7 Source: Darron Cummings/AP/Shutterstock

Motivation Concepts

LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After studying this chapter, you should be able to:

7-1 Describe the three key elements of 7-5 Compare the process-based theories
motivation. of motivation: expectancy theory,
goal-setting theory, and self-efficacy
7-2 Compare the classic theories of theory.
motivation.
7-6 Describe the forms of organizational
7-3 Contrast the content-based theories justice, including distributive justice,
of motivation, including self- procedural justice, informational jus-
determination theory, regulatory-focus tice, and interactional justice.
theory, and job engagement theory.
7-7 Describe how the contemporary
7-4 Understand the differences between theories of motivation complement
the context-based theories of mo- one another.
tivation: reinforcement theory and
social learning theory.

234

M07_ROBB0025_19_GE_C07.indd 234 13/12/22 2:43 AM

 Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 235

Employability Skills Matrix (ESM)

Myth or An Ethical Point/ Toward a Experiential Ethical Case
Science? Choice Counterpoint Better World Exercise Dilemma Incident
Critical Thinking &
Creativity ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Communication
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Collaboration
✓ ✓
Self-Management
✓ ✓
Social
Responsibility ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Leadership
✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Career
Management ✓

ENGAGING EMPLOYEES AT SALESFORCE

E ighty-five percent of employees worldwide are actively disengaged or

not engaged in their jobs. How do some companies maintain high job
engagement levels while most other organizations struggle so much to
do so? Salesforce is one such organization, included on Fortune’s “100
Best Companies to Work For” list for the twelfth year in a row. Part of
Salesforce’s high workforce engagement levels may stem from its unique
company culture and employee benefits. Salesforce differentiates itself
from other organizations with exceptionally generous paid time off and leave
policies, including fantastic child care assistance perks, commuter benefits,
and career development (i.e., Salesforce will reimburse 100 percent of all
college costs up to a limit for job-related courses).
The founders of Salesforce were intentional about developing a company
culture that would directly foster job engagement and motivation. As a result,
they prioritize employee well-being through dedicated mindfulness zones in
offices and a Wellness Reimbursement Program. Employees receive $100
each month to use toward their well-being in whichever way they please,
from enrolling in fitness classes to seeking nutrition counseling. Beyond
offering innovative perks, Salesforce can also sustain high job engagement
by continuously monitoring engagement levels. All Salesforce employees
complete engagement surveys twice a year, but Salesforce does not withhold
employees’ data. Employees are able to access the data from these
surveys through a company app. The company is very transparent about
its assessment practices. Through data sharing, employees are encouraged
to take responsibility for the work environment and take a proactive role in
shaping the culture.

M07_ROBB0025_19_GE_C07.indd 235 13/12/22 2:43 AM

 236 PART 2    The Individual

The company also takes a somewhat unconventional approach by

providing the same amount of transparency to its managers. All employees
can access the data on their manager’s engagement levels and team
performance. The goal is not to publicly discredit the managers and their
teams but rather to determine which management practices are working
and which ones are not. This transparency helps the organization transform
abstract strategies that encourage engagement and motivation into
specific behaviors and policies. For example, explicitly recognizing that
work-life balance prevents burnout is not enough. Companies need to help
employees find this balance through their benefits, policies, practices, and
management.
Salesforce offers training for teams exhibiting low engagement levels,
including “Fearless Teaming,” which focuses on cultivating “psychological
safety” or an environment in which people feel comfortable taking risks.
Jody Kohner, senior vice president of employee engagement at Salesforce,
suggests that employees are empowered to do their best work when
they feel comfortable taking risks. Employees and managers are also
empowered to maximize the fit between employees and their teams. For
instance, Salesforce launched an internal mobility program that empowers
employees to switch teams if they do not feel like they fit with their current
team. The organization’s investment in these initiatives has paid off as it
can retain employees for longer and continue to be a successful, profitable
company.1

M otivation is a powerful force. It can drive employees through encouragement

and reward to accomplish challenging goals. However, it can also prompt
employees to cheat when they experience injustice or are threatened by
unattainable goals. Navigating and predicting these forces becomes a challenge
to both workers and managers. Despite the challenges, knowing more about
motivation theories can help increase an understanding of how motivation may
operate and how employees become motivated.
Millions of people each year spend money in the hopes that they will become
more “motivated.” In the United States alone, self-improvement and motiva-
tional services is an $11 billion market that is expected to grow 5.1 percent on
average until 2027.2 Motivation is also one of the most frequently researched
topics in organizational behavior (OB),3 and full-time OB practitioners (e.g.,
industrial-organizational psychologists, management consultants, human
resource professionals) list it as one of the top most-needed areas for continued
research in the field.4 Beyond interest in the topic, people do appear to be gen-
erally unmotivated at least for a part of the workweek. In one survey, 69 percent
of workers reported wasting time at work every day, and nearly a quarter said
they waste between thirty and sixty minutes each day. How? Usually by surfing
the Internet (checking the news and visiting social network sites) and chatting
with coworkers.5 Although times change, the problem of motivating a workforce
stays the same.

M07_ROBB0025_19_GE_C07.indd 236 13/12/22 2:43 AM

 Motivation Concepts CHAPTER 7 237

In this chapter, we will review the basics of motivation, assess motivation the-
ories, and provide an integrative model that fits these theories together. In the
next chapter, we will apply what we know about motivation to solve motivation
problems in the workplace.

Motivation Defined
The same student who struggles to dedicate time to read an assigned book for
class may devour a New York Times best seller in a day. The difference lies in 7-1 Describe the three key
elements of motivation.
levels of motivation.
We define motivation as the processes that account for an individual’s motivation The processes that account
intensity, direction, and persistence of effort toward attaining a goal.6 While general for an individual’s intensity, direction, and
motivation is concerned with effort toward any goal, we will narrow the focus to persistence of effort toward attaining a goal.
organizational goals. Levels of motivation can vary from moment to moment and
can also be meaningful individual differences (see the chapter on personality
and individual differences). In other words, motivation can take form as both a
personality trait and a temporary state.
Intensity describes how hard a person tries. This is the element most of us
focus on when we talk about motivation. However, high intensity is unlikely to
lead to favorable job performance outcomes unless the effort is channeled in
a direction that benefits the organization. Effort directed toward and consistent
with the organization’s goals is the kind of effort organizations should be seek-
ing to improve. Finally, motivation has a persistence dimension. This measures
how long a person can maintain effort. Motivated individuals work intensely on
an appropriate task long enough to achieve their goals.
Many classic and contemporary theories of motivation focus on employee
needs as goals to attain and describe whether their organizations, jobs, and work
fulfill those needs. Other theories portray goals as means toward organizational
ends, such as the fulfillment of job duties and responsibilities. Although we discuss
remote work to a greater extent in the next chapter on motivation applications,
the issues facing remote workers reflect both perspectives. As shown in the OB Poll,

OB POLL
Is a Lack of Motivation the Biggest Issue Remote Workers Face?

What is your biggest struggle with working remotely?

7% Not being able to unplug

12% 27% L
Loneliness
C
Collaborating and/or
ccommunication
7%
Distractions at home
D

TTime zone differences

15% 16%
Staying motivated
S

16% O
Other

Source: Based on “The 2021 State of Remote Work,” Buffer, January 4, 2021, https://buffer.com/2021-state-of-remote-work
 238 PART 2    The Individual

remote workers’ biggest struggles include the difficulty of fulfilling people’s need
to interact with other people as well as obstacles that thwart goal attainment, like
household distractions and time zone differences. In the next section, we describe
more classic theories of motivation, which portray motivation as a process involv-
ing people’s psychological needs and the extent to which work meets or neglects
those needs.

Classic Theories of Motivation

­7-2 Compare the classic
theories of motivation.
Three theories of employee motivation formulated during the 1950s are con-
sidered to be classics in the study of motivation. They represent a foundation
of motivation theory, with many practicing managers still using their terminol-
ogy. However, now they are of questionable validity (as we will discuss), and as
evidence-based OB practitioners, we should carefully and cautiously consider
their use when compared with more contemporary theories, discussed later in
this chapter.

Hierarchy of Needs Theory

hierarchy of needs Abraham Maslow’s The best-known theory of motivation is Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs,7
hierarchy of five needs—physiological, safety, which hypothesizes that within every human being there is a hierarchy of five
social, esteem, and self-actualization.
needs humans are motivated to meet. A sixth need has been proposed for a
highest level—intrinsic values—which is said to have originated from Maslow,
but it has not gained widespread acceptance.8 The original five needs are:
1. Physiological. Hunger, thirst, shelter, and other bodily needs.
2. Safety. Security and protection from physical and emotional harm.
3. Social-belongingness (originally love). Affection, love, belongingness, ac-
ceptance, and friendship.
4. Esteem. Internal factors such as self-respect, autonomy, and achievement as
well as external factors such as status, recognition, and attention.
5. Self-actualization. Drive to become what we can become; includes growth,
achieving our potential, and self-fulfillment.
According to many interpretations of Maslow’s work,9 as each need becomes
well satisfied, the next one becomes dominant. This has led to the popularized
depiction of the hierarchy as a pyramid or a ladder. Maslow himself, however,
merely outlined the need categories and suggested that some may take prece-
dence depending upon the situation.10 We depict the hierarchy as a pyramid in
Exhibit 7-1 because this is its best-known presentation, but it is important to rec-
ognize that Maslow did not depict the hierarchy of needs in this way. Maslow’s
theory has broadly received long-standing recognition, particularly among prac-
ticing managers. Perhaps the broad recognition is because it is intuitively logical
and easy to understand, especially in its ladder or pyramid form. Unfortunately,
however, most research does not support its validity, and it has not been fre-
quently researched since the 1960s.11 Nonetheless, it is thus important to be
aware of the prevailing public acceptance of the hierarchy when discussing
motivation but also to recognize that psychological needs paint an incomplete
portrait of motivation in the workplace.

Two-Factor Theory
Believing an individual’s relationship to work is basic and that the attitude
toward work can determine success or failure, psychologist Frederick Herzberg
wondered, “What do people want from their jobs?” He asked people to describe,
in detail, situations in which they felt exceptionally good or bad about their jobs.

M07_ROBB0025_19_GE_C07.indd 238 13/12/22 2:43 AM

 Motivation Concepts    CHAPTER 7 239

Exhibit 7-1 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

Self-
actualization
Esteem
Social-belongingness
Safety-security
Physiological

Source: Based on H. Skelsey, “Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs—the Sixth Level,” Psychologist (2014): 982–83.

The responses differed significantly and led Hertzberg to his two-factor theory two-factor theory A theory that relates
(also called motivation-hygiene theory, but this term is not used much today).12­­ intrinsic factors to job satisfaction
Two-factor theory is inherently tied to job satisfaction (see the chapter on job and associates extrinsic factors with
dissatisfaction. Also called motivation-
attitudes) and expresses motivation in terms of intrinsic and extrinsic factors hygiene theory.
that impact job satisfaction.
Under two-factor theory, the factors that lead to job satisfaction are separate
and distinct from those that lead to job dissatisfaction. As shown in Exhibit 7-2,
intrinsic factors such as advancement, recognition, responsibility, and achieve-
ment seem related to job satisfaction. Respondents who felt good about their
work tended to attribute these factors to their situations, while dissatisfied
respondents tended to cite extrinsic factors, such as supervision, pay, company
policies, and work conditions.

Exhibit 7-2 Comparison of Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers

Factors characterizing 1,753 Factors characterizing 1,844

events on the job that lead to events on the job that lead to
extreme satisfaction extreme dissatisfaction

45% 40%
40% 35%
30%
35% 25%
30% 20%
25% 15%
10%
20% 5%
15% 0%
Policy and administration

Supervision

Relationship with
supervisor

Work conditions

Relationship with peers

Salary

10%
5%
0%
Advancement
Work itself

Responsibility
Recognition
Achievement

Growth

Source: Based on Harvard Business Review, “Comparison of Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers,” An exhibit from One More Time: How Do You Motivate
Employees? by Frederick Herzberg, January 2003. Copyright © 2003 by the Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation. All rights
reserved.

M07_ROBB0025_19_GE_C07.indd 239 13/12/22 2:43 AM

 240 PART 2    The Individual

Exhibit 7-3 Contrasting View of Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction

Traditional view

Satisfaction Dissatisfaction

Herzberg’s view

Motivators
Satisfaction No satisfaction

Hygiene factors

No dissatisfaction Dissatisfaction

To Herzberg, the data suggest that the opposite of satisfaction is not dissat-
isfaction, as was traditionally believed (see Exhibit 7-3). Removing dissatisfying
characteristics from a job does not necessarily make the job satisfying; manag-
ers would be placating rather than motivating employees. Herzberg proposed
a dual continuum: The opposite of “satisfaction” is “no satisfaction,” and the
opposite of “dissatisfaction” is “no dissatisfaction.”
Conditions such as quality of supervision, pay, company policies, physical
hygiene factors Factors—such as company work conditions, relationships with others, and job security are hygiene factors.
policy and administration, supervision, and When they are adequate, people will not be dissatisfied; neither will they be
salary—that, when adequate in a job, placate satisfied. If we want to motivate people on their jobs, we should emphasize fac-
workers and limit job dissatisfaction.
tors associated with the work itself or with outcomes directly derived from it,
such as promotional opportunities, personal growth opportunities, recogni-
tion, responsibility, and achievement. These are the characteristics people find
intrinsically rewarding.
The two-factor theory has not been well supported in research. Criticisms
center on Herzberg’s original methodology and his assumptions, such as
how the participants may be biased in thinking back to times when they felt
good or bad about their jobs.13 Furthermore, if hygiene and motivational fac-
tors are equally important to a person, both should be capable of motivating.
Regardless of the criticisms, Herzberg’s theory has been quite influential and
has been used in many studies.14 Most managers worldwide are familiar with its
recommendations.

McClelland’s Theory of Needs

Imagine that you are a sales manager in a well-known mountaineer outfitting
company, reviewing the bonus memo you received earlier in the day. If you meet
the easier, level 1 sales goal, you will get a $2,000 bonus. If you meet the level
2 sales goal (which only 80 percent of the people who attempt actually attain),
you will get a $4,000 bonus. Level 3 pays $8,000, but only half the people who try
can attain it. Finally, Level 4 pays $32,000, but it is almost impossible to achieve.
Which would you try for? If you selected level 3, you are likely a high achiever.
McClelland’s theory of needs A theory that McClelland’s theory of needs, unlike Maslow’s hierarchy, suggests that needs
achievement, power, and affiliation are three are more like motivating factors than prerequisites for survival.15 In McClelland
important needs that help explain motivation. and colleagues’ theory, there are three primary needs:
need for achievement (nAch) The need to • Need for achievement (nAch) is the need to excel or achieve to a set of
excel or achieve to a set of standards. standards.

M07_ROBB0025_19_GE_C07.indd 240 13/12/22 2:43 AM

 Motivation Concepts    CHAPTER 7 241

• Need for power (nPow) is the need to make others behave in a way they need for power (nPow) The need to make
would not have otherwise. others behave in a way in which they would
• Need for affiliation (nAff) is the need to establish friendly and close inter- not have behaved otherwise.
personal relationships. need for affiliation (nAff) The need to
establish friendly and close interpersonal
McClelland and subsequent researchers focused most of their attention relationships.
on nAch.16 In general, high achievers perform best when they perceive their
probability of success as 0.5—that is, a fifty-fifty chance. Similarly, they dislike
low odds (high probability of success) because then there is no challenge
to their skills. Based on prior nAch research, we can predict some relation-
ships between nAch and job performance. First, when employees have a high
level of nAch, they tend to exhibit more positive moods and be more inter-
ested in the task at hand.17 Second, employees high on nAch tend to perform
very well in high-stakes conditions on the job, like work walkthroughs or sales
encounters.18
The other needs within the theory have also been empirically supported.
First, the nPow concept has research support, but it may be more familiar to
people in broad terms than in relation to the original definition.19 We will dis-
cuss power much more in the chapter on power and politics. Second, the nAff
­concept is also well established and accepted in research—for example, one
study of 145 teams suggests that groups composed of employees with a high
nAff tend to perform the best, exhibit the most open communication, and
experience the least amount of conflict (compared with the other needs).20
Additional research suggests that our individual differences (discussed in the
chapter on personality and individual differences) may affect whether we can
satisfy these needs. For example, a high degree of neuroticism can prevent
one from fulfilling the nAff, whereas agreeableness supports fulfillment of this
need; interestingly, extroversion had no significant effect.21 Furthermore, some
ev­idence suggests that women may be more likely to have more nAff needs then
men.22
The degree to which we have each of the three needs is difficult to mea-
sure, and therefore the theory is difficult to put into practice. A behavior may
be directed at satisfying many different needs, and many different behaviors
may be directed at satisfying one given need, making needs difficult to isolate
and examine.23 Therefore, the concepts are helpful, but they are not often used
objectively.

Contemporary Theories: A Primer

Although these three classic theories are quite common, they do not represent
the universe of influential motivation theories in management. In fact, a num-
ber of distinct motivation theories have made a substantial contribution, help-
ing illuminate the nature of motivation in organizations. Some of these theories
may also be considered “classics” (e.g., behaviorism, expectancy theory), while
others may be relatively more modern. Regardless, these theories share the fact
that they are still the focus of (mostly supportive) research and practice in OB
to this day, which makes them “contemporary” theories in our view. These “con-
temporary theories” represent the latest thinking in explaining employee moti-
vation. This does not mean they are unquestionably right, however.
To help categorize these motivation theories, it might be helpful to break
down the core components of these theories. Researchers, for instance, have
classified motivation theories into three categories: (a) content, (b), context, and
(c) processes.24 The content category is primarily concerned with fundamental
motives and individual differences in motivation states common to all people.
This category includes self-determination theory, regulatory-focus theory, and
job engagement theory. The context category involves sources of motivation that

M07_ROBB0025_19_GE_C07.indd 241 13/12/22 2:43 AM