Kidd-1

Valerie Kidd

Motivation in the Workplace

Senior Seminar

West Virginia State University

4/18/2017
 Kidd-2

Motivation in the Workplace

One question asked by leaders, organizational psychologists, and human resource

managers alike is what motivates employees to be productive at work? There is research that

supports that employees are intrinsically motivated to be successful and there is literature that

indicates extrinsic motivation. How do we know if our employees are motivated? According to

S. Fowler (2015), a top motivational author, highly motivated employees possess five intention

characteristics. They are: to stay, endorse the organization, use discretionary effort on behalf of

the organization, use citizenship behaviors, and perform at above-expected standards. Fowler

(2015) also argues that most people are not intrinsically motivated at work because they do not

feel pure enjoyment while working; however, research does not generally agree. In this paper, I

will review various motivation theories and examine the evidence of effectiveness of each one. I

will also view other factors that contribute to employee motivation, such as personality,

organization, and leadership styles.

Maslows Hierarchy of Needs

To begin, I will discuss one of the most well-known theories of motivation. Maslows

Hierarchy of needs proposes that individuals are motivated first by physiological needs that

eventually progress into intrinsic needs such as self-actualization. If we translate these needs to

the workplace, will it make the employee motivated? Let us consider each of these from an

occupational standpoint. The first need on the Maslows pyramid is physiological and in order to

meet the physiological need, employees need adequate rest, be able to breath, eat, drink, and
 Kidd-3

have their body at homeostasis. To begin, they are not resting if they are overworked and they

cannot be at homeostasis if they do not take breaks for nourishment and effectively manage

stress. In addition, employees need clean air so they should have appropriate personal protective

equipment around toxins. Next, the safety need states individuals need security, employment,

resources, health, and morality. From an occupational perspective, employees cannot live in

fear of losing their job, nor have inappropriate health care, and pay. The next need is love and

belonging. While we would not want love or sexual intimacy in the workplace, it is reasonable

to consider friendship and bonding with colleagues. The next level is esteem and satisfies the

need to feel achieved, confident and respected by others. The final level of self-actualization is

more personal and in depth and probably will not be reached by workplace success alone but

workplace achievement could contribute to the overall feeling of self-actualization. To go a step

further, Herzberg proposed in his two-factor theory that individuals had two basic needs in the

workplace. The first is the avoidance of pain. By avoiding pain and unpleasant encounters,

employees are able to feel happier in the workplace. The second factor, like in Maslows

Hierarchy of needs, relates to the achievement of self-actualization and the need for personal

growth. If employers are able to meet all of the needs previously described, does that mean

workers will automatically be more motivated and satisfied? The answer is no. While employers

should consider these needs, they will not alone dictate motivation because there are other

factors to consider such as the personality and character of each individual employee and other

environmental factors I will address in this paper.

Intrinsic Motivation

One intrinsic based theory is achievement theory. Achievement theory (Atkinson 1957 as

quoted by Martin, 2009) indicates that people are motivated to achieve success or to avoid the
 Kidd-4

feeling of failure. We can also consider value-based theories such as equity theory (Adams, 1965

as quoted by Martin, 2009). Simply put, equity theory states that people want to work for

companies that treat everyone fair and equitable. If an employee feels treated unfairly, they will

be less motivated and dedicated to the goals of the organization. Researchers have also found

that employees respond well to setting their own goals. According to goal setting theory, people

will work towards achievement if they have part in structuring their own goals. There are so

many different theories; it is difficult for managers and human resource professionals to identify

how they plan to achieve motivation. Another topic sparking interest of researchers is

identifying age differences in work-motivation.

Age Differences

One study examined the relationship between generations and work motivation and

managerial level with work motivation. Researchers found there was a stronger correlation

between managerial level and work motivation than generations and work motivation (Deal,

Stawiski, Graves, Gentry, Weber, & Ruderman, 2013). One limitation discussed was the issue

that most managerial positions are actually filled by older employees, however researchers

suggest that this could also indicate that those were the group of people who were more

motivated to fill such management positions. This type of research is important because it can

help employers identify the best ways to motivate their employee base. While differences in age

will require further research, there has been significant evidence of the effects of personality on

individual motivation.
 Kidd-5

Personality Traits

In another study, researchers were able to identify that three out of four motivational

traits predicted workplace deviance (Diefendorff & Mehta, 2007). Individuals who are deviant

in the workplace may possess one of many of the following behaviors: wasting resources,

leaving early, procrastinating, stealing, breaking equipment, gossiping, sexual harassment or

verbal abuse (Diefendorff & Mehta, 2007). The one trait negatively related to workplace

deviance was personal mastery. People scoring high in personal mastery are typically ambitious,

goal seeking, and hardworking. I thought these traits were interesting findings because they are

very similar to Suzanne Kobasas work on Psychological Hardiness. Kobasa indicated that

successful mid-level managers shared three traits, which were control, commitment, and

challenge (Kobasa, 1979). Control refers to an individuals internal verses external locus of

control. People with an internal locus of control feel that they have control over their lives and

the things that take place in them, while those with an external locus of control feel that their

lives are dictated by the events occurring in the world that are not within their control. Kobasa

(1979) found that successful managers shared an internal locus of control. The second trait

possessed by successful managers is commitment (Kobasa, 1979). This refers to tenacity or the

ability to not give up on oneself. The final trait identified is challenge. Successful managers

view the events of life as challenging and necessary for their personal growth (Kobasa, 1979).

They work well under pressure and view challenges as a game of beating the odds (Kobasa,

1979). With these types of characteristics indicating successful, non-deviant employees, I think

it is crucial that human resource teams identify if these traits are present in potential employees.
 Kidd-6

Task verses Intrinsic Motivation

In cognitive evaluation theory, researchers compare task verses ego on intrinsic

motivation. In this study, participants who were ego involved, displayed less intrinsic

motivation (Ryan & Deci, 1989). That is, they were more concerned with how they appeared to

others than the task-involved. This changed based on the type of feedback they received. Some

participants received informational feedback while others received controlling feedback.

Researchers found that participants were more likely to have intrinsic motivation after

informational feedback than feedback that was domineering and controlling (Ryan & Deci,

1989). This is important research in the treatment of employees. It proves that if managers are

overbearing or demanding that they will stand a greater risk of demotivating their employees.

This theory leads to my next topic which is leadership and how it effects the motivation of the

employee.

Leadership Approach

One interesting factor of motivation is how leaders affect the performance of their

subordinate employees. Many researchers have already explored the effects of transformational

and transactional leadership on company success. Transformational leaders are charming,

motivating, inspiring, and convince employees that change is for the great good of the

organization (Boga & Ensari, 2009). They also encourage open sharing of ideas (Boga & Ensari,

2009). Transactional leaders are less personal with their employees and tend to focus on setting

clearly defined expectations, and offering recognition once goals are achieved (Boga & Ensari,

2009). Transformational leaders help achieve organizational success amidst changes like an

acquisition or downsizing (Boga & Ensari, 2009). This indicates that a leaders personality can
 Kidd-7

positive or negative affects on organizational success even in undesirable situations. A separate

study found that personality traits such as humility and shared leadership contributed to the

overall success of the group (Chiu, Owens, & Tesluk, 2016). In addition, researchers identified

that non-dominant leaders work very well with employees who have a proactive personality

(Chiu et al, 2016). This indicates that if leaders remain humble, it allows for employees with a

proactive personality to feel empowered, motivated, and to be more productive (Chiu et al,

2016). One stipulation is that the employee with proactive personality also needs to be skilled or

they will not achieve optimal efficiency (Chiu et al, 2016).

A related study examines the link between personality traits from the five-factor model of

personality to transformational leadership behavior. The five factors are Extraversion,

Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Adjustment, and Openness to experience (Judge &

Bono, 2000). This is fascinating research because it was initially believed that transformational

leadership was a learned behavior that can be taught, however individual personality is not thought

to be easily changed (Judge & Bono, 2000). The trait with the strongest correlation to

transformational leadership was agreeableness (Judge & Bono, 2000). Researchers initially

predicted that conscientiousness would be related to transformational leadership but the data was

not able to confirm (Judge & Bono, 2000). In fact, conscientiousness was a deterrent to becoming

a transformational leader because those with high conscientious are not good at delegating and

tend to micromanage employees (Judge & Bono, 2000). Additionally, leaders that were deemed

transformational had direct reports that were more motivated and dedicated to the organization

(Judge & Bono, 2000).

Some situations or behaviors contribute to demotivating employees. This will serve as a

list of things, not to do. Researchers have found that abuse from the highest level of
 Kidd-8

management has a trickledown effect on employees and prompts negative supervision and

damaging employee behaviors. When employees notice this behavior in their supervisors and/or

co-workers, they obtain cues that the company supports that type of behavior and/or deems it

acceptable (Mawritz, Dust, & Resick, 2014). This in turn, causes the employee to develop a

negative image of the company (Mawritz, Dust, & Resick, 2014). Organizations need to

proactively detect hostility even at the highest of levels of authority and take action to ease these

feelings (Mawritz et al, 2014). If not handled, employees may become disengaged, experience

burnout, or retain unhealthy amounts of stress. Burnout is a psychological syndrome of

emotional exhaustion, depersonalization, and reduced personal accomplishment that occurs

among individuals, especially those who do people work (Kirsh, Duffy, & Atwater, 2014).

Employees may also feel depersonalization, which means that they will no longer see clients as

human and will not take care of client needs (Kirsh et al, 2014). In addition, employees might

experience emotional exhaustion brought on by unreasonable demands and long working hours

(Kirsh et al, 2014). Employees experiencing burnout may also feel as if their work is not

important which causes them to feel less motivated (Kirsh et al, 2014).

Health Implications

Too much stress has a damaging and negative affect not only on motivation but also on

overall employee well-being. Stress overloads can cause a breakdown in the immune system

causing individuals to be more susceptible to physical illness. More than 50% of Americans

report that they experience major job stress (Kirsh et al, 2014). Shockingly, approximately, 25%

of Americans feel that their stress is significant enough to cause a nervous breakdown (Kirsh et

al, 2014). Sadly, prolonged stress paired with tension is associated with high blood pressure and
 Kidd-9

depression. I think it is fair to presume that leaders have a significant impact not only on

motivating their employees but also on their overall health and well-being.

Self-Determination Theory

Another avenue to explore is self-determination theory. In self-determination theory, the

type of motivation each employee possesses determines performance (Deal, Stawiski, Graves,

Gentry, Weber, & Ruderman, 2013). There are two broad categories. The first is intrinsic and

identified motivation and employees in this category are more self-determined. The second is

external and introjected where the individuals are less self-determined. Employees who

considered intrinsic and identified showed higher levels of motivation and were more likely to

strive for upper level management positions (Deal, Stawiski, Graves, Gentry, Weber, &

Ruderman, 2013). These types of findings if further defined could be potentially useful to

human resource departments in applicant selection and screening. One current measure used is

The Work Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation Scale (WEIMS) (Tremblay, Blanchard, Taylor,

Pelletier, & Villeneuve, 2009). This is an 18-item measure of work motivation based in self-

determination theory. The questionnaire includes question regarding working conditions,

income, and other motivational factors. Researchers found that as self-determination rises so do

positive outcomes such job satisfaction and commitment and lower levels of self-determination

result in negative outcomes such as work strain and turnover (Tremblay et. al, 2009).

Additionally, as self-determination rose workers reported more organizational loyalty and were

more apt to help coworkers (Tremblay et. al, 2009). In addition, lower levels of self-

determination creates passive employees who do the minimum that lack citizenship and blaming

others. Those with low levels of self-determination were also more likely to take part in deviant

behaviors against coworkers such as being rude or making racial slurs (Tremblay et. al, 2009). .
 Kidd-10

Researchers found that this measure produced valid results in predicting motivational

personalities. Human resource teams and organizational psychologists have already begun

conducting research in order to obtain highly motivated candidates possessing high levels of self-

determination and other related characteristics.

Motivational Testing

In one study, researchers were trying to identify how to accurately screen and hire nurses

with high levels of motivation. Results indicated that nurses personal values and characteristics

could indicate their level of motivation (Koch, Proynova, Paech, & Wetter, 2014). Those who

scored high on benevolence, who worked on general wards, were in the middle of their careers,

and had computer experience were more motivated than other nurses were (Koch, Proynova,

Paech, & Wetter, 2014). By conducting this type of research, HR professionals could potentially

use this information to select the right individuals for open positions in all types of occupational

settings.

Discussion

How will hiring managers, organizational psychologists and human resource teams decide

which approach is best? To begin, they must first understand the demographics of the employee

base then construct a plan. Leaders should certainly consider Maslows Hierarchy of Needs as a

foundation then build up with other relevant theories. To establish relevance, they need to ask

the situational appropriate questions. What type of work are the employees doing? What are the

goals/expectations of the job? Do employees have the necessary skills to complete the work or

will they require additional training? Is proper leadership in place for the scope of the task? By

using a combination of many different motivational theories, a comprehensive plan will yield the
 Kidd-11

best results. By choosing the right personality type for each position, ensuring fair company

practices, maintaining professional leadership, dispelling abuse and negativity, providing

informational feedback, empowering employees, encouraging open thinking, letting employees

take part in their own goal setting, and promoting positive growth and support, I believe

companies will have their best chance at fostering an atmosphere ready for the motivated

employee.
 Kidd-12

References

Boga, I., & Ensari, N. (2009). The role of transformational leadership and organizational change

on perceived organizational success. The Psychologist-Manager Journal, 12(4), 235-251.

Retrieved from http://ezproxy.wvstateu.edu:2048/docview/1269605432?accountid=29132.

Chiu, C. ., Owens, B. P., & Tesluk, P. E. (2016). Initiating and utilizing shared leadership in

teams: The role of leader humility, team proactive personality, and team performance

capability. Journal of Applied Psychology, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000159

Deal, J. J., Stawiski, S., Graves, L., Gentry, W. A., Weber, T. J., & Ruderman, M. (2013).

Motivation at work: Which matters more, generation or managerial level? Consulting

Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 65(1), 1-16.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0032693

Diefendorff, J. M., & Mehta, K. (2007). The relations of motivational traits with workplace

deviance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(4), 967-977.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.967

Fowler, S. (2015). Motivation Done Right. TD: Talent Development, 69(12), 76-77.

Judge, T. A., & Bono, J. E. (2000). Five-factor model of personality and transformational

leadership. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(5), 751-765. Retrieved from

http://ezproxy.wvstateu.edu:2048/docview/614344968?accountid=29132
 Kidd-13

Kirsh, S. J., Duffy, K. G., & Atwater, E. (2014). Psychology for Living: Adjustment, Growth, and

Behavior Today (11th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Kobasa, S. C. (1979). Stressful life events, personality, and health: An inquiry into hardiness.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(1), 1-11.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.1.1

Koch, S. H., Proynova, R., Paech, B., & Wetter, T. (2014). The perfectly motivated nurse and the

others: workplace and personal characteristics impact preference of nursing tasks. Journal

of Nursing Management, 22(8), 1054-1064. doi:10.1111/jonm.12083

Martin, A. J. (2009). Motivation and Engagement in the Workplace: Examining a

Multidimensional Framework and Instrument From a Measurement and Evaluation

Perspective. Measurement & Evaluation In Counseling & Development (American

Counseling Association), 41(4), 223-243.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (1989). Bridging the research traditions of task/ego involvement and

intrinsic/extrinsic motivation: Comment on butler (1987). Journal of Educational

Psychology, 81(2), 265-268. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.81.2.265

Tremblay, M. A., Blanchard, C., Taylor, S., Pelletier, L. G., & Villeneuve, M. (2009). Work

extrinsic and intrinsic motivation scale: Its value for organizational psychology research.

Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du

Comportement, 41(4), 213-226. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0015167