Introduction
Money is present in many aspects of human life. People are addicted to money because of their perception that if they have money, they will have success, popularity, and power. With the high value attached to money, it seems like anything can be bought. Because of the growing materialistic ideology of the world, the most important facet of the society nowadays is accumulation of wealth. As the importance of money is getting more and more these days, there is an absolute necessity to identify where the real motivation of the modern day human being lies, irrespective of the venture. This is precisely the topic of this paper. While discussing the functions of money, this report attempts to analyze whether money is the only thing that motivates the people today. Analysis is carried out by correlating established content theories of motivation and a scholarly article to the desire for money.
Literature
Motivation is defined as an internal state of an organism, which acts as a driving force to provoke thoughts, feelings, and actions (Beck, 2004, p.3). It is the process of stimulating people to actions to accomplish the goals. Motivation can be better explained through two basic types of theories: content theories (Maslow, 1979; Herzberg et al. 1968; McClelland 1987) and process theories (Kelly, 1993; Campbell & Pritchard, 1976). One of the most prevalent belief in content theories is the human needs concept where internal motivation such as needs and desires are identified and analyzed to attain effective work motivation (Steers & Porter, 1987, p.43).
Assessment of article “Does money really affect motivation? A review of the research” – by Tomas Chamorro – Premuzic
According to Tomas Chamorro’s research, motivation can be divided into two types i.e. extrinsic and intrinsic. Intrinsic motivation is dependent on internal factors such as self-development, self- esteem etc, whereas extrinsic motivation is dependent on external factors such as salary hike, benefits, fair compensation etc. Also, Tomas Chamorro asserts that money is a financial reward received in return for exhibiting skills and capabilities for the betterment of the organization. So, if an individual is performing a particular job for earning money, he needs to be motivated both intrinsically and extrinsically. But, if an individual is just focusing on earning money and not his personal development, there is a fair chance that job will become boring for him. By considering both aspects, Tomas Chamorro furnished a thought provoking discussion on employee motivation.
Maslow’s hierarchical theory of needs
In 1943, Abraham Maslow, a well known American psychologist, proposed the Hierarchy of Needs Theory. He believed that people are motivated to achieve definite needs. These needs include five motivational needs, often portrayed in hierarchical levels of a pyramid. He also believed that there is a hierarchy of those five needs in every individual. He grouped the five needs into two categories – Higher-order needs and Lower-order needs. The higher order needs encompass social, esteem, and self-actualization needs. These needs can be satisfied by an individual internally. The lower level needs include physiological and safety needs. These needs can be satisfied externally. Lower level needs in the pyramid should be met before progressing to the higher level needs. On the other hand, if the needs at lower levels are not met, little to no concern is shown towards achieving higher level needs. The five needs in the hierarchical model are as follows-
Figure: Maslow’s hierarchical need model
1. Physiological needs- These needs include basic amenities of life such as air, water, food, clothing and shelter.
2. Safety needs- Safety needs include security in many aspects like job, health, family, and from wild life. In a broader context, these needs include protection and safety physically, emotionally, and environmentally.
3. Social needs- Social needs encompasses the desire for love, care, and friendship.
4. Esteem needs- Esteem needs can be classified into two types: internal esteem needs (self- regard, freedom, confidence, and achievement) and external esteem needs (recognition, admiration, status, and power).
5. Self-actualization needs- These needs are never completely satiable. Self – growth and development constitute these needs. Social – service, creativity, and gaining knowledge also can be categorized under these needs. To continue growing, opportunities keep popping up as an individual grows psychologically.
Assumptions of Maslow’s Theory
Maslow made the following assumptions in developing the hierarchy of needs model
1. Human beings are self governing and trustworthy by nature.
2. Evil tendencies or sickness arise from blocking fulfillment of needs.
3. Need satisfaction is healthy.
Relating Maslow’s theory to Tomas Chamorro’s statements
Lawler’s (1971) review of then-existing evidence concluded, “Money can buy food, security, social relations, and esteem, and to some extent, it can satisfy self-actualization needs” (p. 26), and subsequent research has continued to support this conclusion (e.g., Frank 1985). With respect to Maslow’s hierarchy, reviews of the evidence suggest that pay is important for fulfilling higher-order needs, as well as lower-order ones. Now what if an employee doesn’t need higher compensation? Will he be motivated if the pay is increased? Or if the theory is worked in a different perspective, let us assume that employee received all the benefits like promotion/reward or any other kind of benefits he longed for. Can he promise that he’ll be motivated? The answer wouldn’t be a definite and clear ‘yes’. To understand the real motivational factor behind employees, Sara rynes conducted various interviews with employees (Sara rynes, 2004). But, the results collected showed a different scenario. The results clearly showed that money doesn’t motivate the employees. Let us understand this through a better example, a soccer player is performing so well thinking that he’ll become the captain of the team by the next fiscal year. The manager of the team increases his category and pay instead. Would the soccer player be happy? He’ll get demotivated because that’s not what he expected. A professor of Stanford university, Jeff Pfeffer (1998a, p. 112) came up with a fascinating discussion in one of the most widely read business article, Harvard Business Review. He iterated the concept that people work for money is a “myth.” Also, he asserted, “a sub- stantial body of research has demonstrated, both in experimental and field settings, that large external rewards can actually undermine intrinsic motivation” (1998b, p. 216). His claims were supported by Kohn (1993).
Limitations of Maslow’s Theory
1. It is noteworthy that not all employees are uniform and have same set of needs. Need may differ from individual to individual based on their personality at different points of time. Also, an individual tends to be motivated more by his most unsatisfied need.
2. There is little empirical evidence to support the theory even though it is accepted widely. It is highly tentative.
3. Modern day person has plethora of needs, which may not follow the hierarchy of needs. Under this circumstances, Maslow’s theory does not hold good.
Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of Motivation
Frederick Herzberg, a behavioral scientist, proposed a two-factor theory or the motivator-hygiene theory in 1959. Herzberg believed that some job factors result in satisfaction while other job factors contribute to prevent dissatisfaction. Herzberg’s research indicate that the antonym of satisfaction is no satisfaction and antonym of dissatisfaction is no dissatisfaction according to him. He also divided those job factors into two types-
Hygiene factors- These are the essential job factors crucial for existence of motivation at workplace. Non-existence of hygiene factors at workplace leads to dissatisfaction. Conversely, these don’t lead to positive satisfaction in the long-run. In other words, adequate hygiene factors in a job conciliate the employees and don’t make them dissatisfied. For this reason, Hygiene factors may also be termed as maintenance factors as they are required to avoid dissatisfaction. These factors portray the actual job scenario and are extrinsic to work. The hygiene factors represent the physiological needs, which the individuals always expected to be fulfilled. They include:
¥ Pay – The pay must be equal to those who work in the same industry and domain. It should be reasonable.
¥ Company Policies and administrative policies – The company policies should be fair and clear but not too rigid. Flexible working hours, dress code, breaks, vacation, etc. are potential areas to be concentrated.
¥ Health care benefits – Health care benefits like plans and medical help programs should be offered to the employees and their family members.
¥ Physical Working conditions – Safe, clean, and hygienic working conditions are essential at the workplace. Equipment related to work should always be attended well. Equipment should be well-maintained.
¥ Status – The organizational stature of an employee should be familiar and well-known.
¥ Interpersonal relations – No conflict of interest or humiliation should be entertained at the workplace. Appropriate relationship with peers, subordinates, and superiors is to be maintained by the employees.
¥ Job Security – An organization should take up providing job security to the employees as an ethical responsibility.
Motivational factors- Herzberg didn’t regard hygienic factors as motivators. Instead, he asserted that motivational factors motivate employees for a superior performance and yield positive satisfaction. For this reason, he termed motivational factors as satisfiers. Motivational factors are inherent to work and are involved in performing a job. These factors are often perceived intrinsically rewarding by employees. Motivators also represents the psychological needs that were normally considered as additional benefits. They include:
¥ Recognition – The managers should recognize and praise the employees for their accomplishments.
¥ Sense of achievement – Depending on the job, the employees must develop a sense of achievement.
¥ Growth and promotional opportunities – Growth and promotional opportunities in an organization motivate employees to perform more. So, there must be a chance for growth opportunities in an organization to achieve exceptional results.
¥ Responsibility – Ownership of the work should be handed over to the employees by their managers. Employees should hold themselves responsible for the assigned work. This facilitates cost cutting, also, at the same time they should be accountable.
• Meaningfulness of the work – To motivate and extract maximum performance from an employee, the context of the work should be meaningful, interesting and challenging.
Relating Herzberg’s theory to Tomas Chamorro’s statements
Lawler indicated that, “the tendency for pay to be mentioned as a contributor to satisfaction as often as it is mentioned as being unfairly low or dissatisfying has appeared in most of the studies that have attempted to replicate or test Herzberg’s theory” (1971, pp. 32–33). After reviewing empirical evidence on pay, Lawler noticed that that the pay is rated more highly than what Herzberg has actually reported many years ago. Expanding on this, he also developed a model suggesting that pay is an obvious motivator because of its instrumental nature in obtaining various outcomes. In fact, based on his own earlier research Herzberg carried out a summary which took 1685 subjects and 12 studies into consideration. His outcome showed that pay is mentioned as a motivator almost as frequently as it is mentioned as a dissatisfier. Pay is highly likely to be considered as a motivator, particularly when seen as a form of recognition. To add up to this, Locke developed both empirical (Locke et al. 1980) and conceptual work (e.g., Bartol & Locke 2000) recommending that pay has significant effectiveness as a motivator. When methodologies other than Herzberg’s own are used to assess the dichotomy put forward, Herzberg’s very own conclusions are even less well supported (Campbell & Pritchard 1976). The big question here is, will the employees leave money for so called motivators?
Limitations of Two-Factor Theory
The two factor theory is not free from limitations:
1. Situational variables are overlooked in the two-factor theory.
2. Herzberg expected the existence of a possible correlation between satisfaction and productivity. But his research ignored productivity and stressed upon satisfaction.
3. This theory’s reliability is questionable and uncertain. Analyzers may flaw the findings by analyzing same response in different manner.
4. Detailed measure of satisfaction is missing. Even if an employee hates his job, he may still find his job acceptable.
5. When enquired about the possible sources of satisfaction and dissatisfaction at work, employees normally have the character trait of crediting themselves for the satisfaction factor at work, at the same time, they’ll blame the dissatisfaction on extrinsic factors like pay, administrative policies, and relationship with superiors. From this, it can be clearly understood that the two factor theory is not fully unbiased.
Final Thoughts and Conclusion
In rundown, in spite of the fact that the ideas put forward by Maslow and Herzberg have had significant appeal to numerous people, the common perspective in the academic writing is that the specific forecasts of these theories are not bolstered by empirical evidence (Kanfer 1990). Nonetheless, the influence of both these theories on research and practice can never be underestimated. In his article, Tomas has stressed that motivation actually depends on the individual. Again, it changes from person to person. A person who longs for monetary benefits may think money as the real motivator to indulge himself more into the work. But, on the other hand, a person who cares about his organizational stature and admiration in the organization may perceive higher pay as a demotivator. Also, motivation depends on the kind of job an individual is interested in. Each individual has different personality and thought process. But, is it even possible for an organization to step into each and every employee’s mind to understand what they need exactly? It is not possible, given the dynamic work culture these days. So, in this situation, role of managers is crucial and critical for any organization. Managers from various departments, particularly human resource, need to step up and understand what their subordinates need. They need to communicate effectively and frequently. Involvement of managers in understanding the needs of the workforce will prove helpful as the communication will be carried out on a case by case basis.
The performance of a whole organization is heavily dependent on the individual and team performances of its employees. So, motivating the employees towards achieving higher productivity should be the top priority for any organization. They need to outline policies and practices to engage all the workforce and understand their individual preferences.
Voluntary engagement of employees in organization’s multi dimensional growth should always be encouraged. For instance, Google and Facebook are among the best companies to work for, because of their work culture. There aren’t any particular set rules and regulations on how an organization can motivate their employees. They should let their employees find their own opportunities and realize their potential, without forcing them to do something. So, it is again on the employees to find a company which best suits their interests. It doesn’t make any sense to work in a company/job when you actually don’t the company, isn’t it? The work will be counter-productive.
Implications for Managers
Managers should make sure that all the basic necessities of employees are sufficiently met. They should also provide their subordinate workforce a sense of security in personal, emotional, and environmental aspects. To avoid disappointment among the employees, managers must make sure that the working environment is hygienic. Managers should introduce a social element among the workforce, which facilitates the employees in gelling together. Managers should reward better performing employees through performance appraisals based on the set targets. Based on the appraisals, organizations can promote/reward the deserved employee. If an employee is performing exceedingly well, more challenging tasks can be assigned by the manager to that particular employee so as to utilize his full potential towards improvement of the organization while giving him the opportunity to grow. While assigning tasks, it is the courtesy of the manager to make sure that the work is stimulating and rewarding so that the employees can be motivated to work harder and better. Effective utilization of employees’ capabilities contributes to higher quality of work and productivity.
References
1. Sara L. Rynes & Barry Gerhart (2004). THE IMPORTANCE OF PAY IN EMPLOYEE MOTIVATION: DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN WHAT PEOPLE SAY AND WHAT THEY DO. Human Resource Management, 43(4), 381–394.
2. Dawn Loh, Jeff Wrathall & Jan Schapper (2000). THE MASLOW REVIVAL: MASLOW’S HIERARCHY OF NEEDS AS A MOTIVATIONAL THEORY. Working paper, 78/00, 1-21.
3. Sara L. Rynes, Barry Gerhart & Laura Parks (2005). PERSONNEL PSYCHOLOGY: PERFORMANCE EVALUATION AND PAY FOR PERFORMANCE. Annual review of psychology. 573-595. Retrieved from
http://mario.gsia.cmu.edu/micro_2007/readings/pay_for_perf_2005.pdf.
4. Martin Dewhurst, Matthew Guthridge & Elizabeth Mohr (2009). MOTIVATING PEOPLE: GETTING BEYOND MONEY. Mckinsey quarterly. November edition. Retrieved from
http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/motivating-people-getting-beyond-money
5. Koh, W. L. & Neo, A. (2000). AN EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF PAY FOR PERFORMANCE ON EMPLOYEE SATISFACTION, Research and Practice in Human Resource Management, 8(2), 29-47. Retrieved from
https://rphrm.curtin.edu.au/2000/issue2/impact.html
6. Lawler EE III (1971). PAY AND ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS: A PSYCHOLOGICAL VIEW. McGraw-Hill.
7. Kohn A. (1993). WHY INCENTIVE PLANS CANNOT WORK. Harvard Buiness Review. 71(5), 54–63.
8. Kanfer R. (1990). MOTIVATION THEORY AND INDUSTRIAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, ed. MD Dunnette, LM Hough, Vol. 1, 75–170.
9. Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene theory. Retrieved from
http://www.netmba.com/mgmt/ob/motivation/herzberg/
10. Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic (2013). DOES MONEY AFFECT MOTIVATION? A REVIEW OF THE RESEARCH. Harvard Business Review. April edition.
11. Campbell, D.J., & Pritchard, R. (1976). MOTIVATION THEORY IN INDUSTRIAL and ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY. In M.D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. 63-130.
12. Grant, A. M., & Shin, J. (2011). WORK MOTIVATION: DIRECTING, ENERGIZING, AND MAINTAINING EFFORT (AND RESEARCH). Oxford handbook of motivation.
13. Maslow’s need hierarchical model. Retrieved from
http://www.managementstudyguide.com/maslow_need_hierarchy.htm
14. Jeffrey Pfeffer (1998). SIX DANGEROUS MYTHS ABOUT PAY. Harvard Business Review. May-June issue. Retrieved from
https://hbr.org/1998/05/six-dangerous-myths-about-pay