MGMT20001 · Organisational Behaviour
Motivation
Motivation is the set of forces — direction, intensity and persistence — that energise goal-directed behaviour, and the unit's master split organises everything: content theories explain what motivates (which needs), process theories explain how the thinking that motivates works. Content: Maslow's hierarchy, Herzberg's hygiene-vs-motivators, McClelland's nAch/nAff/nPow, four-drive. Process: Vroom's expectancy (a product — any zero kills it), Adams' equity, Locke & Latham's goal-setting / SMART, and organisational justice. Theory becomes practice through job design (Hackman & Oldham's JCM) and psychological empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer). The unit busts the reward myths — a Christmas bonus is hygiene, not a motivator. We mirror 'Fast Fashion' (Part 2).
What this chapter covers
- 01Content vs process — the master split
- 02Content theories: Maslow, Herzberg (hygiene vs motivators), McClelland, four-drive (+ ERG, SDT)
- 03Process theories: expectancy (Vroom), equity (Adams), goal-setting (Locke & Latham / SMART)
- 04Organisational justice: distributive / procedural / interactional
- 05Job design: the job characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham)
- 06Psychological empowerment (Quinn & Spreitzer): meaning, competence, self-determination, impact
- 07The reward myths (bonus, punishment) the evidence undercuts
Worked example: why the bonus isn't working (expectancy)
- +1Expectancy (E): if staff believe the target is unreachable ('I can't hit it'), effort→performance is near zero — E = 0.
- +1Instrumentality (I): if they doubt the firm will actually pay it ('they won't really pay'), performance→reward is near zero — I = 0.
- +1Valence (V): if they don't value the reward ('I don't want it'), V = 0.
- +1Why 'product' matters: Motivation = E × I × V, so a zero anywhere zeroes the whole thing — one broken link kills effort regardless of the other two.
Key terms
- Content vs process theories
- The unit's master split: content theories explain what motivates (which needs — Maslow, Herzberg, McClelland, four-drive); process theories explain how the thinking that motivates works (expectancy, equity, goal-setting, justice).
- Herzberg two-factor
- Hygiene factors (pay, conditions, supervision, security) only prevent dissatisfaction — fixing them reaches neutral. Motivators (achievement, recognition, the work itself, growth) create satisfaction. Pay is a hygiene factor.
- Expectancy (Vroom)
- Motivation = Expectancy (effort→performance) × Instrumentality (performance→reward) × Valence (value of reward). A product, so a zero in any term zeroes motivation.
- Goal-setting (Locke & Latham)
- Specific, challenging, accepted goals plus feedback raise performance — operationalised as SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable-yet-challenging, Relevant, Time-bound). Difficult goals beat easy ones if accepted.
- Job characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham)
- Five core job dimensions (skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, feedback) create three psychological states that raise a job's motivating potential. Enrichment (vertical depth) is the strongest redesign lever.
Motivation FAQ
What's the difference between content and process theories?
Content theories answer 'what do people want?' (a need or factor) — Maslow, Herzberg, McClelland, four-drive. Process theories answer 'how do people weigh effort, reward and fairness?' — expectancy, equity, goal-setting, justice. Sorting this first narrows any motivation answer instantly.
Why is pay 'only a hygiene factor'?
In Herzberg's two-factor theory, satisfaction and dissatisfaction aren't opposite ends of one scale. Removing bad pay or conditions only reaches neutral; to actually motivate you must add achievement, recognition and growth. So a Christmas bonus, being expected, rarely lifts ongoing effort.
What does it mean that expectancy 'multiplies'?
Motivation = E × I × V. Because the three perceptions multiply, a zero anywhere zeroes the whole thing: 'I can't hit the target' (E=0), 'they won't pay it' (I=0), or 'I don't want the reward' (V=0) each kill effort alone.
How do I turn motivation theory into a recommendation?
Go beyond 'pay more'. Use the job characteristics model to enrich the work (autonomy, skill variety, task significance) and build psychological empowerment (meaning, competence, self-determination, impact). That raises the job's motivating potential rather than just the bonus.
Exam move
Sort first: decide whether a question is about what people want (content) or how they weigh effort and fairness (process) — it narrows the answer immediately. Memorise Maslow, Herzberg (hygiene vs motivators), McClelland on the content side and Vroom (E×I×V), Adams' equity, Locke & Latham's SMART on the process side. Know that expectancy multiplies (a zero kills it) and that justice splits into distributive/procedural/interactional. Finish recommendations with job design (JCM) and empowerment, not just 'pay more', and reach for the reward myths the evidence undercuts.
