Understanding Keys to Motivation - Coursework Example

Name Coursework Organizational success it is said always counted on delivering output or results through teamwork and the contribution of each individual in a team. In current organizational landscape, the need for highly-motivated teams and individual become more critical. As this paper tries to explore, it is assumed that motivating an individual compared with a group may be similar but different in some ways. To decipher this issue, it will be best to first define some terms and then we look at the keys in understanding motivation before finally making a comparison of the difference in the approaches to motivating individual and group. Understanding keys to motivation In order to understand the keys to motivation, it will help that we define what motivation is. As some scientists have defined the term, they refer to motivation as that “process of arousing, directing, and maintaining behavior toward a goal” (Greenberg, 1999). By implication, the way a leader treat his staff or group may pose direct effect on the degree of effort his constituents will be prepared to exert in getting a project or task done. Meeting Basic Needs As the definition of motivation suggests, it is people’s desire to satisfy his or her needs that compel or motivate him or her to work. Thus, understanding motivation calls for a leader to learn to appreciate that his or her constituents’ basic needs must be satisfied through earning to live, feeling to be part of a social group, and accomplishing personal ambitions (Druckers, 1994). In his seminal work, What America Does Right: Learning from Companies that Put People First, Robert H. Waterman Jr. (1994) echoes this assertion and advices that in order for organizations to attract the best people and motivate them to do the best work, the same should meet their employees’ needs. In this regard, Maslow’s (1970) need hierarchy theory may add some insights as to how this may come about. His theory puts to fore the very basic idea that people look for their needs to become well-adjusted and healthy in a particular situation. His well-discussed five categories of needs – physiological, safety, social, esteem and self-actualization – were claimed only activated in a specific order, starting at the lowest most basic needs, then working upward to higher-level needs. According to him, each need is triggered only after the one beneath it in the hierarchy has been satisfied. Ensuring Fairness But it should be noted that satisfying the individual or team’s needs will not necessarily mean that people are fully motivated already. Some literatures reviewed for this study revealed that some people are highly motivated to seek equity. People react when they believe they have been unfairly treated so they redress the iniquities they face on the job, it is said however. Organizational scientists are calling to describe such as equity theory (Adams, 2000). In such case, people make judgment by comparing themselves with fellow colleagues, and then bases this on the outcomes or what they get out of their job, and inputs or what contributions were made by themselves with others. Achieving what you believe you can get Beyond satisfying the basic needs and the need to seek for fair treatment on a job, individual or team are motivated by the belief that certain desired reward can be achieved through working hard to achieve them. This is where the carrot-and-stick paradigm comes in, which claims that people work or exert effort to attain or get what he or she believes is a symbolic of a carrot dangling at the end of the stick or merits. This principle establishes the links between job performance and rewards. A popular theory of motivation addressees this issue and is called expectancy theory. In this theory, Greenberg (1999) expresses that motivation is the combined result of the three components of expectancy, instrumentality, and valence of reward. It also contemplates that motivation is only one of several determinants of job performance apart from people’s role perceptions, role of opportunities, and special skills and abilities that also help predispose a person to perform their jobs better than others. By deduction, expectancy can help sensitize managers to several key determinants of motivation, variables that can be controlled. Beyond this, the theory clarifies the important but unique role that motivation plays in determining job performance. Setting of Goals to Achieve Targets To get remarkable improvement among employees’ performance, sociologists theorized that under certain conditions, setting of goals can help perk up interests of people to keep them going and achieve their targets. Such can be a very good tool that managers can utilize to motivate people. By setting a specific, acceptably difficult and providing feedback about progress toward the achievement of a goal, managers or leaders are able to enhance the job performance of employees. In ordinary situations, researchers noted the principle of self-efficacy, which refers to people’s assessments of themselves as being competent and successful. When people believe that they can succeed at a task, they will be motivated to work hard for it. For this reason people will be motivated to pursue specific goals, ones that readily enable them to define their accomplishments, enhancing their efficacy beliefs. Comparing Motivation between Individual and Group An individual or group may be similar but different in some ways, especially in terms of motivating them to have marked improvement in their performance or to meet job expectations. However, it will help us best appreciate the study of behavior in organizations and sort out the issue clearly by focusing not only on the study of individual but also the groups. For this study, we will first define what an individual or a group means. In their definition of a group, researchers have referred to such as a collection of two or more interacting individuals that maintain social interaction, share common goals and who perceive themselves as being a group. Lastly, in groups, individuals must perceive themselves as group (Greenberg, 1999). Unlike a group, an individual are only beholden to himself or herself but not with other people, except to his manager. An individual is also characterized by its being exclusive and acting alone. However, by using the different literatures and theories reviewed for this study, we can now determine the major ways by which the motivation for individuals or groups may be compared. These are – 1) Definition of Motivation. An individual may not or cannot feel being part of a social group compared with a group whereby individual members attached to such can feel being part of a group. This calls for the leaders or managers to exert more effort in motivating an individual than a group or team, hence, motivating an individual may be more challenging than a group; 2) Needs Hierarchy Theory. An individual may be motivated to satisfy his own needs but this motivation may become short-lived as fulfillment may not be long or lasting. However in a group, motivation may more about appealing to the satisfaction or fulfillment of the needs of the group than by individual self, because the concern for the self alone is diminished. Managers handling a group should take this opportunity to motivate the group members contribute their part to satisfy the needs of the group. On one hand, managers thus needs to emphasize or personally seek out what an individual’s need to satisfy and to ensure that those are sufficiently met. 3) Equity Theory. An individual may be concerned that if he feels undeserved of his reward or otherwise, his attitude toward fulfilling a task or project may also change. If he feels undeserved, he may feel guilty and in turn, slack off, feel bored or dissatisfied in the long term. However, a group may not altogether feel that it is undeserved or over rewarded since the use of the operative term “group” helps define their character and personality, not individually but as one. Hence, managers leading a group should take this opportunity to keep members faithful to the group where the individual members are affiliated. Meanwhile, to avoid the feeling of dissatisfaction or slackening off by an individual, managers should provide related tasks aside from what was already given to the individual, to keep him or her more involved and well-compensated. 4) Carrot-and-Stick paradigm or Expectancy. An individual motivated to pursue a particular goal may not be able to establish a stable and cooperative relationship with other people as he is beholden to no one but his concern is with getting things done. It will be noted that an individual’s strength in this case lies in his desire to excel and do it better than anyone else, hence the emergence of competition. But in a group, where the objective set for a team or each member of the team is one, the group may only be compelled to synergize, unify with the team but not compete with one another for attention from their manager or head, and even for prestige. Manager should carefully study how or what motivational techniques should he use in influencing or motivating individuals in this regard since one of the complaint about this case is that the carrot at the tail implies that leaders are above anybody else, can dictate orders and very the atmosphere is very self-centered. Unlike when it is a group, manager can take advantage of employing motivational technique to address synergism or unification of each member to achieve the common goals of the team. Moreover, the manager or leader will determine what techniques should he employ to have his approach work for each person. To determine what an individuals’ motivations are, and to help a manager generate ideas to meet those motivations, it will be helpful for the same to ask the individual or person and understand what motivating factors can help you make a good relationship with your staff. Building trust among individuals or a team should also be a priority for a leader or manager holding people, because this way, you will be able to honestly receive feedback as to what went right and wrong and also determine what are missing and needs to be improved. Since groups are comprised of different individuals, each with his or her own set of values, beliefs and motivations-which are not always transparent, leader or manager should be in the know about these so he would not be able to offend or create apathy to members. Motivating a well-aligned team can also pose big challenge for a manager to ensure success, but he can do so by creating a healthy and inspirational context in which the motivation can work and then find success. In sum, to ensure that an individual or a team is motivated to work, a manager or leader should learn to understand what motivates them; it also pays that he or she realizes that these people should be motivated, and finally, that he or she keeps them motivated. This also help us surmise that motivation is one of the key skills that leaders use to influence his staff or members to get them going. As networked and matrix organizational structures become more prevalent these days, it is normal to see individuals coming or called to comprise a particular team for a project with a specified duration and objective. When a project is completed or have already met its objectives, a team is dissolved and then the individual members are called on to migrate to a newly-formed team. In the new team, individual members or the team are beholden to new set of purpose and team leaders. With this pattern that is bound to be repeated and become a cycle in some ways or another, many professionals may soon take charge of a team and be compelled to take the lead. Hence, it would be imperative then that these future leaders or managers be equipped or guided to lead and motivate individuals or teams. Additionally, it also pays that managers or leaders know how to differentiate or calibrate his or her leadership styles and techniques in motivating between an individual or group. Only by knowing these things, he can expect high-performance members or teams who are motivated to work for the organization’s success. In the final analysis, motivation for an individual and a team are very likely to be different but only similar in terms of the challenges that leaders face in dealing with it. Cited References Druckers, Peter, 1994, Management, New York: Harper & Row, pp. 17-21. Greenberg, Jerald (1999), Managing Behavior in Organizations. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Maslow, A.H. (1970). Motivation and Personality (2nd ed.). New York: Harper and Row. Waterman, R.H., Jr. (1994). What America does right: Learning from companies that put people first. New York: W.W. Norton. Read More