Recently we had an interesting discussion in the team. After having reviewed Daniel Pink’s 2009 TED Talk on The Puzzle of Motivation, and economist Dan Ariely’s 2005 paper, Large Stakes and Big Mistakes, we discussed if it is possible that an employee is unmotivated despite being empowered for the three factors of intrinsic motivation: Autonomy, Mastery, and Purpose.
My personal feeling is that it is simplistic to analyze an employee’s motivation at the workplace based on these three factors of intrinsic motivation alone. For example, the employee might have autonomy within their team, but the team itself may not be empowered for autonomy by the organization. Second, even if the employee has mastery in their area of work, they might have conflicting masteries making rival claims on their motivation. Lastly, purpose may not always equate to motivation, for e.g: the employee may be a good performer because he is afraid to lose his job as he is the only earning member of his family. But this does not prove he is motivated.
Instead of applying stand-alone theories, the puzzle of organizational motivation is better analyzed and resolved by layering multiple theories of motivation and applying them in unison. For example, we can start by using Alderfer’s ERG Model to establish if the root of the employee’s motivation is existential (material and physiological), relatedness (social and external esteem), or growth (self-esteem and self-actualization).
Once this is established, Adams’ Equity Theory, which states that people seek to maintain a balance between their inputs and the outcomes they receive, can be used to identify this point balance for the employee. What sorts of outcome motivate the employee? What is the proportion of inputs from the employee in terms of quality and quantity of work?
As a third step, we can use Hackman and Oldham’s Job Characteristics Model to identify which of the five core job characteristics (skill, variety, task, identity, task, significance, autonomy, feedback) motivate the employee most.
Finally we need to consider the question: Can motivation be increased unlimitedly? Or does it have a cap? Here is where Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory comes in handy. This theory states that there are certain factors in the workplace that cause job satisfaction, while a separate set of factors cause dissatisfaction.
According to Herzberg, motivation is improved by an increase in conditions like challenging work, recognition for one’s achievement, responsibility, opportunity to do something meaningful, involvement in decision-making, and sense of importance to the organization. A decrease in these conditions does not necessarily lead to a proportional decrease in motivation. However, there is a separate set of hygiene factors (status, job security, salary, fringe benefits, work conditions, good pay, paid insurance, vacations) that affect employee motivation. Increasing these hygiene factors does not increase motivation. But decreasing them reduces motivation dramatically.
