teachers who were rewarded for increasing test
scores frequently used various forms of cheating, for example.
3. Extrinsic rewards assume people are driven by
lower-level needs. Rewards such as bonuses,
pay increases, and even praise presume that the
primary reason people initiate and persist in
behavior is to satisfy lower-level needs. However, behavior also is based on yearnings for
self-expression and on feelings of self-esteem
and self-worth. Typical individual incentive programs don’t reflect and encourage the myriad
behaviors that are motivated by people’s need
to express themselves and realize their higher
needs for growth and fulfillment.
Today’s organizations need employees who are
motivated to think, experiment, and continuously
search for ways to solve new problems. Alfie Kohn,
one of the most vocal critics of carrot-and-stick
approaches, offers the following advice to managers regarding how to pay employees: “Pay well, pay
fairly, and then do everything you can to get money
off people’s minds.” Indeed some evidence indicates
that money is not primarily what people work for.
Managers should understand the limits of extrinsic
motivators and work to satisfy employees’ higher,
as well as lower, needs. To be motivated, employees
need jobs that offer self-satisfaction in addition to a
yearly pay raise.
SOURCES: Alfie Kohn,“Incentives Can Be Bad for Business,”
Inc. (January 1998): 93–94; A. J. Vogl,“Carrots, Sticks, and SelfDeception” (an interview with Alfie Kohn), Across the Board
(January 1994): 39–44; Geoffrey Colvin,“What Money Makes
You Do,” Fortune (August 17, 1998): 213–214; and Jeffrey
Pfeffer,“Sins of Commission,” Business 2.0 (May 2004): 56.
absenteeism, and unionization. Job simplification is compared with job rotation and
job enlargement in Exhibit 15.7.
Job Rotation
Job rotation systematically moves employees from one job to another, thereby
increasing the number of different tasks an employee performs without increasing
the complexity of any one job. For example, an autoworker might install windshields
jjo
job
o rotation A job design th
hat
at
systematically moves employeeees fr
from
om one jo
job
b to
to anot
another
her to
provid
pro
videe tthem
hem wi
with
th var
variet
ietyy and
and
stimul
mulati
ation
on.
5
Leading
2. Extrinsic rewards are temporary. Offering outside incentives may ensure short-term success,
but not long-term high performance. When
employees are focused only on the reward, they
lose interest in their work. Without personal
interest, the potential for exploration, creativity,
and innovation disappears. Although the current deadline or goal may be met, better ways
of working and serving customers will not be
discovered and the company’s long-term success
will be affected.
456
EXHIBIT
P AR T 5 L EADING
15 . 7
Types of Job Design
one week and front bumpers the next. Job rotation still takes advantage of engineering efficiencies, but it provides variety and stimulation for employees. Although
employees might find the new job interesting at first, the novelty soon wears off as
the repetitive work is mastered.
Companies such as Home Depot, Motorola, 1-800-Flowers, and Dayton Hudson
have built on the notion of job rotation to train a flexible workforce. As companies
break away from ossified job categories, workers can perform several jobs, thereby
reducing labor costs and giving people opportunities to develop new skills. At Home
Depot, for example, workers scattered throughout the company’s vast chain of stores
can get a taste of the corporate climate by working at in-store support centers, while
associate managers can dirty their hands out on the sales floor.40 Job rotation also
gives companies greater flexibility. One production worker might shift among the
jobs of drill operator, punch operator, and assembler, depending on the company’s
need at the moment. Some unions have resisted the idea, but many now go along,
realizing that it helps the company be more competitive.41
Job Enlargement
Job enlargement combines a series of tasks into one new, broader job. This type of design
is a response to the dissatisfaction of employees with oversimplified jobs. Instead of
only one job, an employee may be responsible for three or four and will have more time
to do them. Job enlargement provides job variety and a greater challenge for employees.
At Maytag, jobs were enlarged when work was redesigned so that workers assembled
an entire water pump rather than doing each part as it reached them on the assembly
line. Similarly, rather than just changing the oil at a Precision Tune location, a mechanic
changes the oil, greases the car, airs the tires, checks fluid levels, battery, air filter, and so
forth. Then, the same employee is responsible for consulting with the customer about
routine maintenance or any problems he or she sees with the vehicle.
Job Enrichment
jjo
job
o enlargement A job design
gn
g
n
that comb
combine
iness a se
serie
riess of
of task
taskss
into one new, broad
b der job
b to
give employees variety and
challenge.
job enrichment A job design
n
that incorporates achievement,,
recognition, and other highlevel motivators into the work.
Recall the discussion of Maslow’s need hierarchy and Herzberg’s two-factor theory.
Rather than just changing the number and frequency of tasks a worker performs, job
enrichment incorporates high-level motivators into the work, including job responsibility, recognition, and opportunities for growth, learning, and achievement. In an
enriched job, employees have control over the resources necessary for performing
it, make decisions on how to do the work, experience personal growth, and set their
own work pace. Research shows that when jobs are designed to be controlled more
by employees than by managers, people typically feel a greater sense of involvement,
commitment, and motivation, which in turn contributes to higher morale, lower turnover, and stronger organizational performance.42
Many companies have undertaken job enrichment programs to increase employees’ involvement, motivation, and job satisfaction. At Ralcorp’s cereal manufacturing
457
C HAPTER 15 M OTIVATING E MPLOYEES
plant in Sparks, Nevada, for example, assembly-line employees screen, interview,
and train all new hires. They are responsible for managing the production flow to
and from their upstream and downstream partners, making daily decisions that
affect their work, managing quality, and contributing to continuous improvement.
Enriched jobs have improved employee motivation and satisfaction, and the company has benefited from higher long-term productivity, reduced costs, and happier,
more motivated employees.43
Job Characteristics Model
One significant approach to job design is the job characteristics model developed
by Richard Hackman and Greg Oldham.44 Hackman and Oldham’s research concerned work redesign, which is defined as altering jobs to increase both the quality of employees’ work experience and their productivity. Hackman and Oldham’s
research into the design of hundreds of jobs yielded the job characteristics model,
which is illustrated in Exhibit 15.8. The model consists of three major parts: core job
dimensions, critical psychological states, and employee growth-need strength.
Core Job Dimensions Hackman and Oldham identified five dimensions that
determine a job’s motivational potential:
1. Skill variety. The number of diverse activities that compose a job and the number
of skills used to perform it. A routine, repetitious assembly-line job is low in variety, whereas an applied research position that entails working on new problems
every day is high in variety.
2. Task identity. The degree to which an employee performs a total job with a recognizable beginning and ending. A chef who prepares an entire meal has more task
identity than a worker on a cafeteria line who ladles mashed potatoes.
3. Task significance. The degree to which the job is perceived as important and having impact on the company or consumers. People who distribute penicillin and
other medical supplies during times of emergencies would feel they have significant jobs.
4. Autonomy. The degree to which the worker has freedom, discretion, and selfdetermination in planning and carrying out tasks. A house painter can determine
how to paint the house; a paint sprayer on an assembly line has little autonomy.
EXHIBIT
15 . 8
work redesign The altering
of jobs to increase both the
quality off employe
l es’’ work
k experience and
d th
heir
i produ
d ctiivity
i y.
job characteristics model A
model of job design that comprisses core job dimensions, critical
psychological states, and emplo
p
lo
l yee
y gr
g owth-need strength
gth..
The Job Characteristics Model
5
Leading
SOURCE: Adapted from J. Richard Hackman and G. R. Oldham, “Motivation through the Design of Work: Test of a Theory,” Organizational Behavior and
Human Performance 16 (1976): 256.
458
P AR T 5 L EADING
5. Feedback. The extent to which doing the job provides information back to the
employee about his or her performance. Jobs vary in their ability to let workers
see the outcomes of their efforts. A football coach knows whether the team won
or lost, but a basic research scientist may have to wait years to learn whether a
research project was successful.
The job characteristics model says that the more these five core characteristics can
be designed into the job, the more the employees will be motivated and the higher
will be performance, quality, and satisfaction.
Critical Psychological States The model posits that core job dimensions are
more rewarding when individuals experience three psychological states in response
to job design. In Exhibit 15.8, skill variety, task identity, and task significance tend
to influence the employee’s psychological state of experienced meaningfulness of work.
The work itself is satisfying and provides intrinsic rewards for the worker. The job
characteristic of autonomy influences the worker’s experienced responsibility. The job
characteristic of feedback provides the worker with knowledge of actual results. The
employee thus knows how he or she is doing and can change work performance to
increase desired outcomes.
Personal and Work Outcomes The impact of the five job characteristics on the
psychological states of experienced meaningfulness, responsibility, and knowledge
of actual results leads to the personal and work outcomes of high work motivation,
high work performance, high satisfaction, and low absenteeism and turnover.
Employee Growth-Need Strength The final component of the job characteristics model is called employee growth-need strength, which means that people have
different needs for growth and development. If a person wants to satisfy low-level
needs, such as safety and belongingness, the job characteristics model has less
effect. When a person has a high need for growth and development, including
the desire for personal challenge, achievement, and challenging work, the model
is especially effective. People with a high need to grow and expand their abilities
respond favorably to the application of the model and to improvements in core job
dimensions.
One interesting finding concerns the cross-cultural differences in the impact of job
characteristics. Intrinsic factors such as autonomy, challenge, achievement, and recognition can be highly motivating in countries such as the United States. However,
they may contribute little to motivation and satisfaction in a country such as Nigeria
and might even lead to demotivation. A recent study indicates that the link between
intrinsic characteristics and job motivation and satisfaction is weaker in economically disadvantaged countries with poor governmental social welfare systems, and in
high power distance countries, as defined in Chapter 4.45 Thus, the job characteristics
model would be expected to be less effective in these countries.
INNOVATIVE IDEAS FOR MOTIVATING
Despite the controversy over carrot-and-stick motivational practices discussed in
the Shoptalk box earlier in this chapter, organizations are increasingly using various
types of incentive compensation as a way to motivate employees to higher levels of
performance. Exhibit 15.9 summarizes several popular methods of incentive pay.
TakeaMoment
Go to the ethical dilemma on pages 464–465 that pertains to the use of incentive
compensation as a motivational tool.
459
C HAPTER 15 M OTIVATING E MPLOYEES
Program
Purpose
Pay for performance
Rewards individual employees in proportion to their performance
contributions. Also called merit pay.
Gain sharing
Rewards all employees and managers within a business unit when
predetermined performance targets are met. Encourages teamwork.
Employee stock ownership
plan (ESOP)
Gives employees part ownership of the organization, enabling them
to share in improved profit performance.
Lump-sum bonuses
Rewards employees with a one-time cash payment based on
performance.
Pay for knowledge
Links employee salary with the number of task skills acquired.
Workers are motivated to learn the skills for many jobs, thus increasing company flexibility and efficiency.
Flexible work schedule
Flextime allows workers to set their own hours. Job sharing allows two
or more part-time workers to jointly cover one job. Telecommuting,
sometimes called flex-place, allows employees to work from home or
an alternative workplace.
Team-based compensation
Rewards employees for behavior and activities that benefit the
team, such as cooperation, listening, and empowering others.
Lifestyle awards
Rewards employees for meeting ambitious goals with luxury items,
such as high-definition televisions, tickets to big-name sporting
events, and exotic travel.
EXHIBIT
15 . 9
New Motivational Compensation Programs
Variable compensation and forms of “at risk” pay are key motivational tools that
are becoming more common than fixed salaries at many companies. These programs
can be effective if they are used appropriately and combined with motivational ideas
that also provide employees with intrinsic rewards and meet higher-level needs.
Effective managers don’t use incentive plans as the sole basis of motivation. The most
effective motivational programs typically involve much more than money or other
external rewards. Two recent motivational trends are empowering employees and
framing work to have greater meaning.
Empowering People to Meet Higher Needs
One significant way managers can meet higher motivational needs is to shift power
down from the top of the organization and share it with employees to enable them to
achieve goals. Empowerment is power sharing, the delegation of power or authority
to subordinates in an organization.46 Increasing employee power heightens motivation for task accomplishment because people improve their own effectiveness, choosing how to do a task and using their creativity.47 Research indicates that most people
have a need for self-efficacy, which is the capacity to produce results or outcomes, to
feel that they are effective.48
Empowering employees involves giving them four elements that enable them
to act more freely to accomplish their jobs: information, knowledge, power, and
rewards.49
Leading
1. Employees receive information about company performance. In companies where
employees are fully empowered, all employees have access to all financial and
operational information.
2. Employees have knowledge and skills to contribute to company goals. Companies
use training programs and other development tools to help employees acquire
the knowledge and skills they need to contribute to organizational performance.
3. Employees have the power to make substantive decisions. Empowered employees have the authority to directly influence work procedures and organizational
performance, such as through quality circles or self-directed work teams.
5
empowerment The delegation of power and authorityy to
subordinates.
460
P AR T 5 L EADING
4. Employees are rewarded based on company performance. Organizations that
empower workers often reward them based on the results shown in the company’s
bottom line. Organizations may also use other motivational compensation programs described in Exhibit 15.9 to tie employee efforts to company performance.
Many of today’s organizations are implementing empowerment programs, but
they are empowering workers to varying degrees. At some companies, empowerment means encouraging workers’ ideas while managers retain final authority for
decisions; at others it means giving employees almost complete freedom and power
to make decisions and exercise initiative and imagination.50 Current methods of
empowerment fall along a continuum, as illustrated in Exhibit 15.10. The continuum
runs from a situation in which front-line workers have almost no discretion, such as
on a traditional assembly line, to full empowerment, where workers even participate
in formulating organizational strategy.
Giving Meaning to Work Through Engagement
Another way to meet higher-level motivational needs and help people get intrinsic rewards from their work is to instill a sense of importance and meaningfulness.
In recent years, managers have focused on employee engagement, which puts less
E X H I B I T 1 5 .1 0
A Continuum of
Empowerment
SOURCES: Based on Robert C. Ford and Myron D. Fottler, “Empowerment: A Matter of Degree,” Academy of
Management Executive 9, no. 3 (1995): 21–31; Lawrence Holpp, “Applied Empowerment,” Training (February 1994):
39–44; and David P. McCaffrey, Sue R. Faerman, and David W. Hart, “The Appeal and Difficulties of Participative
Systems,” Organization Science 6, no. 6 (November–December 1995): 603–627.
461
emphasis on extrinsic rewards such as pay
and more emphasis on fostering an environment in which people feel valued and
effective. Employee engagement means
that people enjoy their jobs and are satisfied with their work conditions, contribute
enthusiastically to meeting team and organizational goals, and feel a sense of belonging and commitment to the organization.
Fully engaged employees care deeply
about the organization and actively seek
out ways to serve the mission.51
How do managers develop engaged
employees? Not by controlling and ordering them around, but by organizing the
workplace in such a way that each person
can learn, contribute, and grow. Good managers channel employee motivation toward
the accomplishment of organizational goals
by tapping into each individual’s unique
set of talents, skills, interests, attitudes, and
needs. By treating each employee as an individual, good managers can put people in
the right jobs and provide intrinsic rewards
to every employee every day. Then, managers make sure people have what they
need to perform, clearly define the desired
outcomes, and get out of the way. At the
Hotel Carlton in San Francisco, something
as simple as buying new vacuum cleaners
enhances employee engagement.
PHOTO COURTESY TURN HERE, PHOTO BY NAAMAH USSEY
C HAPTER 15 M OTIVATING E MPLOYEES
Brad Inman (center), chairman and founder of
TurnHere, Inc. of Emeryville, California, gathers his staff every day at 3 p.m. to kick
around ideas, see works in progress, talk about the financial status of the company,
and discuss how to meet revenue goals. “At first people thought I was crazy when
I said we should all get together every day,” says Inman, founder of the company
that is a leading platform for online video production and provides studio-quality
Internet video advertising for clients. But Inman believes involving and listening to
employees is critical to employee engagement. “The key to retention is for people to
feel they are contributing to building something, not just showing up,” says Inman.
Hotel Carlton, Joie de
Vivre Hospitality Inc.
5
Leading
Text not available due to copyright restrictions
Innovative Way
Keeping low-skilled service employees engaged can be particularly challenging, but managers at Joie de Vivre Hospitality Inc. are continually searching for ways to do it. At the Hotel
Carlton in San Francisco, which Joie de Vivre took over in 2003, one way was to buy a new
vacuum for each of the 15 housekeepers and to replace it each year. Previous management
had refused to replace the aging vacuums, despite numerous complaints from staff. Buying new vacuums made a big difference in employees’ performance and motivation. “It just
seems that [they] care more about us,” one housekeeper said.
Caring about employees and helping them see their jobs as valuable and fun are top
priorities for Joie de Vivre CEO Chip Conley. The company sponsors employee parties and
awards, arranges annual employee retreats, and offers free classes on a variety of topics,
including English as a second language. Most importantly, it pushes managers to seek and
act on feedback from employees, to make the workplace feel like a community of caring,
and to find ways to help people see how their jobs make a difference. It is essential, Conley
says to “focus on the impact they’re making rather than just on the task of cleaning the
toilet.”52
engagement A situation in
which employees enjoy their
work,, contribute enthusiastically to meeting goals, and feell
a sense of belongi
g ng
g and commitmen
itmentt tto
o the
the org
organi
anizat
zation
ion.
Maslow and the Motivation Hierarchy: Measuring Satisfaction of the Needs
Author(s): Robert J. Taormina and Jennifer H. Gao
Source: The American Journal of Psychology, Vol. 126, No. 2 (Summer 2013), pp. 155-177
Published by: University of Illinois Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/amerjpsyc.126.2.0155 .
Accessed: 17/05/2014 05:45
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
University of Illinois Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The
American Journal of Psychology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Maslow and the Motivation Hierarchy:
Measuring Satisfaction of the Needs
ROBERT J. TAORMINA
University of Macau
JENNIFER H. GAO
Macao Polytechnic Institute
For each of the 5 needs in Maslow’s motivational hierarchy (physiological, safety–security,
belongingness, esteem, and self-actualization), operational definitions were developed from
Maslow’s theory of motivation. New measures were created based on the operational definitions (1) to assess the satisfaction of each need, (2) to assess their expected correlations (a) with
each of the other needs and (b) with four social and personality measures (i.e., family support,
traditional values, anxiety/worry, and life satisfaction), and (3) to test the ability of the satisfaction level of each need to statistically predict the satisfaction level of the next higher-level need.
Psychometric tests of the scales conducted on questionnaire results from 386 adult respondents
from the general population lent strong support for the validity and reliability of all 5 needs
measures. Significant positive correlations among the scales were also found; that is, the more
each lower-level need was satisfied, the more the next higher-level need was satisfied. Additionally, as predicted, family support, traditional values, and life satisfaction had significant positive
correlations with the satisfaction of all 5 needs, and the anxiety/worry facet of neuroticism had
significant negative correlations with the satisfaction of all the needs. Multiple regression analyses revealed that the satisfaction of each higher-level need was statistically predicted by the satisfaction of the need immediately below it in the hierarchy, as expected from Maslow’s theory.
Maslow’s (1943, 1987) theory of human motivation
has generated a great deal of interest, based on the
number of citations it has garnered, but it has always
been a controversial theory, because the literature
includes both criticism and support. For example, it
has been criticized for being culture centered (Yang,
2003), but it has received empirical support in a large
number of countries and cultures (Davis-Sharts,
1986). Some critics have claimed that it is gender
biased (Cullen & Gotell, 2002), while others have
contended that it is relevant to both genders (Coy
& Kovacs-Long, 2005). Nonetheless, given that the
theory recurs in the literature and that it continues to
draw interest from both theorists and researchers, it
should be regarded as deserving research attention.
To permit meaningful empirical testing, as Marx
and Hillix (1973) explained, theories should follow certain rules that allow them to be tested and
verified. First, their terms must be explained, which
for Maslow’s theory would mean identifying the
needs and clarifying their definitions. Next, a more
advanced form of theory testing entails examining
American Journal of Psychology
Summer 2013, Vol. 126, No. 2 pp. 155–177 • © 2013 by the Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
the hypothesized relationships among the variables,
which requires viable measures to assess the needs
and theorized relationships among them (e.g., their
expected hierarchical associations) and their ability
to predict certain outcomes. Thus, this article uses
grounded theoretical concepts to define the needs,
develop viable measures for them, and assess their
relationships to each other and to a set of theorized
antecedent and outcome variables.
Definition of a Need
For the purpose of clarity, the relevant concepts are
defined in the sections that follow. First, a “need” (the
most critical concept) is defined; then, operational
definitions of the specific needs are provided in the
subsequent section on scale development. The approach used here is based on the fundamentals of
drive theory (e.g., Hull, 1951; Spence, 1956). Basically,
drive theory posits that certain things are required by
all human beings for the continuation of their lives
or for their well-being. Seward and Seward (1937)
defined drive as “an activity of the total organism
resulting from a persistent disequilibrium” (p. 349),
with a disequilibrium usually created by an insufficiency (or deficiency) of certain things, such as water,
food, and rest. Thus, a drive reflects a “need” that
arises from the lack of some particular thing, such
that a “need” can be characterized by, and defined as,
a lack of something that is essential to an organism’s
(a person’s) existence or well-being.
For further clarification, it should be noted that
a “thing,” itself, is not a need; instead, the thing,
when it is lacking, creates the need that is felt by the
organism. For example, the lack of water, which is
necessary for survival, is what creates the need for
water, which, in turn, drives the organism to seek
water. Therefore, it is not the water that is the need
(water is just a chemical), but, rather, it is the lack of
water that creates a disequilibrium in the organism
that drives the organism to seek water. Of course,
Maslow’s theory goes beyond this to explain that
each type (or level) of need contains various things
that he grouped together because they are conceptually related. These ideas, particularly that (a) the
thing is not a need and (b) the lack of a thing is what
identifies a need, are necessary to understand how
the scales were developed to measure satisfaction of
the five needs in Maslow’s theory.
Approach to Scale Development
For the sake of parsimony, it is assumed that the five
needs (i.e., physiological, safety–security, belongingness, esteem, and for self-actualization) exist along
the lines Maslow (1943) described (for the most part,
Maslow’s original 1943 theory is used here). Although
some tests of the needs have been conducted by previous researchers, most were undertaken in therapeutic settings. Therefore, instead of directly measuring
the needs themselves or assessing the extent to which
those needs were satisfied, previous studies (e.g., Collins, Langham, & Sigford, 2000) tended to use existing personality scales that were thought to be related
to the needs. Furthermore, as Wahba and Bridwell
(1976) argued in their review of the research, most
scales that assessed the concepts have been troubled
by measurement problems. Therefore, what is still
required is a set of valid and reliable measures that
are designed to directly assess the five needs or satisfaction of the needs.
To create valid and suitable measures for the
needs, it is essential to derive unambiguous definitions for each concept. Thus, each of the needs is
operationally defined to develop a clear understanding of what is to be measured with each scale. In turn,
the definitions are used to enable scale development
for empirical testing. Subsequently, the new scales
are assessed for their reliability, their construct validity, and an exploratory analysis of their expected
relationships with a set of demographic, social, and
personality variables.
LEVEL 1: PHYSIOLOGICAL NEEDS.
Marx and Hillix (1973) stated that terms can be either “primitive” (e.g., an object that can be pointed
to) or defined via semantic relationships. By virtue
of the terms it used, Maslow’s (1987) theory has the
necessary theoretical foundation. For example, food
and water are concrete things that can be seen and
touched and are consumed on a daily basis, and so
the need for them can be readily understood. In particular, some molecules (e.g., water, salt, oxygen) are
needed for life, such that deficiencies motivate the
organism to seek them. Indeed, the links between
hunger and deficiencies of some chemicals have been
empirically confirmed (Poothullil, 1992). Maslow also
mentioned other needs, including ambient temperatures (we can freeze to death or die of overheating).
156 • TAORMINA & GAO
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
And medical doctors argue that we need exercise and
healthy physiques. Thus, physiological needs can be
operationally defined as the lack of chemicals, nutrients, or internal (e.g., exercise/health) or environmental (e.g., temperatures) conditions necessary for
the body to survive, such that the extended absence
of these things could lead to psychological stress or
physical death.
Regarding the location of physiological needs in
the hierarchy, some critics have argued that it might
not be as Maslow described (Wahba & Bridwell,
1976), and some used anecdotes, such as when people at a banquet in China delay eating until the guest
of honor arrives, to argue that a person’s physiological needs (for food) might not be as important as social (relationship) needs (Nevis, 1983). But Maslow
(1987) was referring to “chronic extreme hunger,”
which he thought was rare in normally functioning
societies. Consequently, the hierarchy is not a matter
of valuing what is “important” but, rather, whether
one is physiologically “deprived” of something,
which, when sufficiently lacking, gives rise to the
need. Ignoring these ideas leads to a misconception
of the basic needs.
Some misunderstanding of this level could have
occurred among modern critics of Maslow’s theory
because people who live in affluent societies might
not be fully sensitized to this idea. As Maslow (1987)
explained, “Average . . . citizens are experiencing
appetite rather than hunger when they say ‘I am
hungry.’ They are apt to experience sheer life-anddeath hunger only by accident” (p. 17). That is, over
the last century, agriculture has advanced so far in
the developed countries that the needs for food and
water are being met, which could make this need
seem less critical than it is. In other words, in a
wealthy society nourishing liquids of many types
(e.g., juice) can be found such that a person might
imbibe them without realizing they are composed of
water and think that water is not an essential physiological need. In less developed countries, however,
drinkable water is less accessible and more highly
valued (Gadgil, 1998). Consequently, because the
physiological needs are located at the lowest level
of the hierarchy, and the theory does not identify
any lower-level needs, no hypothesis is made about
other needs that could predict the physiological
needs.
LEVEL 2: SAFET Y–SECURIT Y NEEDS.
Safety–security needs, as Maslow (1943) explained,
are also basic to human beings, as can be observed
in infants, who have an overt “danger reaction” (e.g.,
crying) to threatening stimuli, such as being in danger
of falling (losing the support of a parent’s arms), or
being treated roughly. This reaction may be “instinctive,” that is, performed without conscious design or
intentional adaptation (Oxford English Dictionary,
n.d.), to facilitate survival in response to predators
because, without it, the species may have perished
countless millennia ago. The response is apparently
so fundamental that it may be genetically and neurologically determined to aid survival (Carretie, Hinojosa, Mercado, & Tapia, 2005).
To define the safety–security needs, it is necessary
to identify the types of threats that could educe the
safety–security response and the conditions that satisfy these needs. Because this level of need is conceptually higher than the previous level, the terms used
as threats to safety refer to both concrete and abstract
things, such as wild animals, criminal assault, disease,
war, anarchy, social chaos, natural catastrophes, and,
in more peaceful times, the lack of such things as job
security, financial security, medical insurance, and
retirement security (Maslow, 1943).
Maslow (1943) also gave examples of things that
could satisfy the safety–security needs, such as a place
where one can feel safe from harm (e.g., a shelter such
as a house that gives protection from weather disasters), a guardian, or someone who can be relied on
for help (e.g., a reliable police force), an ethical legal
system, or a trustworthy government, and more abstractly, stability or structure in one’s life. From these
examples, safety–security needs may be defined as
the lack of protections such as shelter from environmental dangers and disasters, personal protection
from physical harm, financial protection from destitution, legal protection from attacks on one’s rights to a
peaceful existence, or a lack of stability in one’s life.
With regard to the needs hierarchy, in Maslow’s
theory, the more the physiological needs are satisfied, the more the person will attempt to satisfy the
safety–security needs. This means that it is not the
feeling of need that should be correlated; rather, it
is the satisfaction of the needs that should be correlated. Although not everyone will satisfy higher-level
needs, the satisfaction of any given lower-level need,
MASLOW AND THE MOTIVATION HIERARCHY • 157
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
according to Maslow’s theory, makes it possible to
satisfy the next higher-level need. This implies that
two contiguous needs could be positively correlated
(especially if large numbers of people are sampled).
In other words, when one has sufficiently satisfied
a need (i.e., when satisfaction of that need is high),
then one would have time to attend to satisfying
the next higher-level need, which should result in
a greater level of satisfaction with that need as well.
Therefore, an increase in the satisfaction of the
former (physiological) need should be associated
with an increase in satisfaction of the latter (safety–­
security) need.
H(1): The more the physiological needs are
satisfied, the more the safety–security needs
will be satisfied.
LEVEL 3: BELONGINGNESS NEEDS.
In describing the belongingness needs (also called
the “love needs”), Maslow (1987) noted that when
physiological and safety–security needs are largely
gratified, people “hunger for affectionate relations
with people in general” (p. 381). As Baumeister and
Leary (1995) pointed out in an extensive review of the
theory and research on this concept, the need of human beings to have interpersonal attachments and to
feel a sense of belonging with other people is considered fundamental to the species. Their review offers
strong support for several factors that were theorized
to characterize the belongingness needs. These include an evolutionary basis for satisfying them, that is,
forming attachments with other individuals or groups
can increase survival for those who develop belongingness with others (Ainsworth, 1989).
Baumeister and Leary (1995) concluded that the
belongingness needs are innate, that they are universal
(because they are found in every human society), that
interpersonal bonds are very easy to develop for most
people, and that the deprivation of satisfying these
needs can have negative consequences for the individual. Baumeister and Leary also stated that “social
exclusion may well be the most common and important
cause of anxiety” (p. 506) because it is accompanied
by feelings of social rejection, isolation, loneliness, and
depression, which confirms Maslow’s (1943) observation that “practically all theorists of psychopathology
have stressed thwarting of the love needs as basic in
the picture of maladjustment” (p. 381).
A definition of the belongingness needs can
be derived from Maslow’s (1943) initial theoretical
conceptualization and from Baumeister and Leary’s
(1995) review of the concept: a lack of close, lasting,
emotionally pleasant interactions with other people,
in groups as well as in intimate dyads, that yield personal relationships characterized by mutual affective
concern. Thus, close relationships may take many
forms, the foremost of which is the family, as well as
same-sex and heterosexual friendships, romances,
marriage, work groups, and other forms. However, it
should be noted that “love is not synonymous with
sex. Sex may be studied as a purely physiological
need” (Maslow, 1943, p. 381), which is how the two
needs are examined in the present research.
With regard to the place the belongingness needs
take in the hierarchy, again, Maslow’s (1943) theory
specifies that the relative gratification of a need at any
of the levels releases the person to start focusing on
satisfying the need at the next level up in the hierarchy. Thus, when one’s physiological and safety–security needs are largely satisfied, one will be able to
pay more attention to satisfying his or her need to
form pleasant interactions with others.
H(2): The more the safety–security needs are
satisfied, the more the belongingness needs
will be satisfied.
LEVEL 4: ESTEEM NEEDS.
Maslow (1943) regarded the esteem needs as having
two components: esteem for oneself and the respect
one receives from other people. To achieve a clearer
understanding of the two facets, they are explained
separately, although they could be assessed either as
separate facets or combined as an overall construct.
Esteem for self. In reviewing self-esteem, Guindon (2002) complained that practitioners did not
define this concept because they assumed its meaning was implicitly understood, and therefore she
offered a new definition for it. Unfortunately, her
definition used the word self to define “self,” which
rendered the definition incomplete. Therefore, to
increase clarity, the term “self-esteem” is here rephrased as “esteem for self ” and (using the Oxford
English Dictionary definition of self and Guindon’s
review of the concept) is defined as a person’s attitudinal evaluation of and the respect he or she
has for his or her own nature or character and the
158 • TAORMINA & GAO
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
related feelings of one’s worthiness, merit, or value
as a person.
Esteem from others. Whereas self-esteem has been
well researched by psychologists for decades, esteem
from others has not received much attention, either
conceptually or empirically. Using the definition developed earlier to characterize esteem for self, “esteem
from others” is defined here in terms of what a person
receives, that is, the attitudinal evaluation and respect
a person receives from people regarding that person’s
nature or character and their related feelings about that
person’s worthiness, merit, or value as a person.
Thus, esteem needs, as an overall concept, is defined as the lack of respect a person has for himself or
herself or the lack of respect a person receives from
other people.
One reason for the scarcity of research on this
variable might be the absence of a usable measure
for it. In one early attempt to measure the overall esteem need (among managers), Porter (1961) used two
statements, one for prestige (of a person’s management position) received from other people in one’s
company and one for prestige received from other
people not in the company. As each statement was
evaluated separately, no scale was created (and no
reliability reported). Later, Lester (1990) designed a
scale for more general use, but the esteem need still
contained only two items that referred to respect
from others.
Recently, a scale was created for esteem from
others (Taormina, 2009) that included statements
reflecting the respect and admiration other people
felt for a person (e.g., “I am admired by many people”). That scale had a significant negative correlation with gambling behavior, which may indicate a
type of divergent validity of the scale because gambling is regarded by many people to be an immoral
behavior; that is, the respondents received less esteem from other people for engaging in a socially
undesirable behavior.
In regard to the place of esteem needs in the hierarchy, there is a logical progression from satisfying belongingness needs to seeking esteem because
both involve social interactions. A human being needs
others with whom to interact to feel good about himself or herself within a network of social relationships,
which may satisfy the need for self-esteem. But it is
not sufficient to only be a part of a group (especially if
one is not respected by the group members). Thus, to
have a fulfilling sense of esteem, one needs the respect
of others as well.
H(3): The more the belongingness needs are
satisfied, the more the esteem needs will be
satisfied.
LEVEL 5: SELF-ACTUALIZ ATION NEEDS.
Self-actualization has been one of the most difficult
needs to define because it is at the highest level of the
theoretical hierarchy and thus is a more abstract concept. Maslow (1987) described it as “people’s desire
for self-fulfillment, namely, the tendency for them to
become actualized in what they are potentially. This
tendency might be phrased as the desire to become
more and more what one idiosyncratically is” (p. 22).
Another difficulty in defining this need was in
viewing it subjectively, as an idealistic state of being. Maslow (1987) chose to describe acquaintances
and friends (p. 126) who were “very fine,” “older,”
“creative,” “visibly successful,” “saintly,” and “sagacious” people (p. 42); thus, his characterization of
self-actualized people was subjective and idealized.
Also, the descriptions were not of those people’s
inherent characteristics but of their values, that is,
about being “involved in a cause outside their own
skin, in something outside of themselves” (p. 42). The
attention that (financially) successful older people
give to creativity (versus shame and doubt) and their
generativity (versus stagnation) depicts people who
successfully passed through Erikson’s (1964) seventh
stage of development. Specifically, generativity refers
to being concerned with other people and trying to
make the world a better place. This led to the problem of including other-orientedness as part of the
definition of self-actualization.
The idea of including other-orientedness to
define self-actualization is inappropriate because it
introduces confounds. For example, other-oriented
behavior might be motivated by a lack of being liked
by others (i.e., the person’s belongingness needs).
Alternately, the desire to help others might result from
a lack of respect from others (i.e., the esteem needs).
Additionally, although some writers believe that
self-actualization should include the idea of a “social self ” (which describes the individual in relation
to other people), other-orientedness fundamentally
confounds the definition of self-actualization because
MASLOW AND THE MOTIVATION HIERARCHY • 159
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
the constructs of “self ” and “other” are inherently
distinct (i.e., other people are independent physical
entities that cannot be part of a person’s individuated
physical “self ”).
Furthermore, because Maslow was concerned
with therapy, he thought clinical psychologists should
help patients using Erikson’s (1964) idea of generativity, which states that one should care about other people rather than be self-concerned. This therapeutic
approach disposed some psychologists to overlook
the main concept of self-actualization, that is, the self,
and instead to emphasize an idealized view of what
people should be like (i.e., to be concerned about the
welfare of other people). Unfortunately, that contradicts what self-actualization is, at least regarding its
lexical meaning.
In order to derive an operational definition that
will better allow the concept to be measured, a more
fundamental approach to establishing a working
definition should be taken. This is accomplished by
examining the linguistic elements of the term selfactualization. The first element, self, consists of a
person’s conscious and unconscious, including the
cognitions, thoughts, and feelings that combine to
form the person’s core identity. Also, according to
the Oxford English Dictionary (n.d.), the self is “that
which a person really and intrinsically is,” or, “one’s
true character.”
To complete the definition, the second part of
the term can also be broken down to reveal its nature. Actual refers to what is genuine, real, or true.
The -ize suffix refers to converting something, and
-ation refers to a process; thus, the term actualization
refers to the process of converting something into
what it really and essentially is. Therefore, when all
parts of the word are used in combination, the term
self-actualization can be more precisely defined: the
process of a person becoming what he or she really
and uniquely, that is, idiosyncratically, is (where id­
iosyncratic refers to “individual disposition; A peculiarity of constitution or temperament particular
to a person,” Oxford English Dictionary, n.d.). This
definition delineates the true self from what society
tells us we ought to be.
Regarding the components of self-actualization,
previous attempts were limited by the lack of a clear
definition, which made earlier measures ambiguous, or
were inappropriate because they stressed being other-
oriented. One attempt (Shostrom, 1964) used many
other-oriented adjectives that are socially approved
(e.g., empathetic, friendly, accepting, tolerant, modest,
and humble), but whereas the terms were derived from
a psychotherapeutic point of view, they could invoke
social desirability. Thus, although the terms had a high
reliability, several adjectives did not fit the definition
of self-actualization. In another example, Lester (1990)
created a scale for self-actualization for college students
(N = 46, mean age = 21 years), but viewed from the
stricter definition of self-actualization, the items do
not seem to describe the concept (e.g., “I am seeking maturity” would be irrelevant to older people, and
the results from such a small sample of young college
students might not be generalizable).
In a different approach, Leclerc, Lefrançois,
Dubé, Hébert, and Gaulin (1998) used the Delphi
technique, which asked several authors who had published at least one paper on self-actualization to list
the traits of a self-actualized person. They obtained
36 items, which they placed into two categories:
“openness to experience” and “reference to self.”
Unfortunately, “openness to experience” is one of
the Big Five personality constructs (Costa & McCrae,
1992), and because this is a personality characteristic, it should have a normal curve for all members
of the population, but this contradicts the idea that
self-actualization is achieved by a relative minority of
the population (Maslow, 1962, p. 190).
Also in the Leclerc et al. (1998) study, some items
(e.g., “aware of their feelings”) are characteristic of all
human beings, whereas some items (e.g., “capable of
intimate contact”) are typical of most mammals (e.g.,
dogs are very affectionate), and some items are otherfocused (e.g., “capable of empathy”). For the “reference to self ” items, although fittingly labeled, some
were not appropriate, with one of the most troublesome items being “have a positive self-esteem.” Because self-esteem is a component of the (subordinatelevel) esteem needs, it brings into doubt whether that
study had a clear definition of self-actualization as a
separate construct. Also, that study did not empirically test the items and did not report reliabilities for
the scales.
Additionally, French and Joseph (1999) tried
to relate religiosity to self-actualization and used 15
items of a self-actualization scale by Jones and Crandall (1986), which included items such as “I feel free
160 • TAORMINA & GAO
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
to be angry at those I love,” and “I fear failure.” However, the scale yielded an alpha reliability of only .20,
so it was dropped from their analyses.
As a consequence of the problems with previous scales, a new scale was developed for this study.
All the items created were based on the definition of
self-actualization developed in this article and, with
discerning selectivity, on Maslow’s (1987) theoretical explanations. Therefore, the items for the present
study were intentionally focused on the self-oriented
aspects of self-actualization (e.g., “I am now being the
person I always wanted to be”).
Regarding the theoretical location of the self-actualization construct in the needs hierarchy for empirical testing, once the esteem needs have been largely
satisfied, a person should be sufficiently secure in
his or her social standing among other people that
he or she can turn to the endeavor of self-actualizing,
namely, trying to become what he or she really (and
uniquely) wants to be.
H(4): The more the esteem needs are satisfied, the more the self-actualization needs
will be satisfied.
Exploratory Variables and the Five Needs
In addition to creating the needs measures and testing
their interrelationships, a set of additional measures
was identified to determine whether certain theoretical and practical variables would be associated
with the needs, as might be expected from inductive
reasoning. Three variables of interest selected were
emotional support received from the family, personal
(traditional) values, and anxiety/worry (i.e., a facet of
neuroticism) as a personality measure. One further
variable selected for testing was life satisfaction.
FAMILY EMOTIONAL SUPPORT.
In humans, children are raised and cared for by their
parents and family, who provide the child with basic necessities (e.g., nourishment) and protection
(e.g., shelter) for survival, growth, and development.
These behaviors should relate directly to satisfying
the physiological and safety–security needs. Family members also (to varying degrees) provide love
and emotional support to the child, which partially
satisfies the belongingness needs. The family could
(likewise, to varying degrees) also provide a positive
regard that fosters self-esteem.
Along these lines, as described in attachment
theory (Ainsworth, 1989; Bowlby, 1982), children
who are raised by caring, supportive parents tend
to have higher self-esteem (Armsden & Greenberg,
1987) and to be more outgoing and competent in their
social activities (Waters, Wippman, & Sroufe, 1979),
which could earn them more respect from others,
thus increasing their esteem needs (from both the self
and others). When these needs are adequately met,
the person will be more able to pursue his or her selfactualization. To test these ideas, family emotional
support was selected to assess its relationship to the
satisfaction of all five needs.
H(5): The more family emotional support
people receive, the more satisfaction there
will be of their (a) physiological, (b) safety–
security, (c) belongingness, (d) esteem, and
(e) self-actualization needs.
TR ADITIONAL VALUES.
Traditional values, which are characteristic of a society and usually learned and adopted by individual
members of the society, represent ideas, concepts,
and qualities that people consider important. According to Homer and Kahle (1988), using social adaptation theory, values guide individuals on what to
do when faced with choices in life and have a causal
influence on their behaviors. Unger et al. (2002)
tested this idea among several ethnic groups and
found that higher levels of traditional cultural values,
specifically filial piety and familism (i.e., a sense of
family obligation), were associated with lower levels
of health risk behaviors.
Traditional values in most societies usually refers to close family ties, personal integrity, respect for
others, and living according to the cultural mores of
one’s society. Each of these factors could affect the
extent to which a person’s needs are satisfied. For
example, family ties, as reflected in intergenerational
support, could help a person satisfy physiological
needs (e.g., for food) and safety–security needs (for
home and shelter provided by parents to their children and by offspring to their elders). Close family
ties also refer to feeling love, acceptance, warmth, and
inclusion, which help satisfy the belongingness needs.
Additionally, personal integrity can help a person develop self-esteem, and the respect one has for
others is likely (in most societies) to be reciprocated,
MASLOW AND THE MOTIVATION HIERARCHY • 161
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
such that someone with personal integrity will probably be more accepted and liked by others, increasing satisfaction of the belongingness needs, and be
more respected by others, increasing satisfaction of
the need for esteem from others. Thus, if all the aforementioned needs are more likely to be satisfied in a
person who abides by his or her society’s traditional
values, this would make it more likely for that person
to also achieve self-actualization.
H(6): The more that people abide by traditional values, the more satisfied will be
their (a) physiological, (b) safety–security,
(c) belongingness, (d) esteem, and (e) selfactualization needs.
ANXIET Y AND WORRY AS A FACET OF NEUROTICISM.
Neuroticism is characterized by anxiety, worry, fear,
and doubt (Costa & McCrae, 1992), and Maslow
(1943) explained that this aspect of personality is antithetical to the satisfaction of certain needs: “Some
neurotic adults in our society are, in many ways,
like unsafe children in their desire for safety” (p.
379). Anxiety, and its associated symptom, worry,
as the most characteristic features of neuroticism,
can manifest in any aspect of life, such as whether
there is enough food to eat (physiological need) and
whether it is safe to eat (safety–security need) or
whether a spouse truly loves the person (belongingness need). Also, research on neuroticism has found
it to occur with low levels of self-esteem (Judge,
Erez, Bono, & Thoresen, 2002). Therefore, people
with high levels of the anxiety/worry component of
neuroticism would suffer such disquietude in their
lives that they would be less likely to self-actualize.
Indeed, Lester, Hvezda, Sullivan, and Plourde
(1983) found that neuroticism had negative correlations with all five of the Maslow needs. Whereas
neuroticism has several facets containing numerous items (Costa & McCrae, 1992), which could not
all be assessed here, this personality construct was
measured by its principal feature, namely anxiety/
worry.
H(7): The more anxiety/worry (neuroticism)
people have, the less satisfied will be their (a)
physiological, (b) safety–security, (c) belongingness, (d) esteem, and (e) self-actualization
needs.
LIFE SATISFACTION.
As Milyavskaya and Koestner (2011) explained, selfdetermination theory (Deci & Ryan, 2000) posits that
the satisfaction of certain basic psychological needs
should result in a variety of positive outcomes, including an overall feeling of well-being. Using self-determination theory, Milyavskaya and Koestner found
that, for people who were satisfied with their own
autonomy and with their relatedness to others, there
were significant positive correlations with the feeling
of overall well-being. This suggests that satisfaction
of all five of the needs in Maslow’s hierarchy could
be positively related to life satisfaction.
That is, based on Milyavskaya and Koestner’s
(2011) results, relatedness to others may reflect belongingness, and autonomy may reflect self-actualization (living idiosyncratically) because Maslow
(1987) noted that “self-actualizing people maintain a
degree of individuality, detachment, and autonomy”
(p. 156), that is, autonomy allows a person freedom
to manifest his or her individual temperament (as
compared with a person who remains dependent on
others and thus would be less likely to live out his or
her unique personal peculiarities). Also, Deci and
Ryan (2009; Ryan & Deci, 2000) explained that satisfaction of basic physiological, psychological, and
motivational needs will positively influence one’s
affect and well-being.
Hence, to the extent that life satisfaction is an
indicator of overall well-being (Pavot, Diener, Colvin, & Sandvik, 1991), the Milyavskaya and Koestner
(2011) results may presage similar correlations with
life satisfaction. Here, a more direct test is conducted
on satisfaction of all five needs in Maslow’s hierarchy
in relation to life satisfaction.
H(8): The more satisfied are people’s (a)
physiological, (b) safety–security, (c) belongingness, (d) esteem, and (e) self-actualization
needs, the more life satisfaction they will have.
EXPERIMENT
METHOD
Respondents
Although the need satisfaction measures were created
in English, an opportunity arose to gather data from
162 • TAORMINA & GAO
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
a large sample in China. Thus, there were 386 (138
male, 248 female) respondents who were all ethnic
Chinese, aged 18 to 67 years (M = 31.44, SD = 12.78).
The average number of brothers was 1.10 (SD = 1.27),
and average number of sisters was 1.24 (SD = 1.30).
For education, 7 respondents had none, 46 finished
primary school, 241 secondary school, 79 had a
bachelor’s degree, and 13 had a master’s degree or
higher. For marital status, 246 were single, 132 married, and 8 indicated “other” (divorced, separated, or
widowed). The average number of children was 0.65
(SD = 1.11), with most respondents (69.43%) having
none and the rest (30.57%) having one to six children.
For employment, 73 respondents were unemployed,
127 had part-time jobs, and 186 had full-time jobs.
For monthly income (in U.S. dollars), 181 earned less
than $625, 94 earned between $625 and $1,249, 58
between $1,250 and $1,874, 29 between $1,875 and
$2,499, 10 between $2,500 and $3,124, and 14 earned
$3,125 or more. For overall health, the mean score was
2.63 (SD = 0.74).
Measures
The questionnaires assessed six elements: satisfaction of the five hierarchical needs, anxiety/worry (a
facet of neuroticism), family emotional support, life
satisfaction, traditional values, and demographics.
DEMOGR APHICS.
Data for age, number of brothers and sisters, and
number of children were continuous and recorded
as given by the respondents. For the remaining
(categorical) demographics, the responses were
dummy coded: For gender, 0 = female, 1 = male; for
education, 0 = none, 1 = primary school, 2 = second­
ary school, 3 = bachelor’s degree, 4 = master’s degree
or more; for marital status, 1 = single, 2 = married,
3 = other. For employment status, 0 = unemployed,
1 = part-time, 2 = full-time; for monthly income, in
U.S. dollars, 1 = <$625, 2 = $625-$1,249, 3 = $1,250$1,874, 4 = $1,875-$2,499, 5 = $2,500-$3,124,
6 = $3,125 or more; and for perceived overall health,
1 = bad, 2 = moderate, 3 = good, 4 = very good, 5 = ex­
cellent.
SATISFACTION ON MASLOW ’S FIVE NEEDS.
All the items for each need level were developed
from Maslow’s (1943, 1971, 1987) theory of need
satisfaction, which was examined for conceptual
explanations and examples, yielding 15 statements
(items) for each of the first four needs and 12 for
self-actualization. The question that was asked for
the physiological, safety–security, belongingness,
and esteem needs referred to satisfaction of the need
(i.e., “How satisfied are you with,” followed by the
items), and responses were measured on a 5-point
Likert scale ranging from 1 (completely unsatisfied)
to 5 (completely satisfied). For self-actualization, the
question asked, “How much do you agree or disagree that the following statements describe you”
(followed by the items), and responses were measured on a 5-point agree–disagree Likert scale ranging from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree.
The items for all five of the needs measures are listed
in the Appendix.
PHYSIOLOGICAL NEEDS SATISFACTION.
Although there are many physiological needs, some
are classic in terms of their underlying prepotency
(e.g., hunger). Thus, satisfaction with the physiological needs was measured by 15 items (statements) that
included items specifically mentioned by Maslow
(1943, p. 373), that is, the need for sleep, food, water,
sex, physical health, and suitable ambient temperature (i.e., heating/cooling). The items asked about the
amount or quality of these. A sample item was “The
quality of the water I drink every day.”
SAFET Y–SECURIT Y NEEDS SATISFACTION.
Maslow (1987) discussed the need to have a safe and
secure place to live and to be protected from dangers
in the environment, as well as the need for financial
security and a stable life. Maslow (1943, pp. 376–380)
specifically mentioned being secure in one’s home
and neighborhood, protection from being attacked,
safety from war, disease, natural catastrophes, criminal assault, and even financial security (e.g., of having
a savings account). These were all included in the
15 items created to assess satisfaction of the safety–­
security needs. A sample item was “The safety of my
neighborhood.”
BELONGINGNESS NEEDS SATISFACTION.
This measure focused on receiving love, support,
warmth, and affection. Maslow (1943, pp. 380–381)
described it as having “affectionate relations with
people in general” and cited people who could satisfy these needs as family and friends and mentioned
“a sweetheart, or a wife” (to be less gender specific,
this was named “spouse/partner”). Thus, the items
created included a spouse or partner, family, friends,
associates, and colleagues. Satisfaction of the belongingness needs was also measured with a 15-item scale.
A sample item was “The affection shown to me by
my friends.”
MASLOW AND THE MOTIVATION HIERARCHY • 163
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ESTEEM NEEDS SATISFACTION.
Because Maslow (1943, pp. 381–382) noted that esteem needs “can be classified into two subsidiary
sets” (i.e., self-esteem and esteem from other people), the 15-item esteem needs satisfaction measure
contained two parts. Satisfaction with esteem for
self had seven items that specifically asked about
satisfaction with one’s feelings of self-esteem, selfworth, self-respect, and positive self-regard. A sample item for this facet of esteem was “The amount of
esteem I have for myself.” Satisfaction with esteem
from others had eight items on satisfaction with the
prestige, respect, esteem, recognition, and positive
regard or appreciation received from other people.
A sample item for this facet of esteem was “The
prestige I have in the eyes of other people.” To obtain an overall estimate of the esteem needs construct, the two facets were combined into a single
measure in this study.
SELF-ACTUALIZ ATION NEED SATISFACTION.
Although Maslow (1950, 1962) wrote on this topic
extensively, many of those ideas were factors that
Maslow (1969) conjectured to be associated with this
need and thus could not be used. Rather, the items
created for this study were based on Maslow’s (1962,
pp. 193–196) central concepts (e.g., self-expression
and being uninhibited). Specifically, Maslow (1943)
mentioned self-fulfillment (p. 382), self-acceptance,
enjoying life, doing what one wants, living life fully,
and gratifying one’s own wishes (Maslow, 1962, p.
196). These concepts, and those created from the operational definition (developed in this article), were
included as items for this construct. Self-actualization
was measured with 12 items that assessed the extent
to which it was achieved. A sample item was “I am
now being the person I always wanted to be.”
Measures for the Exploratory Variables
ANXIET Y/ WORRY AS NEUROTICISM.
To avoid a lengthy questionnaire, a brief 5-item scale
that assessed the most characteristic aspects of neuroticism (i.e., anxiety and worry) was used for this
measure. The items were selected from two sources
to ensure that they focused only on the anxiety/worry
facet of the larger neuroticism construct. Two items
were extracted from the neuroticism domain of the
NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa &
McCrae, 1992), “I often worry about things” and “I
am filled with doubts about things,” and three items
from Peterson and Seligman’s (2004) neuroticism
measure, “I usually expect the worst,” “I usually
look on the bright side” (reversed), and “I am not
confident that things will work out for the best.” Responses were measured on a 5-point agree/disagree
Likert scale.
FAMILY EMOTIONAL SUPPORT.
For this scale, 10 items were selected from Procidano
and Heller’s (1983) 20-item Perceived Family Social
Support scale. Because the present study was designed to assess the extent of received family emotional support, some items were deleted because they
referred to giving rather than receiving support, and
others were deleted because of excessive item length
or ambiguity. A sample item was “My family gives
me the moral support I need.” To measure this, the
5-point agree/disagree Likert scale was used.
LIFE SATISFACTION.
Life satisfaction was measured with a 10-item scale
from Sirgy et al. (1998; originated by Meadow, Mentzer, Rahtz, & Sirgy, 1992), who used the measure for
a five-nation study (Australia, Canada, China, Turkey,
and the United States). Respondents were asked to
rate how satisfied they felt with their lives as compared with certain situations (e.g., “How satisfied
are you compared to the accomplishments of most
people in your position?”). Responses were measured on the 5-point unsatisfied/satisfied Likert scale.
TR ADITIONAL VALUES.
The most relevant values measure for the Chinese
sample in this study was the 12-item Chinese Values Scale (Taormina, 2009), which measures values
that are considered central to the culture. Sample
items were “personal steadiness,” “prudence,” and
“respect for tradition.” Respondents were asked to
what extent they personally live their lives by these
values, using a response scale that ranged from 1
(never) to 5 (always).
LANGUAGE OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE
All items for all the measurement scales were originally constructed in English by a native English
speaker with extensive experience constructing and
publishing scales that measure psychological constructs. When an opportunity arose to gather a large
sample of data in China, translation of the scales was
then undertaken by bilingual expert linguists. One
team of linguists translated the original English items
into Chinese, after which a second team translated
the Chinese version back into English. The back-
164 • TAORMINA & GAO
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
translation was then examined by another bilingual
expert and by the native English speaker who created
the items, and the back-translation was deemed virtually identical to the original English version.
ed the recommended (.95) value for a good fit of the
data to the model (Schreiber, Stage, King, Nora, &
Barlow, 2006).
TESTS OF SCALE VALIDIT Y.
Procedure
To obtain a wide range of respondents, data were
collected in popular shopping locations (frequented
by people from all walks of life), business districts,
and universities. For sidewalk interventions, a random-ordered method was used. To complement this
approach, randomly selected apartment buildings
were also targeted, with one apartment on each floor
visited at times that were convenient to the residents
(i.e., during the afternoons or early evenings).
In all cases, the guidelines of the American Psychological Association for the ethical treatment of
human participants were followed, with potential
respondents informed of the nature of the study and
assured of their anonymity and of the confidentiality
of their answers. Those who agreed to participate
were handed the questionnaire. From the 500 people
asked, 386 complete questionnaires were collected
(on site), yielding a response rate of 77.2%.
RESULTS
Psychometrics of the Needs Scales and Other Measures
FACTOR ANALYSES.
Because each need had numerous items, which
could group into multiple components, an exploratory factor analysis was run. This gave five components for the physiological need (food–water, sex,
temperature, sleep, and exercise–physical health),
four for the safety–security need (home, environment, finance, and police–law), three for the belongingness need (friends, family, spouse–partner), two
for the esteem need (for self, from others), and two
for the self-actualization need (self-realization, selfdetermination).
The exploratory factor analysis results thus enabled the use of a confirmatory factor analysis to assess the fit of the 72 items into an overall five-part
needs model using a structural equation model,
which yielded the following results: χ2(74) = 117.47,
p = .001, RMSEA = .04, and very good fit indexes for
the model, that is, CFI = .98, IFI = .98, TLI = .96,
NFI = .95, GFI = .96, all of which reached or exceed-
In addition to the confirmatory factor analysis, which
helped affirm the construct validity of the five scales, a
known-groups validity test was also conducted. This
assesses the degree to which the measures can demonstrate significantly different scores for groups already known to differ, and in which direction, on the
dimensions measured. The groups were 32 doctors,
lawyers, full professors, and wealthy business professionals who were expected to be high on satisfaction
of the needs because they had achieved successful
lives and 30 indigent, long-term unemployed, and
underemployed migrant workers living away from
their families who were expected to be low on satisfaction of the needs because of various (e.g., financial,
personal, and social) limitations on their lives.
In t tests used to compare the two groups on
need satisfaction, all the needs differed significantly (p < .001) in the expected direction, with
the underemployed (M = 2.55, SD = 0.49) lower
than professionals (M = 4.19, SD = 0.63) on physiological need satisfaction, t(60) = 11.41; the underemployed (M = 2.18, SD = 0.41) lower than professionals (M = 4.41, SD = 0.72) on safety–­security
need satisfaction, t(60) = 14.82; the underemployed
(M = 2.42, SD = 0.57) lower than professionals
(M = 4.61, SD = 0.53) on belongingness need satisfaction, t(60) = 15.65; the underemployed (M = 2.03,
SD = 0.67) lower than professionals (M = 4.31,
SD = 0.58) on esteem need satisfaction, t(60) = 14.38;
and the underemployed (M = 1.95, SD = 0.40) lower
than professionals (M = 3.82, SD = 0.40) on self-actualization, t(60) = 18.50. These results reflect strong
support for the construct validity of the needs measures.
TEST FOR COMMON-METHOD BIAS.
For common-method bias, Harman’s (1960) factor
analytic approach was used. This is a maximum-likelihood analysis of all the variables that uses a forced,
one-factor solution, and the resultant Chi-square value is then divided by the degrees of freedom to assess
whether the items fit into a single factor, such that a
ratio of less than 2.00:1 would indicate a single ­factor,
MASLOW AND THE MOTIVATION HIERARCHY • 165
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
reflecting common-method bias. For this study, the
ratio was 7.32:1, suggesting that common-method
bias was not a concern.
SCALE RELIABILITIES.
Another measure of scale integrity for the need levels
is reliability. Cronbach’s alpha reliability scores were
computed for each of the new scales, yielding .81 for
physiological needs, .87 for safety–security, .90 for belongingness, .91 for esteem (.90 for the 8-item esteem
from others subscale and .89 for the 7-item esteem for
self subscale, but only the combined 15-item measure
was used in the analyses), and .86 for self-actualization.
Whereas all the reliability values exceeded the recommended .70 (Nunnally, 1978), all scales demonstrated
very good reliabilities. Also, scale reliabilities for the
four exploratory variables were .83 for family emotional
support, .83 for traditional values, .69 for anxiety/worry (neuroticism), and .86 for life satisfaction.
Correlations
Three types of correlations were computed. The first
was among the five needs. The second was between the
needs and the four exploratory test variables, that is,
family support, traditional values, anxiety/worry (neuroticism), and life satisfaction (as an outcome). The
third set of correlations was between the demographics
and the needs. Note that the categorical demographic
variables were dummy coded in regular increasing
functions (see Measures), and for marital status, only
the single (coded 1) and married (coded 2) respondents
were included such that all the demographics could be
entered in the correlations and regressions. To better
understand the results, it should be remembered that
the measures assessed the extent to which the respondents felt their needs were satisfied.
The correlations among the satisfactions of
the five needs were all positive and significant (all
ps < .001), supporting hypotheses H(1) through H(4)
and coinciding with Maslow’s theoretical proposition that any given need should be somewhat satisfied
for the next higher-order need to emerge (Maslow,
1987, pp. 17–18). In line with this, the results (except
only those for physiological and self-actualization)
showed that satisfaction of the needs that are adjacent had higher correlations than those that are not.
Specifically, the correlation between physiological
and safety–security (.50) was higher than the correlation between physiological and belongingness or
between physiological and esteem. The correlation
between safety–security and belongingness (.38) was
higher than the correlation between safety–security
and esteem or between safety–security and self-­
actualization. The correlation between belongingness and esteem (.50) was higher than the correlation
between belongingness and self-actualization. And
the correlation between esteem and self-actualization
(.50) was higher than the correlation between selfactualization and belongingness or between selfactualization and safety–security.
To test the next four hypotheses, the correlations were between the exploratory variables and
satisfaction of the needs. For family support, the
correlations with need satisfaction were all positive,
from .26 to .57 (all ps < .001), supporting H(5a) to
H(5e). For traditional values, the correlations with
the needs satisfaction were also all positive, from .19
to .35 (all ps < .001), supporting H(6a) to H(6e). For
anxiety/worry (neuroticism), the correlations with
the need satisfaction were all negative, from –.15 or
–.16 (p < .005) to –.24 (p < .001), supporting H(7a) to
H(7e). For life satisfaction, the correlations with the
need satisfaction were all positive and ranged from
.30 to .58 (all ps < .001), supporting H(8a) to H(8e).
Because no hypotheses were formulated for the
demographics, the correlations assessed whether
any personal or social factors might be related to
satisfaction of the needs (here, only significant correlations are reported). Satisfaction of physiological
needs was positively correlated with the number
of brothers and sisters (both ps < .05), number of
children, income (both ps < .01), age (p < .005), and
overall health (p < .001). Satisfaction of the safety–
security needs had positive correlations with income
(p < .05) and overall health (p < .005). Satisfaction of
the belongingness needs had negative correlations
with age and income (both ps < .05) and a positive
correlation with overall health (p < .001). Satisfaction of the esteem needs had a negative correlation
with employment (p < .05) and a positive correlation
with overall health (p < .001). Satisfaction of the selfactualization needs had positive correlations with
overall health (p < .05), number of brothers, sisters,
and children (all ps < .005), age, and marital status
(both ps < .001). All these correlations and the variable means, standard deviations, and Cronbach’s
alpha reliabilities are shown in Table 1.
166 • TAORMINA & GAO
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TABLE 1. Means, SDs, Cronbach’s Alpha Reliabilities, and Correlations for Satisfaction of the 5 Maslow Needs With
the Exploratory and Demographic Variables (N = 386)
Variable
Mean
SD
12 345
Alpha
1. Physiological
3.23
0.46
—
.81
2. Safety–security
3.44
0.51
.50****
—
.87
3. Belongingness
3.82
0.45
.37****
.38****
—
.90
4. Esteem
3.57
0.47
.40****
.31****
.50****
.91
5. Self-actualization
3.21
0.55 .53****.35**** .34****.50****— .86
6. Family support
3.46
7. Traditional values
3.75
0.47 .21****.20**** .35****.32****.19****
.83
8. Anxiety/worry
3.03
0.58–.15***–.16*** –.15***–.24****
–.16***
.69
9. Life satisfaction
3.31
10. Gender
0.36
0.48
.09.03–.09.00.09
—
11. Age
0.55
0.52
31.44 12.78
.26****
.36****
.17***
.26****
.57****
.30****
.33****
—
.36****
.52****
.29**** .83
.58**** .86
.02
–.11*
–.04
.19****
—
12. Brothers
1.10
1.27
.13*
–.03
–.05
.04
.16***
—
13. Sisters
1.24
1.31
.11*
–.01
–.06
.02
.16***
—
14. Marital status
1.35
0.48
.19***
.06
–.03
–.01
.21****
—
15. Number of children
0.65
1.11
.14**
.03
–.07
–.06
.17***
—
16. Education
2.12
0.72
–.06.02 .05.06
–.07
—
17. Employment
1.29
0.77
.10
.06
–.10
–.10*
.06
—
18. Income (monthly)
2.05
1.32
.14**
.12*
–.11*
.02
.08
—
19. Overall health
2.63
0.74
.37****
.14***
.18****
.12*
—
.19****
Note. Numerical codings of the demographics are in the Method section: For marital status, only single and married (N = 378) were included.
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .005. ****p < .001.
Self-Actualization Achievement
Maslow (1962) stated that self-actualization is
achieved by very few people, so the data were examined for evidence of this. But self-actualization is not
an all-or-none proposition, and the scores were measured on a 5-point Likert scale. Hence, statistically,
“achieved” could connote that there would be fewer
people at 2 SDs above the mean vis-à-vis a normal
curve, where 2.5% of the 386 respondents (i.e., 10
people) would be expected to score. Because only 5
(half the expected number) scored that high, the data
seem to support Maslow’s idea.
Mean Differences Tested Across Gender
on Need Satisfaction
To ascertain whether there was evidence for the criticism of gender bias raised by Cullen and Gotell (2002)
against Maslow’s theory, t tests across gender were
run on all five needs. The t values, all using t(384),
ranged from –1.80 to 1.86, with none significant (all
ps > .05). Thus, no gender differences (biases) were
found on satisfaction of any of the needs.
Regressions
To further assess H(1) through H(4), regressions
were also run on satisfaction of the needs, that is,
for any given need, its lower-level needs (but not its
higher-level needs) were included as potential predictors, along with the demographics and the exploratory variables (whereas physiological needs had no
lower-level needs, its regression was run on only the
demographic and exploratory variables).
For physiological need satisfaction, five variables
entered the regression (all positively) to explain 24%
of the variance, F(5, 370) = 24.87, p < .001. Perceived
overall health explained 14% of the variance, marital
status explained 5%, traditional values 1%, family support 3%, and number of brothers 1%.
MASLOW AND THE MOTIVATION HIERARCHY • 167
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
For safety–security need satisfaction, two variables entered the regression (both positively) to explain 25% of the variance, F(2, 373) = 62.73, p < .001.
Physiological needs satisfaction explained 23% of the
explained variance, further supporting H(1), and family support explained 2%.
For belongingness need satisfaction, six variables entered the regression to explain 44% of the
variance, F(6, 369) = 50.00, p < .001. Entering the
regression positively were family support, which accounted for 32%; safety–security need satisfaction
6%, adding support to H(2); physiological need
satisfaction 2%; traditional values 1%; and education 1%. Entering the regression negatively, income
accounted for the remaining 2% of the explained
variance.
For esteem need satisfaction, five variables entered the regression to explain 35% of the variance,
F(5, 370) = 42.12, p < .001. Entering positively were
belongingness need satisfaction, which accounted
for 24%, further supporting H(3); physiological need
satisfaction 6%; and traditional values 2%. Also, two
variables entered the regression negatively to account
for the remaining explained variance: the anxiety/
worry facet of neuroticism, which accounted for 2%,
and employment for 1%.
For self-actualization need satisfaction, three variables entered the regression (all positively) to explain
41% of the variance, F(3, 372) = 86.73, p < .001. Physiological need satisfaction explained 28%, esteem need
satisfaction explained 10%, adding support to H(4);
and number of children accounted for the remaining
3% of the explained variance.
The final regression was for life satisfaction,
which was regressed onto all the other variables to
determine whether satisfaction of any needs could
explain life satisfaction. Three variables entered
the regression (all positively) to explain 41% of the
variance, F(3, 372) = 87.20, p < .001. Satisfaction of
self-actualization accounted for 34% of the explained
variance, esteem need satisfaction 6%, and traditional
values 1%.
The regressions for satisfaction of the physiological and safety–security needs are shown in Table 2, for
satisfaction of the belongingness and esteem needs
are shown in Table 3, and for self-actualization and
life satisfaction are shown in Table 4.
DISCUSSION
The results are discussed first in regard to the correlations used to test the hypotheses, next in terms of the
ability of the satisfaction of lower-level needs to statistically predict the satisfaction of higher-level needs in
the regressions, and then in regard to the ability of the
demographics and the exploratory variables to predict satisfaction of the five needs and life satisfaction;
and, finally, some observations on the intercultural
relevance of Maslow’s theory are made (with mention of the sample’s culture included, where relevant,
in discussing factors that relate to particular needs).
Correlations Among the Needs Variables
The hypotheses for satisfaction of the needs were
based on Maslow’s theoretical tenet that it is necessary for lower-level needs to be mostly (though
not necessarily 100%) satisfied before a person becomes concerned with satisfying higher-level needs
(Maslow, 1943, pp. 388–389). This implies that there
should be significant positive correlations between
the degrees of satisfaction of any two needs that are
adjacent in the hierarchy. As can be seen from the correlation results (Table 1), the satisfaction of any given
need was positively and significantly correlated with
the need immediately below it in the hierarchy, thus
supporting Maslow’s theorized hierarchy of needs.
Lower-Level Needs as Predictors of Higher-Level Needs
The theoretical hierarchy of needs also suggests
that, in regressions, satisfaction of a lower-level need
should be able to statistically predict the extent to
which a higher-level need is satisfied, and ideally satisfaction of any need should predict the need immediately above it in the hierarchy. (Whereas the physiological needs are at the lowest level, no other needs
in the hierarchy were tested as potential predictors.)
For satisfaction of the safety–security needs, the
only other need that could be used in the regression
was satisfaction of the physiological needs, which did
enter the regression to account for the majority of the
explained variance. For satisfaction of the belongingness needs, both satisfaction of the safety–security
and physiological needs entered the equation. For
satisfaction of the esteem needs, satisfaction of the
belongingness and of the physiological needs entered
168 • TAORMINA & GAO
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TABLE 2. Stepwise Regressions for Satisfaction of Physiological and Safety–Security Needs
PhysiologicalSafety–security
PredictorsBeta
ΔR 2BetaΔR 2
Self-actualization
n/a n/a
Esteem need satisfaction
n/a
n/a
Belongingness need satisfaction
n/a
n/a
Safety–security need satisfaction
n/a
n/a
Physiological need satisfaction
n/a
.44****
Family emotional support
.16***
.03.15***
.02
.14***
.01.08
Traditional values
Anxiety/worry (neuroticism)
–.09
–.07
Gender
.07.01
Age
.12–.05
Number of brothers
.10*
Number of sisters
.06
Marital status
.15***
Number of children
.02
Education
.23
.01–.08
–.07
.05–.04
–.02
–.04.04
Employment
.05.03
Income (monthly)
.08
Overall health
.37****
.06
.14–.06
Total R 2
.24
Final F
24.87****
.25
62.73****
df
5,3702,373
Note. Need satisfaction was regressed only on lower-level needs. Degrees of freedom do not add to 385 (N – 1) because cases with missing
values were deleted. n/a = not applicable.
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .005. ****p < .001.
the regression. Likewise, for self-actualization, satisfaction of the esteem needs and of the physiological
needs entered the regression as predictors.
Summarizing these results, satisfaction of the
lower-level need immediately below any given need
in the hierarchy predicted satisfaction of the next
higher-level need, yielding strong evidence for the
hierarchical nature of Maslow’s theory of need satisfaction. Also, satisfaction of the physiological needs
was a significant predictor of the satisfaction of every
one of the four higher-level needs, suggesting that
the physiological needs are profound and, as Maslow
(1943) argued, that they could very well preempt
one’s ability to satisfy any of the higher-level needs
if they are not satisfied.
Additional Predictors of Need Satisfaction
and Life Satisfaction
PHYSIOLOGICAL NEED SATISFACTION.
For satisfaction of this need level, two exploratory and
three demographic variables entered the regression.
Family emotional support may have been a predictor
because the family is the strongest and most important unit in most societies worldwide, including (and
especially) in Chinese society (Yang, 1995). Thus,
even though the measure assessed “emotional” sup-
MASLOW AND THE MOTIVATION HIERARCHY • 169
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TABLE 3. Stepwise Regressions for Satisfaction of Belongingness and Esteem Needs
BelongingnessEsteem
PredictorsBeta
ΔR 2BetaΔR 2
Self-actualization
n/a
n/a
Esteem need satisfaction
n/a
n/a
Belongingness need satisfaction
n/a
.31****
Safety–security need satisfaction
.18****
.06.04
Physiological need satisfaction
.18****
.02.25****
.06
Family emotional support
.42****
.32.04
.13***
.01.16***
.02
Traditional values
Anxiety/worry (neuroticism)
–.05
Gender
–.00
.03
Age
–.06
–.04
Number of brothers
–.18****
.03
.05
Number of sisters
–.03
.04
Marital status
–.03
–.01
Number of children
–.04
–.08
.24
.02
Education.10*
.01.07
Employment
–.01
Income (monthly)
–.18****
Overall health
–.12***
.01
.02.10
.02
–.01
Total R 2
.44
.35
Final F
50.00****42.12****
df
6,3695,370
Note. Need satisfaction was regressed only on lower-level needs. Degrees of freedom do not add to 385 (N – 1) because cases with missing
values were deleted. n/a = not applicable.
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .005. ****p < .001.
port, it seems that the family emotional connection
is sufficiently strong that it extends to satisfaction of
physiological needs.
Traditional values also entered this regression.
In many societies, traditional values are characterized by a strong familism (e.g., Unger et al., 2002),
in which the family hierarchy is of great importance,
particularly the care and support parents give to
their children and the respect children show for
their parents. The more one believes in these traditions, the more likely one is to practice them,
that is, to provide for one’s offspring just as one
was provided for by his or her parents, such that a
strong belief in the traditional values of one’s society should be reflected in the satisfaction of one’s
physiological needs.
Overall health was also a predictor of physiological need satisfaction. This single-item measure was
included as a rough assessment of how the respondents felt about their health. People with good health
are more likely to exercise, eat and sleep well, and to
have greater amounts of (and more satisfying) sex. Because it is a global measure that was related to many
needs, future research might investigate overall health
further, perhaps as a dependent measure.
Number of brothers was also a predictor of sat-
170 • TAORMINA & GAO
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
TABLE 4. Stepwise Regressions for Satisfaction of Self-Actualization Needs and Life Satisfaction
Self-actualization
Life satisfaction
PredictorsBeta
ΔR 2Beta ΔR 2
Self-actualization
n/a .43****.34
Esteem need satisfaction
.38****
Belongingness need satisfaction
.05
.01
Safety–security need satisfaction
.05
.08
Physiological need satisfaction
.35****
Family emotional support
.07
.10.26****.06
.28.02
Traditional values
–.02
Anxiety/worry (neuroticism)
–.02
.04
Gender
.04 –.01
Age
.07 –.05
Number of brothers
.04
–.04
Number of sisters
.08
.01
Marital status
.06
–.02
Number of children
.16****
Education
Employment
.01
.11*
–.02
.03.00
–.01 .02
.03 –.04
Income (monthly)
–.01
–.04
Overall health
–.08
.06
Total R 2
Final F
.41
86.73****
df 3,372
.41
87.20****
3,372
Note. Need satisfaction was regressed only on lower-level needs. Degrees of freedom do not add to 385 (N – 1) because cases with missing
values were deleted. n/a = not applicable.
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .005. ****p < .001.
isfaction of physiological needs. In many societies,
such as Italian and Chinese society, sons (especially
the eldest) who are brothers are responsible for
helping siblings who are in need. After the father has
passed away, it is customary for the eldest brother
to act as the head of the family, with responsibility
to tend to the entire family’s needs. The other demographic predictor was marital status, which may
have entered the regression because married couples have more regulated lives (e.g., with food and
sex). By contrast, single people might be more likely
to eat and sleep according to their own personal
desires, which could result in irregular intakes of
food or inadequate amounts of sleep, both of which
would yield unsatisfactory levels of physiological
needs satisfaction.
SAFET Y–SECURIT Y NEED SATISFACTION.
For this level of need satisfaction, only two predictor
variables contributed to explaining the variance. The
first was satisfaction with the physiological needs,
and the other was the exploratory variable of family
emotional support. This is understandable because
the family is the source of well-being and protection
for people in all world cultures. For Chinese culture
in particular, the family is the first source of help when
MASLOW AND THE MOTIVATION HIERARCHY • 171
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
a person is in need (Chang & Holt, 1991). No demographics entered this regression.
BELONGINGNESS NEED SATISFACTION.
For belongingness need satisfaction, in addition to
satisfaction with the physiological and safety–security
needs, two exploratory and two demographic variables also entered the regression. Family emotional
support explained the majority of the variance, which
can be readily understood because human beings are
raised by, and physically and emotionally supported
by, their families. Also, the emotional support that
families give to each other is a critical component of
a happy family life, playing a major role in a person’s
feelings of belongingness.
Traditional values was also a positive predictor.
Values include ideas, concepts, and qualities that
people consider to be important. Because culture is
defined as the attitudes, values, beliefs, and behaviors shared by members of a group (Triandis, 1996),
a society’s values are shared by people, and shared
values tend to bring people together (Cohen, 1976).
As McMillan and Chavis (1986) explained, “When
people who share values come together, they find
that they have similar needs, priorities, and goals,
thus fostering the belief that in joining together
they might be better able to satisfy these needs and
obtain the reinforcement they seek” (p. 13). Thus,
sharing important social values engenders a sense
of belongingness.
Of the two demographics that entered the equation, education entered positively. Several societies
place a high value on self-improvement through education; thus, in such societies people who receive
more education may be more accepted by other
members of the society, yielding a greater feeling of
belongingness. The other demographic, monthly income, interestingly, was a negative predictor, that is,
the less income a person had, the more he or she felt
a sense of belonging. This might be explained by the
fact that in collective societies (e.g., China), friends
and colleagues with monetary problems are still accepted and are treated with more consideration (e.g.,
offered help) if they are not doing well monetarily.
For example, at a restaurant outing, members who
are better off financially would show consideration
to others by inviting them to meals and insisting on
paying for the entire meal.
ESTEEM NEED SATISFACTION.
For satisfaction of esteem needs, most of the variance
was explained by satisfaction of the belongingness
needs, consistent with the hierarchical theory. In
addition, traditional values entered the regression,
suggesting that abiding by the culture’s traditional
values can earn respect for a person. In terms of the
values of the sample, Chinese values involve personal
and social behaviors that were prescribed to maintain
harmony among family and friends and throughout
society (Yang, 1995). In other words, by adopting society’s recommended personal characteristics and
living according to its prescribed behaviors, one develops an agreeable character that is appreciated and
respected by others.
The anxiety/worry facet of neuroticism entered
the regression negatively, with high levels of anxiety/
worry yielding low levels of esteem. Also, correlations
for anxiety/worry with esteem for self and with esteem from others were negative and significant (both
ps < .001). For esteem for self, Hankin, Lakdawalla,
Carter, Abela, and Adams (2007) found that neuroticism could engender symptoms of emotional distress,
such as low self-esteem. Also, Lönnqvist, Verkasalo,
Mäkinen, and Henriksson (2009) found that neuroticism predicted low self-esteem. Regarding esteem
from others, Swickert and Owens (2010) found that
high levels of neuroticism yielded low levels of social acceptance on several measures of social support.
Thus, the present results match previous research on
neuroticism and esteem.
For employment, the negative relationship was
somewhat surprising. As employment level was a demographic variable, no hypothesis was formulated
because all the demographics were exploratory variables. Nonetheless, to find it as a significant negative
predictor of esteem need satisfaction was surprising
mainly because it seems anomalous. One possible
reason for this might be found in certain factors that
are unique to the sample. That is, the gambling industry is the largest employer in the Chinese city where
the data were gathered, which means that many of
the employed respondents were likely to be working
there. However, gambling has long been considered
immoral behavior in China (Cheng, 2009). Thus,
because those who were employed were likely to be
working in the gambling industry, which is traditionally viewed as immoral, this could explain why the
172 • TAORMINA & GAO
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
people at the highest (full-time) employment level
(M = 3.36, SD = 0.55) felt less esteem than people who
were either part-time employed (M = 3.40, SD = 0.56)
or unemployed (M = 3.50, SD = 0.60). Future research might investigate this further.
SELF-ACTUALIZ ATION SATISFACTION.
For this level, satisfaction of the physiological and
esteem needs were significant predictors. Although
physiological need satisfaction was a predictor for all
four need levels (noted previously), it is interesting
that it had such a high correlation with self-actualization. One reason for this could be that self-actualization was assessed with a self-oriented (rather than
other-oriented) measure, such that a self-indulgent
element could be playing a role. That is, when someone can live however he or she wants and do whatever
he or she wants, the person becomes able to fulfill his
or her sensual desires, such as eating the best foods
and enjoying the various physical comforts in life, and
(perhaps) having sex more frequently (and possibly
with more partners). This might explain why physiological need satisfaction was so highly correlated
with self-actualization, and this could be an interesting area for future research.
In addition, one demographic, number of children,
entered this regression as a positive predictor. This
result might stem from traditional attitudes about having children, that is, they perpetuate one’s genes to
another generation, which has been a joy for parents
(and grandparents) in all societies. In Chinese society,
“continuing the family line is a mandatory responsibility” (Lee & Chu, 2001, p. 715). That is, having more
children has traditionally been considered desirable,
and the more children (especially sons) people have,
the more likely they will be to extend their family line
(and name) and thus become more self-actualized.
LIFE SATISFACTION.
For this variable, it was expected that human beings
would be likely to be more satisfied with their lives if
the five important needs Maslow identified are satisfied and less so if those needs are unsatisfied. For
example, if a person is chronically undernourished
from lack of food, the person surely could not be satisfied with his or her life. Similar arguments can be
made for the remaining needs. Indeed, satisfaction of
all five of the needs was positively and significantly
correlated with life satisfaction (all ps < .001).
Regarding the regression for life satisfaction,
self-actualization and satisfaction with esteem needs
were positive statistical predictors. Self-actualization
may have entered because life satisfaction referred
to satisfaction with one’s life achievements, contextualized in relation to what the person expected of
himself or herself. For esteem, this is related to the
concept of “face,” that is, how positively a person
is regarded in society, which is an important aspect
of life in Chinese culture (Ho, 1976). Since esteem
is of such great value in Chinese society and selfactualization is the epitome of personal achievement, it is understandable that self-actualization
and satisfaction of the esteem needs could predict
life satisfaction. Traditional values also entered this
regression. Because it was an exploratory variable,
however, no hypothesis was formulated for it, but
its appearance in the regression confirms the importance traditional values play in fostering harmonious
relationships in Chinese society (Yang, 1995).
Intercultural Relevance of Maslow’s Theory
As noted previously, some writers have criticized
Maslow’s theory because they thought it was created
using ideas that are based only in Western culture, but
the data in this study, which were obtained from an
Eastern culture, lent substantial support to the generality of the theory of hierarchical needs. The concepts
and the items were based directly on Maslow’s (1943)
theory, which he surmised to be universal, and the
results of this study appear to confirm what Maslow
surmised about culture and the generalizability of
the needs.
Specifically, Maslow (1943) suggested that there
was a “unity behind the superficial differences in specific desires from one culture to another” and that
“it is the common experience of anthropologists that
people, even in different societies, are much more
alike than we would think” (p. 389). Also, as Maslow
further noted (with scientific prudence), the classification of the needs helps in understanding human
nature: “The claim is made only that it is relatively
more ultimate, more universal, more basic, than the
superficial conscious desires from culture to culture,
and makes a somewhat closer approach to commonhuman characteristics” (p. 390). The results of this
study appear to confirm Maslow’s expectations because his theoretical concepts, although developed
MASLOW AND THE MOTIVATION HIERARCHY • 173
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
in a Western culture, held (with strong statistical support) in a culture as diverse as that of China.
Of course, more research should be conducted
in other countries. But such research should be performed with a better understanding of the concepts
(e.g., physiological need is based in physical requirements, not on superficial prescriptions for social behavior). And it should also be remembered that the
measures developed here were not for the levels of
need, but they were rather for the extent of satisfac­
tion of the needs.
General Summary and Future Research
The present research examined Maslow’s (1943)
theorized hierarchy of motivational needs by operationally defining the five needs and developing
definition-based scales to measure satisfaction of the
needs. Creation of the scales was based on their content and construct validities and tested by confirmatory factor analysis and by the known-groups method
of validity assessment. The scales were also tested for
their predictive validity, that is, they were examined
in relation to the theorized hierarchy, whereby each
need was found to be a statistical predictor of the
need immediately above it in the hierarchy. These
results represent a notable finding because they not
only confirm the predictive validity of the measures
but lend empirical support to Maslow’s theory. The
new scales were also tested for their expected association with other social and personality variables,
yielding results that lent further conceptual support
for the theory.
With regard to future research, whereas previous
measures had limited empirical success, the new measures for need satisfaction developed in this research
may be more promising because of their construct
validity and high reliabilities. That is, areas for future research are multitudinous because the needs,
and their satisfaction, affect virtually all areas of an
individual’s personal and social life, particularly in
regard to satisfaction of the needs for belongingness,
esteem, and self-actualization. To provide one example, satisfaction of the belongingness needs would be
particularly interesting, potentially productive, and
revealing, to use with research on variables that assess
social interactions in a variety of settings, including in
groups (of diverse types), and especially in intimate
relationship dyads.
NOTE
Address correspondence about this article to Robert J. Taormina, Psychology Department, Faculty of Social Sciences and
Humanities, University of Macau, Av. Padre Tomas Pereira, SJ,
Macao (SAR) China (e-mail: [email protected]).
REFERENCES
Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1989). Attachment beyond infancy.
American Psychologist, 44, 709–716.
Armsden, G. C., & Greenberg, M. T. (1987). The inventory
of parent and peer attachment: Individual differences and
their relationship to psychological wellbeing in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 427–454.
Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong:
Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529.
Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment
(2nd ed.). New York, NY: Basic Books.
Carretie, L., Hinojosa, J., Mercado, F., & Tapia, M. (2005).
Cortical response to subjectively unconscious danger.
NeuroImage, 24, 615–623.
Chang, H., & Holt, G. R. (1991). More than relationship:
Chinese interaction and the principle of kuan-hsi. Com­
munication Quarterly, 39, 251–271.
Cheng, T. J. (2009). Introduction to the sociology of gambling.
Beijing, China: Social Sciences Academic Press.
Cohen, E. (1976). The structural transformation of the kibbutz. In G. K. Zollschan & W. Hirsch (Eds.), Social
change (pp. 703–740). New York, NY: Wiley.
Collins, R., Langham, R. A., & Sigford, B. J. (2000). Reliability and validity of the Wisconsin HSS Quality of Life
Inventory in traumatic brain injury. Journal of Head
Trauma Rehabilitation, 15, 1139–1148.
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Per­
sonality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor
Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL:
Psychological Assessment Resources.
Coy, D. R., & Kovacs-Long, J. (2005). Maslow and Miller:
An exploration of gender and affiliation in the journey of
competence. Journal of Counseling & Development, 83,
138–145.
Cullen, D., & Gotell, L. (2002). From orgasms to organizations: Maslow, women’s sexuality, and the gendered foundations of the needs hierarchy. Gender, Work & Organiza­
tion, 9, 537–555.
Davis-Sharts, J. (1986). An empirical test of Maslow’s theory
of need hierarchy using hologeistic comparison by statistical sampling. Advances in Nursing Science, 9, 58–72.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of
goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of
behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Self-determination theory:
A consideration of human motivational universals. In P. J.
Corr & G. Matthews (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook
174 • TAORMINA & GAO
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
of personality psychology (pp. 441–456). New York, NY:
Cambridge University Press.
Erikson, E. H. (1964). Childhood and society (2nd ed.). Oxford, England: W.W. Norton.
French, S., & Joseph, S. (1999). Religiosity and its association with happiness, purpose in life, and self-actualisation.
Mental Health, Religion & Culture, 2, 117–120.
Gadgil, A. (1998). Drinking water in developing countries.
Annual Review of Energy and the Environment, 23,
253–286.
Guindon, M. H. (2002). Toward accountability in the use of
the self-esteem construct. Journal of Counseling & Devel­
opment, 80, 204–214.
Hankin, B. L., Lakdawalla, Z., Carter, I. L., Abela, J. R. Z., &
Adams, P. (2007). Are neuroticism, cognitive vulnerabilities
and self-esteem overlapping or distinct risks for depression? Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 26, 29–63.
Harman, H. H. (1960). Modern factor analysis. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
Ho, D. Y. H. (1976). On the concept of face. American Jour­
nal of Sociology, 81, 867–884.
Homer, P. M., & Kahle, L. R. (1988). A structural equation
test of the value–attitude–behavior hierarchy. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 638–646.
Hull, C. L. (1951). Essentials of behavior. New Haven, CT:
Yale University Press.
Jones, A., & Crandall, R. (1986). Validation of a short index
of self-actualization. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 12, 63–73.
Judge, T. A., Erez, A., Bono, J. E., & Thoresen, C. J. (2002).
Are measures of self-esteem, neuroticism, locus of control,
and generalized self-efficacy indicators of a common core
construct? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
83, 693–710.
Leclerc, G., Lefrançois, R., Dubé, M., Hébert, R., & Gaulin,
P. (1998). The self-actualization concept: A content validation. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 13,
69–84.
Lee, T. Y., & Chu, T. Y. (2001). The Chinese experience of
male infertility. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 23,
714–725.
Lester, D. (1990). Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 1187–1188.
Lester, D., Hvezda, J., Sullivan, S., & Plourde, R. (1983).
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and psychological health.
Journal of General Psychology, 109, 83–85.
Lönnqvist, J. E., Verkasalo, M., Mäkinen, S., & Henriksson, M. (2009). High neuroticism at age 20 predicts
history of mental disorders and low self-esteem at age 35.
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65, 781–790.
Marx, M. H., & Hillix, W. A. (1973). Systems and theories in
psychology (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psycho­
logical Review, 50, 370–396.
Maslow, A. H. (1950). Self-actualizing people: A study of psychological health. Personality, 11–34.
Maslow, A. H. (1962). Some basic propositions of a growth
and self-actualization psychology. In A. H. Maslow, To­
ward a psychology of being (pp. 177–200). Princeton, NJ:
Van Nostrand.
Maslow, A. H. (1969). A theory of metamotivation: The biological rooting of the value-life. Humanitas, 4, 301–343.
Maslow, A. H. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature.
Oxford, England: Viking.
Maslow, A. H. (1987). Motivation and personality (3rd ed.).
Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley.
McMillan, D. W., & Chavis, D. M. (1986). Sense of community: A definition and theory. Journal of Community
Psychology, 14, 6–23.
Meadow, H. L., Mentzer, J. T., Rahtz, D. R., & Sirgy, M. J.
(1992). A life satisfaction measure based on judgment
theory. Social Indicators Research, 26, 23–59.
Milyavskaya, M., & Koestner, R. (2011). Psychological needs,
motivation, and well-being: A test of self-determination
theory across multiple domains. Personality and Indi­
vidual Differences, 50, 387–391.
Nevis, E. C. (1983). Using an American perspective in understanding another culture: Toward a hierarchy of needs
for the People’s Republic of China. Journal of Applied
Behavioral Science, 19, 249–264.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill.
Oxford English Dictionary. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://
www.oed.com/
Pavot, W. G., Diener, E., Colvin, C. R., & Sandvik, E. (1991).
Further validation of the Satisfaction With Life Scale:
Evidence for the cross-method convergence of well-being
measures. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 149–161.
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Character
strengths and virtues: A classification and handbook. New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Poothullil, J. M. (1992). Maltose: The primary signal of hunger and satiation in human beings. Physiology & Behavior,
52, 27–31.
Porter, L. W. (1961). A study of perceived need satisfactions in
bottom and middle management jobs. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 45, 1–10.
Procidano, M. E., & Heller, K. (1983). Measures of perceived
social support from friends and family. American Journal
of Community Psychology, 11, 1–23.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination
theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social
development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55,
68–78.
Schreiber, J. B., Stage, F. K., King, J., Nora, A., & Barlow, E.
A. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and
confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. Journal of
Educational Research, 99, 323–337.
MASLOW AND THE MOTIVATION HIERARCHY • 175
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Seward, G. H., & Seward, J. P. (1937). Internal and external
determinants of drives. Psychological Review, 44, 349–363.
Shostrom, E. L. (1964). An inventory for the measurement of
self-actualization. Educational and Psychological Measure­
ment, 24, 207–218.
Sirgy, M. J., Lee, D. J., Kosenko, R., Meadow, H. L.,
Rahtz, D., Cicic, M., . . . Wright, N. (1998). Does television viewership play a role in the perception of quality of
life? Journal of Advertising, 27(1), 125–142.
Spence, K. (1956). Behavior theory and conditioning. New
Haven, CT: Yale University.
Swickert, R., & Owens, T. (2010). The interaction between
neuroticism and gender influences the perceived availability of social support. Personality and Individual Dif­
ferences, 48, 385–390.
Taormina, R. J. (2009). Social and personality concomitants
of gambling attitudes and behavior among Chinese residents in the casino economy of Macau. Journal of Social
and Personal Relationships, 26, 1047–1071.
Triandis, H. C. (1996). The psychological measurement of
cultural syndromes. American Psychologist, 51, 407–415.
Unger, J. B., Ritt-Olson, A., Teran, L., Huang, T., Hoffman, B. R., & Palmer, P. (2002). Cultural values and
substance use in a multiethnic sample of California adolescents. Addiction Research & Theory, 10, 257–280.
Wahba, M. A., & Bridwell, L. G. (1976). Maslow reconsidered: A review of research on the need hierarchy theory.
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 15,
212–240.
Waters, E., Wippman, J., & Sroufe, L. A. (1979). Attachment, positive affect, and competence in the peer group:
Two studies in construct validity. Child Development, 50,
821–829.
Yang, K. S. (1995). Chinese social orientation: An integrative
analysis. In T. Y. Lin, W. Tseng, & E. Yeh (Eds.), Chinese
societies and mental health (pp. 19–39). Hong Kong,
China: Oxford University Press.
Yang, K. S. (2003). Beyond Maslow’s culture-bound linear
theory: A preliminary statement of the double-y model of
basic human needs. In V. Murphy-Berman & J. J. Berman
(Eds.), Cross-cultural differences in perspectives on the self
(pp. 192–272). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
APPENDIX. THE FIVE NEED SATISFACTION MEASURES
For the first four need measures, the instructions asked the
respondents to indicate how much they agreed or disagreed
with the statement “I am completely satisfied with” (the items
in the list) on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (strongly
disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Physiological Needs Satisfaction Scale
1. The quality of the food I eat every day
2. The amount of food that I eat every day
3. The quality of the water I drink every day
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
The amount of water that I drink every day
The amount of heating I have when the weather is cold
The amount of cooling I have when the weather is hot
The quality of the air I breathe every day
The amount of sex I am having
The quality of sex I am having
Every aspect of my physical health
The amount of sleep I get to feel thoroughly relaxed
The quality of sleep I get to feel fully refreshed
The amount of exercise I get to keep me healthy
The type of exercise I get to keep my body toned
My overall physical strength
Safety–Security Needs Satisfaction Scale
1. The quality of the house/apartment I am living in
2. The space available for me in my house/apartment
3. How secure I am in my house/apartment
4. How safe I am from being physically attacked
5. The safety of my neighborhood
6. How safe I am from catching any diseases
7. How secure I am from disasters
8. How protected I am from dangers in the environment
9. The protection that the police provide for me
10. The protection that the law provides for me
11. How safe I am from destructive terrorist acts
12. How safe I am from acts of war
13. My financial security
14. My ability to get money whenever I need it
15. The money I reserved for me to have a secure retirement
Belongingness Needs Satisfaction Scale
1. The amount of rapport I share with the people I know
2. The quality of the relationships I have with my friends
3. The love I receive from my spouse/partner
4. The intimacy I share with my immediate family
5. The camaraderie I share with my colleagues
6. How much I am welcomed in my community
7. The warmth I share with my relatives
8. The emotional support I receive from my friends
9. The feeling of togetherness I have with my family
10. How much I am cared for by my spouse/partner
11. The happiness I share with my companions
12. The sympathy I receive from my confidants
13. The enjoyment I share with associates
14. The affection shown to me by my friends
15. The closeness I feel with my associates
Esteem Needs Satisfaction Scale
1. The admiration given to me by others*
2. The honor that many people give me*
3. How much other people respect me as a person*
4. The prestige I have in the eyes of other people*
5. How highly other people think of me*
6. The high esteem that other people have for me*
7. The recognition I receive from various people*
176 • TAORMINA & GAO
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
The high regard that other people have for me*
How much I like the person that I am**
How sure I am of myself **
How much respect I have for myself **
All the good qualities I have as a person**
My sense of self-worth**
The amount of esteem I have for myself **
How positive I feel about myself as a person**
Note for the esteem measures:
*Items that represent esteem from others.
**Items that represent esteem from self.
All 15 esteem items may be combined for use as a single scale.
Self-Actualization Satisfaction Scale
For this measure, respondents were asked to indicate how
much they agreed or disagreed that the items described them
using a 5-point Likert scale that ranged from 1 (strongly dis­
agree) to 5 (strongly agree).
1. I am totally comfortable with all facets of my personality.
2. I feel that I am completely self-fulfilled.
3. I am now being the person I always wanted to be.
4. I am finally realizing all of my innermost desires.
5. I indulge myself as much as I want.
6. I am now enjoying everything I ever wanted from my life.
7. I completely accept all aspects of myself.
8. My actions are always according to my own values.
9. I am living my life the way I want.
10. I do the things I like to do whenever I want.
11. I am actually living up to all my capabilities.
12. I am living my life to the fullest.
MASLOW AND THE MOTIVATION HIERARCHY • 177
This content downloaded from 143.210.133.26 on Sat, 17 May 2014 05:45:57 AM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions