MOTIVATION THEORIES

Drive Reduction Theories

There are a number of drive theories. The Drive Reduction Theory grows out of the concept that we have certain biological needs, such as hunger. As time passes the strength of the drive increases as it is not satisfied. Then as we satisfy that drive by fulfilling its desire, such as eating, the drive's strength is reduced. It is based on the theories of Freud and the idea of feedback control systems, such as a thermostat.

There are several problems, however, that leave the validity of the Drive Reduction Theory open for debate. The first problem is that it does not explain how Secondary Reinforcers reduce drive. For example, money does not satisfy any biological or psychological need but reduces drive on a regular basis through a pay check second-order conditioning. Secondly, if the drive reduction theory held true we would not be able to explain how a hungry human being can prepare a meal without eating the food before they finished cooking it.

However, when comparing this to a real life situation such as preparing food, one does get hungrier as the food is being made (drive increases), and after the food has been consumed the drive decreases. The only reason the food does not get eaten before is the human element of restraint and has nothing to do with drive theory. Also, the food will either be nicer after it is cooked, or it wont be edible at all before it is cooked.

Cognitive dissonance theory

Main article: Cognitive dissonance
Suggested by Leon Festinger, this occurs when an individual experiences some degree of mental discomfort resulting from an incompatibility between two cognitions. For example, a consumer may seek to reassure himself regarding a purchase, feeling that another decision may have been, in retrospect, preferable.

Another example of cognitive dissonance is when a belief and a behavior are in conflict. A person may believe smoking is bad for one's health and yet continues to smoke.

Affective-Arousal Theories

Need Achievement Theory

Main article: David McClelland
David McClelland’s achievement motivation theory envisages that a person has need for three things but people differ in degree in which the various needs influence their behavior: Need for achievement, Need for power, and Need for affiliation

Interests Theory

Main article: Holland Codes
Holland Codes are used in the assessment of interests as in Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI; Holland, 1985). One way to look at interests is that if a person has a very strong interest in one of the 6 Holland areas, then obtaining outcomes in that area will be very strongly reinforcing relative to obtaining outcomes in areas of weak interest.

Need Theories

Need Hierarchy Theory

Main article: Hierarchy of needs
Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of human needs theory is the most widely discussed theory of motivation.

The theory can be summarized as thus:

Human beings have wants and desires which influence their behaviour; only unsatisfied needs can influence behavior, satisfied needs cannot.
Since needs are many, they are arranged in order of importance, from the basic to the complex.
The person advances to the next level of needs only after the lower level need is at least minimally satisfied.
The further the progress up the hierarchy, the more individuality, humanness and psychological health a person will show.
The needs, listed from basic (lowest, earliest) to most complex (highest, latest) are as follows:

Physiological
Safety and security
Social
Self esteem
Self actualization

Herzberg’s two factor theory

Main article: Frederick Herzberg
Frederick Herzberg's two factor theory, concludes that certain factors in the workplace result in job satisfaction, while others do not, but if absent lead to dissatisfaction.

He distinguished between:

Motivators; (e.g. challenging work, recognition, responsibility) which give positive satisfaction, and
Hygiene factors; (e.g. status, job security, salary and fringe benefits) which do not motivate if present, but if absent will result in demotivation.
The name Hygiene factors is used because, like hygiene, the presence will not make you healthier, but absence can cause health deterioration.

The theory is sometimes called the "Motivator-Hygiene Theory."

From a practical point of view (vs academic) Herzberg's two factor theory has proven more powerful than Maslow since its concepts are simpler to understand. Steve Bicknell did considerable research into Employee Engagement Data, in particular the analysis of verbatim comments over 50 companies found there was a common theme between low hygiene - high motivator and low Employee Engagement. Employees consistently recorded low scores against management/leadership - Employees were optimisitic about success but happy to complain about leadership since their hygiene factors had not been addressed. Message - sort the hygiene, then drive the motivation.

Alderfer’s ERG theory

Main article: Clayton Alderfer
Created by Clayton Alderfer, Maslow's hierarchy of needs was expanded, leading to his ERG theory (existence, relatedness and growth). Physiological and safety, the lower order needs, are placed in the existence category, Love and self esteem needs in the relatedness category. The growth category contained the self actualization and self esteem needs.

Self-determination theory

Self-determination theory, developed by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, focuses on the importance of intrinsic motivation in driving human behavior. Like Maslow's hierarchical theory and others that built on it, SDT posits a natural tendency toward growth and development. Unlike these other theories, however, SDT does not include any sort of "autopilot" for achievement, but instead requires active encouragement from the environment. The primary factors that encourage motivation and development are autonomy, competence feedback, and relatedness.[2] 643890-89-

Cognitive theories

Goal-setting theory

Goal-setting theory is based on the notion that individuals sometimes have a drive to reach a clearly defined end state. Often, this end state is a reward in itself. A goal's efficiency is affected by three features; proximity, difficulty and specificity. An ideal goal should present a situation where the time between the initiation of behavior and the end state is close in time. This explains why some children are more motivated to learn how to ride a bike than mastering algebra. A goal should be moderate, not too hard or too easy to complete. In both cases, most people are not optimally motivated, as many want a challenge (which assumes some kind of insecurity of success). At the same time people want to feel that there is a substantial probability that they will succeed. Specificity concerns the description of the goal. The goal should be objectively defined and intelligible for the individual. A classic example of a poorly specified goal is to get the highest possible grade. Most children have no idea how much effort they need to reach that goal. For further reading, see Locke and Latham (2002)