RUNNING HEAD: Motivation Theory and Practice
Motivation Theory and Practice
Motivation is the psychological process which gives the behavior a meaning or a purpose and direction (Kreitner, 1995); an internal drive to satisfy the unsatisfied needs (Higgins, 1994) and the will to achieve (Bedeian,1993).The word motivation has a different connotation in Psychology, it refers to the initiation, direction, intensity and persistence of behavior (Green, 1995). Thus motivation in simple terms can be defined as the desire or willingness to do something and the inner force which helps the individuals to achieve their goals and aims. Motivation is very important in business as the employer has to first of all understand as to what motivates the employees and what exactly should they do to motivate their employees so as to increase the over all productivity. Motivation has occupied a prominent place amongst researchers due to the fact that business has to motivate not only the employees but also should succeed in motivating the customers. This is so because of the increasing competition in business and the motivated employees can provide a firm with a distinctive advantage and a cutting edge on others by being more productive, which can keep the business organization thriving and surviving. Motivation has been attempted to be studied and analyzed by two schools of thought; the scientific school of thought and the Behavioral School of thought. Scientific Model
The scientific method to management tasks was devised by pioneers like Frederic Taylor, (1856-1915).Under this model; employees are regarded as an input in the process of production of goods and services. The scientific approach lays importance on the scientific selection, training and development of the employees rather than giving them an option to choose their own tasks and the methods of training so as to carry out the work in accordance with scientifically devised procedures. According to this model human behavior was to be analyzed scientifically, by considering individuals as parts of the machines. Taylor broke down the tasks into smallest units in order to figure out the best approach. Here each worker was assigned a single job in which he is trained like the motions of the parts of the machine. He then made a science for each element of work and restricted the behavioral alternatives of the worker in accordance with his social & physical environment, task, capacity, speed, durability and cost in order to remove the human variability (Terpstra, 2005). This model of Taylor was successful as it increased production and profitability as it was based on rationality rather than the trial and error methodology in management, and this led to enhanced efficiency in work. But this approach to the treatment of human beings as machines was opposed by the managers, who called it as dehumanization of work. The other feature of this model was that observation and breaking the timings on the basis of stop-watch timing also faces a strong resistance on the ground that nobody likes his work to be so closely monitored. Taylor’s method though criticized had an impact on the work as it was a very novel efficient and more productive method of work, which totally changed the nature of the industry itself as the departments of work study, personnel, maintenance and Quality check did not exist at all before the scientific model was invented by Taylor (Buford, 2000). Though there have been many developments in this field later but the scientific model has remained the basis for all the other models which developed later, as they were only modifications and not original. Behavioral approach
The Behavioral Model approaches the concept from the identification of the elements and specific influences which motivate individuals to increase their efficiency and productivity. Many people have contributed to this approach of...
References: Bedeian, A. G. (2003). Management (3rd ed.). New York: Dryden Press.
Bowen, B. E., & Radhakrishna, R. B. (1991). Job satisfaction of agricultural education faculty: A constant phenomena. Journal of Agricultural Education, 32 (2). 16-22.
Buford, J. A., Jr., Bedeian, A. G., & Lindner, J. R. (2005). Management in Extension (3rd ed.). Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Extension.
Buford, J. A., Jr. (2000). Extension management in the information age. Journal of Extension, 28 (1).
Dickson, W. J. (1973). Hawthorne experiments. In C. Heyel (ed.), The encyclopedia of management, 2nd ed. (pp. 298-302). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Harpaz, I. (2004). The importance of work goals: an international perspective. Journal of International Business Studies, 21. 75-93.
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to work. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Higgins, J. M. (2004). The management challenge (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Kovach, K. A. (1997). What motivates employees? Workers and supervisors give different answers. Business Horizons, 30. 58-65.
Kreitner, R. (2005). Management (6th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, July 1943. 370-396.
Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and Human Behavior. New York: Free Press.
Smith, G. P. (1994). Motivation. In W. Tracey (ed.), Human resources management and development handbook (2nd ed.).
Terpstra, D. E. (2005). Theories of motivation: borrowing the best. Personnel Journal, 58. 376.
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley .
Please join StudyMode to read the full document