7.1 The Importance of Worker Motivation What motivates people at work? For the past century, I/O psychologists have been trying to answer this elusive question. Think about how you might answer it. Do coworkers motivate you? Rewards? Perhaps the fear of punishment? No matter how you respond, chances are your reasons for doing your job differ from those of your friends, family, and coworkers. Because everyone has different needs, values, emotions, and personality traits, each person will likewise possess a different set of factors that drive his or her motivation. The indeterminate number of variables that influence motivation are what makes studying this topic difficult. Despite the challenges, researchers have, over time, gained considerable insight into how to improve worker motivation. This chapter is divided into two sections: The first deals with content and process theories of motivation, and the second focuses on ways in which organizations can improve worker motivation. Before discussing the theories, however, let's begin by defining motivation and identifying its basic properties. What Is Motivation? Motivation is one of the most basic and important drivers of human behavior, especially when we work. Traditionally, motivation has been viewed as a goal-oriented process that starts with a need or a deficiency. People have an inherent drive to act or behave in certain ways in order to meet a goal or alleviate a deficiency. The three basic elements of motivation are intensity, persistence, and direction. Each of these elements is required in order for a person to perform a job well. People most commonly think of intensity, or the amount of effort an individual puts into achieving a goal, when they think about motivation. However, the direction of the effort also matters: Workers must direct their efforts toward behaviors that lead to positive outcomes for the organization. Finally, workers must demonstrate persistence—that is, they must be able to continue working until they achieve the desired outcome. A motivated worker, then, will apply effort (intensity) as long as it takes (persistence) in such a way (direction) as to achieve the desired goal. 7.2 Theories of Motivation Concepts in Motion: Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs In general, the various theories and writings on motivation can be described as focusing on either content or process. Content theories of motivation try to comprehensively identify what motivates people, whereas process theories of motivation attempt to discover how motivators trigger the drives that can lead to behavior. Both types of theories are important and informative for people interested in motivating themselves and others by managing the antecedents and conditions that can facilitate desirable behaviors. To begin, let's look at four content theories: Maslow's hierarchy of needs, Herzberg's twofactor theory, Alderfer's existence-relatedness-growth (ERG) theory, and McClelland's needs theory. Maslo.

1. 7.1 The Importance of Worker Motivation
What motivates people at work? For the past century, I/O
psychologists have been trying to answer this elusive question.
Think about how you might answer it. Do coworkers motivate
you? Rewards? Perhaps the fear of punishment? No matter how
you respond, chances are your reasons for doing your job differ
from those of your friends, family, and coworkers. Because
everyone has different needs, values, emotions, and personality
traits, each person will likewise possess a different set of
factors that drive his or her motivation. The indeterminate
number of variables that influence motivation are what makes
studying this topic difficult.
Despite the challenges, researchers have, over time, gained
considerable insight into how to improve worker motivation.
This chapter is divided into two sections: The first deals with
content and process theories of motivation, and the second
focuses on ways in which organizations can improve worker
motivation. Before discussing the theories, however, let's begin
by defining motivation and identifying its basic properties.
What Is Motivation?
Motivation is one of the most basic and important drivers of
human behavior, especially when we work. Traditionally,
motivation has been viewed as a goal-oriented process that
starts with a need or a deficiency. People have an inherent drive
to act or behave in certain ways in order to meet a goal or
alleviate a deficiency.
The three basic elements of motivation are intensity,
persistence, and direction. Each of these elements is required in
order for a person to perform a job well. People most commonly

2. think of intensity, or the amount of effort an individual puts
into achieving a goal, when they think about motivation.
However, the direction of the effort also matters: Workers must
direct their efforts toward behaviors that lead to positive
outcomes for the organization. Finally, workers must
demonstrate persistence—that is, they must be able to continue
working until they achieve the desired outcome. A motivated
worker, then, will apply effort (intensity) as long as it takes
(persistence) in such a way (direction) as to achieve the desired
goal.
7.2 Theories of Motivation
Concepts in Motion:
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
In general, the various theories and writings on motivation can
be described as focusing on either content or process. Content
theories of motivation try to comprehensively identify what
motivates people, whereas process theories of motivation
attempt to discover how motivators trigger the drives that can
lead to behavior. Both types of theories are important and
informative for people interested in motivating themselves and
others by managing the antecedents and conditions that can
facilitate desirable behaviors. To begin, let's look at four
content theories: Maslow's hierarchy of needs, Herzberg's
twofactor theory, Alderfer's existence-relatedness-growth
(ERG) theory, and McClelland's needs theory.
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
Some content theories of motivation deal with needs, or the
physiological and psychological wants or desires people attempt
to satisfy by achieving particular goals. These theories aim to

3. identify not only the different needs people have but also the
conditions under which they will be motivated to satisfy these
needs in a way that contributes to performance. American
psychologist Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs, developed
in 1943, is the most influential of the needs-based theories of
motivation.
Photo of man and a woman smiling and hugging while outside.
Belonging—the need for love, affection, and affiliation—is the
third level in Maslow's hierarchy of needs.
According to Maslow, needs can be organized hierarchically,
from the most basic to the most advanced. Maslow defined five
levels of needs, beginning with (1) physiological needs, such as
the need for food, water, and shelter. After satisfying the
primary needs, human motivation progresses sequentially
through higher levels of needs, including (2) safety, or the need
for physical and emotional security; (3) belonging, or the need
for love, affection, and affiliation; (4) esteem, or the need for
admiration and respect from others; and (5) self-actualization,
or the striving toward the achievement of one's full potential.
Maslow emphasized the importance of fulfilling each level of
needs sequentially. According to his theory, a given level of
needs will not motivate a person's behavior until the needs from
preceding levels have been met. For example, people will not be
motivated to meet their needs to belong (level 3) until they have
met their basic physiological and safety needs (levels 1 and 2,
respectively). Moreover, Maslow argued that once a need has
been satisfied, it ceases to be motivating. Further motivation
requires moving to the next level in the motivational hierarchy.
Finally, in order to achieve self-actualization, a person must
have opportunities for growth and responsibility. This striving
toward personal growth and self-actualization is what creates
long-term worker motivation.

4. Because it is intuitively logical and easy to use, Maslow's
theory has been highly influential in the workplace. However,
research indicates that the hierarchy of needs is limited, and
some of its precepts can be refuted (Rauschenberger, Schmitt, &
Hunter, 1980). For example, many people pursue higher-level
needs such as esteem and self-actualization even when they
seem not to have met their most basic needs. Additionally, a
person's need for self-actualization does not ever seem to reach
satiation. In fact, highly accomplished individuals seem to have
a stronger need for self-actualization than other people. Despite
some limitations, however, Maslow's theory offered a
significant contribution to the thinking and practice in the fields
of psychology and organizational sciences, as it clearly
demonstrated that workers are motivated by a wide range of
needs, not simply the traditional rewards (such as wages and
financial incentives) and punishments (such as job termination).
Consider This: Your Needs and Motivation
•Which level of Maslow's needs applies the most to you right
now?
•In relation to Maslow's hierarchy, have your lower-level needs
been satisfied?
•Do you agree with the sequence of needs in Maslow's
hierarchy? Why or why not? How would you change the
sequence based on your own needs and experiences?
Find out for Yourself: More on Maslow
Visit the website below, which lists publications by and about
Maslow, to expand your knowledge about Abraham Maslow's
seminal work.
http://www.maslow.com/ (http://www.maslow.com/)

5. Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory
In the 1960s, another American psychologist, Fredrick
Herzberg, developed a different model. Herzberg's two-factor
theory of motivation, also known as motivation-hygiene theory.
The basis for the two-factor theory stemmed from studies in
which Herzberg asked professionals to report incidents at work
that exceptionally motivated them as well as those that
exceptionally discouraged them. The professionals' responses
showed consistent themes. The factors related to positive
feelings about work, which Herzberg called motivators, tended
to be associated with the job itself, such as job content,
responsibilities, and achievements. On the other hand, the
factors related to negative feelings, which Herzberg called
hygiene factors, tended to be associated with the job context,
such as pay, working conditions, and the manager's style.
Although hygiene factors can, according to Herzberg's theory,
prevent job dissatisfaction, only motivators can lead to
motivation and job satisfaction. Examples of motivators and
hygiene factors are displayed in Table 7.1.
Table 7.1: Examples of Herzberg's motivation and hygiene
factors
Motivator Factors
Hygiene Factors
•Achievement
•Salary and benefits
•Recognition
•Work conditions

6. •Job characteristics
•Quality of supervision
•Advancement opportunities
•Coworker relationships
•Growth opportunities
•Job security
•Responsibility
•Company policies
The most significant contribution of the two-factor theory is the
notion that job content is a powerful motivator, necessary for
the development and retention of the right talent within an
organization. At the time of the theory's inception, the primary
emphasis of management was on hygiene factors such as pay,
benefits, and working conditions. Although these peripheral
factors are important in attracting new employees, Herzberg
found that they are unlikely to create motivating and satisfying
jobs unless complemented with interesting and challenging
work.
More recently, researchers have studied the differences between
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. As with the two-factor
theory, these studies differentiate between motivation generated
by workers' interest in the job for its own sake (intrinsic
motivation) and motivation triggered by tangible, externally
generated rewards and/or punishments (extrinsic motivation).
Much debate surrounds the relationship between intrinsic and
extrinsic motivation. One side views the two as additive,
overlapping, and complementary. For example, a promotion
might be both intrinsically and extrinsically motivating: the
former because the employee desires interesting new work that
makes better use of his or her skills; the latter because the

7. employee needs a larger income. Conversely, some studies
suggest that extrinsic motivation can adversely affect intrinsic
motivation. A hobby, for example, might be interesting and
engaging as long as a person does it for fun (intrinsically
motivating), but should it become a paying job (motivated by
external factors such as money), it can become yet another
chore to complete and thus lose much of its motivational power
(Wiersma, 1992).
Consider This: Your Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation
•What are your most intrinsically motivating activities? List 3–5
activities that you really enjoy spending time on. These are the
types of activities you get fully absorbed in, those that make
you lose track of time and feel really good afterward.
•What are some shared characteristics of those activities?
•How are those activities a reflection of your current needs?
•How would you feel about those activities if you could find a
job that would pay you to do them on a regular basis?
•Do you believe that extrinsic and intrinsic motivation are
complementary or contradictory? Explain.
Existence Relatedness Growth (ERG) Theory
ERG recognizes several basic needs including growth, which
deals with self-actualization and esteem needs.
Clayton Alderfer's existence relatedness growth (ERG) theory,
first published in 1969, continued to build upon the work of
Maslow and Herzberg. ERG recognizes various types of needs,
falling between Maslow's hierarchy and Herzberg's two-factor
theory with three basic categories: existence, which includes
basic survival needs; relatedness, or the desire for support,
relationships, and recognition; and growth, which deals with
self-actualization and esteem needs. Although the categories are

8. hierarchical (existence needs have priority over relatedness, for
example), Alderfer did not necessarily agree with Maslow's
notion that each level must be attained in sequence before
moving on to the next. Rather, ERG theory holds that
individuals may work on meeting different categories of needs
simultaneously. Furthermore, Alderfer recognized a potential
regression mechanism, the frustration-regression principle, in
which existence and/or relatedness needs resurface when growth
needs are frustrated. In practice, managers can use this
knowledge both to help frustrated employees by meeting their
existence and/or relatedness needs until they are ready to move
forward and to try to avoid regression in the first place by
providing employees with growth opportunities. Because
according to ERG theory, needs fluctuate and evolve, the theory
can help to explain some of the exceptions that arise in older
motivational models, such as needs that do not ever seem to
reach satiation or the pursuit of higher-level needs when
lowerlevel needs have not been met.
McClelland's Needs Theory
Building on Henry Murray's (1938) seminal theories of
psychological needs, David McClelland began his investigation
into the realm of motivational needs theory in the late 1950s.
Unlike Maslow, Alderfer, and Herzberg, McClelland developed
a nonhierarchical model. His theory identified three needs that
are developed by individual experiences and shared in varying
degrees by all people. These needs motivate specific behaviors:
•Need for achievement (nAch): The drive to excel and achieve
results; the desire to gain satisfaction from personal attainment
•Need for affiliation (nAff): The desire to form close personal
relationships and to be liked by others
•Need for power (nPow): The drive to influence or control
others; the desire to be responsible for others
McClelland predicted that people would be motivated to seek

9. out and perform well in jobs that matched their needs. For
example, high achievers will be motivated by tasks or jobs that
require moderate levels of risk-taking and high levels of
responsibility and feedback, because such work bestows not
only a certain level of autonomy and challenge but also a good
chance of success. Consequently, high achievers should perform
well in entrepreneurial activities. On the other hand, high
achievers often make poor managers, as they tend to care more
about personal success and less about directing other people's
efforts (Miner, Smith, & Bracker, 1994). Individuals with high
needs for affiliation or power have been shown to be more
successful managers (Miner, 1965). Team settings may be more
appealing to those with high needs for affiliation than to those
with high needs for achievement or power.
Figure 7.1: Overview of need theories
From Levy, P. E. (2010). Industrial Organizational Psychology:
Understanding the workplace. (3 ed). New York: Worth. p. 233,
Fig. 9.2. Reprinted by permission.
7.3 Process Theories of Work Motivation
As you have learned from the content theories of motivation,
people are driven to meet a variety of needs within their lives.
Some needs are more basic and trigger the need to survive.
Others are intrinsic and drive people to achieve a sense of
personal fulfillment or self-actualization. Content theories
address what motivates people, but this is not enough to fully
explain motivation. Managers cannot simply peruse a list of
needs (content) and then somehow extrapolate how to motivate
their employees (process). This is where process theories of
motivation come in. These theories aim to describe the actual
process of motivation, that is, how a person becomes interested
in moving from a state of complacency or satisfaction to a state
of motivation and change. We will discuss three major process

10. theories in this section: goal-setting theory, expectancy theory,
and equity theory or organizational justice.
Goal-Setting Theory
We have goals in every facet of our lives. People set goals
related to personal health, relationships, and financial status.
Similarly, organizations set goals concerning work productivity,
efficiency, and quality. We live in a goal-oriented society. With
all of this goal setting going on, have you ever wondered if
goals actually improve performance? The research is clear:
Goals do positively influence performance—as long as they are
designed properly.
Starting in the 1960s, Edwin Locke and his associates have been
examining how to design goals that will motivate workers.
Goal-setting theory states that specific, difficult goals lead to
greater performance than vague goals, such as encouraging a
person to do her best (Locke & Latham, 1990). These findings
have been supported in both laboratory and field studies and
have been shown to affect the performance of individuals,
teams, and organizations.
Photo of a business man aiming a bow and arrow at a cloud
shaped like a target.
Specific and difficult goals increase the level of focus and
motivation required to achieve a goal, which leads to greater
performance.
Why might specific goals be better than vague ones? In addition
to focusing an individual's attention onto precise objectives,
specific goals reduce ambiguity about expected levels of
performance. To enhance a goal's specificity, managers should
include a measurable outcome and set a clear completion date.
As an example, let's examine a familiar goal: the New Year's
weight loss resolution. People who vow simply to lose weight

11. will lack the focus needed to make a plan and achieve their
goal. On the other hand, people who set a specific goal with due
dates (e.g., lose 20 pounds by June 1) will give themselves a
clear objective they can work to achieve.
Now let's look at the second finding of goal theory, which states
that difficult goals lead to greater performance than easy ones.
As when they are specific, goals that are difficult focus an
individual's attention onto goal-relevant activities and away
from distractions. They also motivate people to work harder to
achieve the goal. Think about your own work habits. Do you
exert the same amount of effort on an easy assignment as you do
on a challenging one? Probably not. Finally, hard goals
encourage greater persistence. Researchers found that when
people are allowed to control the amount of time they spend on
a task, they will work longer when the goal is difficult (LaPorte
& Nath, 1976). Keep in mind that in order to be effective, a
goal must be challenging but not so difficult that it is
unattainable. People must believe they can attain a goal, or they
will become frustrated and demoralized to the extent that the
goal will serve only to reduce their effort or inspire them to
give up altogether.
A specific, difficult goal is most beneficial when accompanied
by ongoing feedback. Feedback allows people to compare their
current performance with that set by the goal, identify
discrepancies, and then make modifications to get back on
track. Different types of feedback vary in terms of impact.
Feedback that comes through completing the job, as is typical of
production jobs, has been shown to be a more powerful
motivator than feedback received from an external source, such
as the manager (Ivancevich & McMahon, 1982).
No matter how specifically worded, appropriately difficult, and
feedback-supported they are, goals, in the end, are not really
goals unless people want to achieve them. Therefore,

12. determination to reach a goal, or goal commitment, is another
important facet of effective goal setting. A meta-analysis of 83
studies found that goal commitment is a critical link in the
connection between goals and successful performance,
especially when goals are difficult (Klein, Wesson, Hollenbeck,
& Alge, 1999). I/O psychologists have proposed two ways to
increase goal commitments: increasing the perceived importance
of the goal and fostering the goal setter's self-efficacy (Locke &
Latham, 2002).
One way to convince people of a goal's importance is to have
them make a public commitment to the goal, because going
against such a visible promise would presumably make goal
setters feel hypocritical (Cialdini, 2001). For example, sharing
the goal with others and asking them to hold you accountable is
a way to make a public commitment to a goal. Goals can also
gain importance if leaders communicate them as inspiring
visions of the future around which followers can rally. An
inspirational vision also serves to enhance excitement about the
goal and generates the energy needed to persevere until the goal
is accomplished. Finally, monetary incentives can improve a
goal's prestige and workers' commitment to it. With this last
approach, however, managers must be extremely careful.
Financial rewards can discourage risk-taking and creativity,
splinter relationships, and create limited short-term thinking
(Kohn, 2003).
The second way to improve goal commitment is to increase the
goal setter's self-efficacy. In other words, if a person believes
he or she can accomplish a goal, he or she will be more
committed to it (Wofford, Goodwin, & Premack, 1992). Leaders
can raise self-efficacy by providing training and experiences
that improve workers' knowledge, skills, and abilities in goal-
related areas; by role-modeling successful performance; and by
conveying confidence that workers can achieve the goal
(Bandura, 1986; White & Locke, 2000).

13. In conclusion, then, setting goals is one of the most practical
tools available to help leaders motivate workers. Intentions, in
the form of specific and difficult goals, are a very powerful
motivating force and have been found to increase worker output
significantly. The broad range of effects of goal setting can be
generalized across a wide variety of organizations, jobs, and
tasks.
Find out for Yourself: Practical Approaches to Goal Setting in
Organizations
The two links below introduce you to two commonly used
approaches to goal setting in organizations. Read the two
articles below, and then think about the applications of these
approaches for more effective goal setting in your current
organization if you are employed.
•Management by Objectives:
http://www.economist.com/node/14299761
(http://www.economist.com/node/14299761)
•What Is the Balanced Scorecard?
http://www.balancedscorecard.org/BSCResources/Aboutthe-
BalancedScorecard/tabid/55/Default.aspx
(http://www.balancedscorecard.org/BSCResources/AbouttheBal
ancedScorecard/tabid/55/Default.aspx)
Photo of an unevenly balanced scale.
According to equity theory, motivation is influenced by the
perceived fairness of treatment at work. People seek an
appropriate balance between what they put into their job and
what they receive in return.
Equity Theory and Organizational Justice Theory
Equity theory states that motivation is influenced by our

14. perception of how equitably or fairly we are treated at work
(Adams, 1965). The creator of this theory, John Stacey Adams,
concluded that employees compare the ratio of inputs (effort,
experience, education, and competence) they invest in a job and
the outcomes (pay, benefits, recognition, and promotions) they
receive with another person's or group's ratio of inputs and
outcomes in the same or a similar job. If the person's ratio of
outcomes and inputs is unequal to that of the other person or
group (called the referent), he or she perceives the situation as
unfair (see Figure 7.2). In other words, people seek a fair
balance between what they put into their job and what they get
back in return. Tension arises when there is a perception of
imbalance: If people feel underrewarded, they can experience
frustration or anger; if they feel overrewarded, guilt.
According to equity theory, people are highly motivated to
maintain equitable exchange relationships and will therefore
devote considerable energy toward making their situations fair.
Carrell and Dittrich (1978) proposed a number of ways people
reduce their feelings of unfairness. First, they can actually
change their inputs (reducing effort or taking classes, for
example) and/or outcomes (asking for a raise or applying for a
higherlevel job). Second, they can distort their own perceptions
of inputs and/or outcomes so as to make things seem more
equitable in their own minds (called cognitive distortion).
Finally, they can simply quit and flee the situation.
Figure 7.2: Equity theory ratios
Research on equity theory supports the notion that people
evaluate the fairness of their inputs and outputs, especially
when inequity is due to undercompensation. Underpaid hourly
employees, for example, tend to lower their inputs by producing
less work, and underpaid piece-rate workers tend to produce a
high volume of low-quality work. In reducing their inputs, then,
underpaid employees are attempting to adjust their performance

15. to a level they feel matches their compensation. Interestingly,
when the opposite occurs—imbalance due to
overcompensation—research shows that employees tend not to
be motivated to balance the input/output ratio. Theoretically,
the guilt employees experience when overpaid should motivate
attempts to re-establish equity, perhaps by working more or
improving the quality of their work, but again, research just
does not seem to support this conclusion (Mowday, 1996).
Equity theory examines one form of fairness, that which deals
with the way workers judge the fairness of outcomes (also
called distributive justice). People, however, evaluate much
more than work-reward ratios. They assess almost everything
connected to the organization, including decision-making
procedures, interpersonal interactions, and information
(Colquitt, Conlon, Wesson, Porter, & Ng, 2001). I/O
psychologists refer to this broader, multidimensional view of
fairness, of which distributive justice is but one part, as
organizational justice (see Figure 7.3 for a model). The
following sections will include an overview of the other three
parts of organizational justice: procedural justice, informational
justice, and interpersonal justice.
Figure 7.3: Model of organizational justice
Procedural Justice
As we all know, organizations have limited resources
(promotions, pay, job opportunities, etc.) to give employees. In
addition to judging the fairness of the outcomes of resource
allocation (distributive justice), employees also evaluate the
fairness of how management decides to give out its resources,
especially if the process seems unfair. If your manager gives
one member of your team a bonus, you would probably want to
know how the manager made his or her decision, and why you
were left out, right? Depending on the answers, you may or may

16. not decide the decision was fair. This is called procedural
justice.
How can managers improve procedural justice? One way is to
give employees a chance to have their opinions heard during the
decision-making process. Employees who participate in making
decisions are more likely to be committed to those decisions,
even if they are disadvantageous. To further improve procedural
justice, managers must also demonstrate consistency (across
time and people), act ethically and without bias, gather input
from affected parties, use accurate information, and remain
open to appeals (Leventhal, 1980).
Fair procedures are especially important if a decision results in
a negative outcome. This makes logical sense. If a coworker
gets the promotion for which both you and he applied, the
coworker probably isn't too concerned about how the decision
was made, beyond the notion that he feels he deserved it. You,
on the other hand, most likely want to know exactly why you
were passed over, especially if you feel that you possess the
same educational and skill level and work just as hard as your
coworker. If you come to the conclusion that the process of
determining the recipient of the promotion was fair, you will
view your negative outcome more positively. This is known as
the fair process effect, and it illustrates the importance of the
relationship between procedures and their outcomes. Keep in
mind, then, that examining processes and outcomes separately
will never yield a complete understanding of fairness. Managers
must always consider how procedures interact with outcomes
and how the former will influence employees' ultimate
perceptions of the fairness of the latter.
Informational Justice
Interpersonal justice deals with the way procedures are

17. explained on an interpersonal level. Employees who feel that
they are treated unjustly exhibit lower performance and greater
turnover.
The fair-process effect is also exhibited using two additional
forms of organizational justice: informational justice and
interpersonal (or interactional) justice. The work of Bies and
Moag (1986) on informational justice has shown that one way to
improve people's perceptions of fairness is to provide them with
information about the procedures used and outcomes given
before, during, and/or after rewards are allocated. Significant
research supports the notion that employees will be even more
apt to perceive explanations as having high informational
justice if they perceive them to be adequate (Bies, 1987).
Interpersonal (Interactional) Justice
Interpersonal (or interactional) justice deals with the way in
which outcomes are presented and procedures are explained on
an interpersonal level (Greenberg, 1993). Let's go back to our
earlier example in which your coworker received a promotion
for which you also applied. Perhaps, as part of your fairness
assessment, you ask your manager to explain the decision. If
your manager gives what is technically a fair and adequate
explanation yet communicates it in an insensitive manner, you
will probably still experience feelings of injustice. A study by
Mikula, Petri, and Tanzer (1990) asked respondents to describe
a recent unjust event in their lives. Many of the reported
injustices were related to interpersonally unfair treatment, such
as inconsiderate, impolite, or aggressive behavior; treatment
that violated personal dignity; or actions that indicated a lack of
loyalty from another person. The implication is that, in their
daily lives, people are aware of interpersonal treatment and
perceive poor interpersonal treatment as unfair.
In the last few sections, we've discussed the ways in which

18. people perceive and judge processes, outcomes, and
interpersonal communication. Why are people's perceptions of
justice important? Organizationally speaking, employees who
feel that they are treated unjustly show lower performance,
decreased satisfaction, and greater turnover. Therefore,
especially when dealing with negative outcomes, managers
should follow consistent and unbiased processes, be transparent
about how the decision was made, and treat workers with
dignity and respect.
Consider This: Perceptions of Equity and Justice
•Think about a recent unjust event that you personally
experienced or witnessed. Try to remember as many of the
details of the event as possible.
•Describe the event in terms of distributive, procedural,
informational, and interpersonal justice.
•If possible, ask someone else who was involved in the event to
also describe the event.
•Interpret the other person's description in terms of distributive,
procedural, informational, and interpersonal justice.
•In what ways were your perceptions similar to the other
person's? In what ways were they different?
Expectancy Theory
One of the most widely evaluated process theories of motivation
is Victor Vroom's expectancy theory, developed in 1964, which
states that motivation is determined by the outcomes that people
expect as a result of their actions on the job. Ultimately,
Vroom's theory deals with the mental processes of choosing;
people will be motivated to choose work activities they both
find attractive and believe they can do. This process can be
broken into three dimensions: expectancy, instrumentality, and
valence (Vroom, 1964), and the theory focuses on the
relationship between them:

19. •Effort-performance relationship (expectancy): The probability
perceived by the individual that expending effort on an activity
will lead to high performance. The worker asks herself, "Can I
perform this activity well?" If the worker perceives the
probability of high performance to be low, she will not be
motivated to apply the effort.
•Performance-outcome relationship (instrumentality): The
degree to which the worker believes that successful performance
will lead to the desired outcome. The individual asks, "If I
perform well, will this lead to a reward (pay, promotion,
recognition, etc.)?"
•Rewards-personal goals relationship (valence): The degree to
which an activity's outcomes have sufficient personal value
(based on needs, goals, interests) to motivate the individual to
behave in a certain way. The worker asks, "Is the reward for
performance personally attractive?"
Photo of a businessman holding a trophy over his head with a
celebratory look on his face.
Performance-outcome relationship is the degree to which the
worker believes that successful performance will lead to the
desired outcome.
Expectancy theory includes a method of calculating a task's
motivational force (multiplying the expectancy dimension by a
composite of the combined valence and instrumentality
dimensions). If any one of the factors is 0, the employee will
take no action (Donovan, 2001).
Even though people rarely consciously perform these
calculations, they are motivated and guided by the interactions
of expectancy, instrumentality, and valence. For example,
imagine you are a highly successful salesperson at a large
company. You have always dreamed of being a manager for the
company and have just learned that there will be a job posting
for a sales leader six months from now. The thought of getting

20. the promotion is very exciting for you (valence). Additionally,
you feel you can perform your current job exceptionally well
and earn an excellent performance appraisal if you continue to
generate high sales numbers and act as a good team player,
finish your degree, and complete some management courses
(expectancy). Finally, you believe your excellent evaluation
will lead your managers to give you the promotion
(instrumentality). Taking this information into consideration,
you have a high likelihood of being motivated to try for the
promotion.
Interestingly, although expectancy theory makes a lot of sense
intuitively, evaluative research on this topic has generated
mixed results. As you might expect, people will generally
expend greater effort toward reaching a goal as their
expectations of receiving a reward increase, assuming they
perceive the reward to be valuable (Van Eerde & Thierry,
1996). Other research shows some caveats. Equity theory
assumes that individuals are looking only for the outcome that
is the most personally beneficial. If this is true, organizations
would be able to motivate workers as long as they make
outcomes sufficiently enticing. However, this is not always the
case. For example, even though an individual might find a
promotion personally attractive (travel to exotic locations, high
pay, increased prestige and respect, exciting job duties, a move
to a fantastic city with a great climate, etc.), he might not be
motivated to attain it (moving would mean leaving behind
friends and family, longer hours would preclude spending time
with family or participation in a treasured hobby). Choices,
then, often yield outcomes that can be perceived as both
positive and negative, and they are not solely motivated by
personal considerations.
7.4 Making Work Motivating

21. Cartoon illustration of an office scene. Employees are working
in cubicles and posters in the background read, "Remember you
are not indispensable," "Work or die!" and "There are plenty of
people who'd do your jobs for less!" In the foreground an
employee is talking to the manager saying "Mr. Frimley, sir, can
I have a word about the motivational artwork..."
Every day, millions of people go to work. For most of us, it's
not a choice: Without a paycheck, we couldn't pay bills, buy
food, or shelter our families, let alone indulge in luxuries. It's
unfortunate, then, that the majority of us spend so much time
and effort earning our income at jobs we find unsatisfying. In
2009, the Conference Board, a market information company,
found that only 45% of American workers were satisfied with
their jobs. In 22 years of conducting the survey, this percentage
is the lowest the survey has ever measured (as cited in Pepitone,
2010). The research cited a number of reasons for the steadily
declining levels of job satisfaction, including uninteresting
work as well as pay that has not kept up with inflation. As we
have already illustrated, each of these elements—job
characteristics and rewards—affect workers' motivation and are
thus very important in determining an employee's overall
success at his or her job. Because organizations control these
factors, can managers strategically adjust them to make work
more motivating? If so, how?
The Job Characteristics Model
Despite the sobering statistics, there are many people who are
satisfied with their jobs and actually enjoy going to work.
Often, the positive feelings stem from the inherent
characteristics of the job itself. In 1976, Hackman and Oldham's
job characteristics model attempted to identify the specific job
characteristics that impact workers' attitudes and motivation:
•Skill variety: The extent to which a job provides the
opportunity to use a variety of different skills and talents on the

22. job. Managing an office is one example of a job with high skill
variety. An office manager is responsible for ordering supplies,
coordinating a budget, managing support staff, facilitating team
meetings, and interacting with others. On the other hand, a
person who works on an assembly line has a job with low skill
variety; an automobile assembly-line worker will do a single
task, such as attaching front bumpers to assembled cars, eight
hours a day.
•Task identity: The degree to which a job requires the
completion of a whole or identifiable piece of work, from
beginning to end. One example of high task identity is a sales
professional who is responsible for the entire sales process from
identifying customers to conducting sales meetings to closing
the deal. A job with low task identity is that of a cabinet maker
whose sole responsibility is to sand cabinet doors.
•Task significance: The degree to which the job has an impact
on the lives and wellbeing of other people (i.e., customers and
coworkers). An example of a job with high task significance is a
medical doctor whose actions impact the lives and physical
well-being of patients in his or her care. On the other hand, an
office worker responsible for scanning records into an online
filing system has a job with low task significance.
•Autonomy: The degree to which the job provides significant
freedom and discretion to schedule and organize one's own work
activities. An example of a job with high autonomy is that of a
bank lender who has the latitude to schedule his or her work day
and make decisions as to the most effective sales strategies. A
job with low autonomy is that of a bank lender who is given a
schedule of meetings and is required to follow a strict set of
processes and procedures when making loans.
•Feedback: The amount and type of information received about
the effectiveness of one's work performance. An example of a
job with high feedback is that of a gun manufacturer who fires
each completed gun to ensure proper functioning. A job with
low feedback is that of an IT manager who receives feedback
from his or her manager just twice a year, during formal

23. performance appraisals.
The job characteristics model proposes that the motivating
potential for any job can be calculated. Using the Job
Diagnostic Survey (JDS), a worker reads descriptions of various
job characteristics and, on a scale from 1 (very nondescriptive)
to 5 (very descriptive), determines the degree to which each
statement describes his or her job. Next, the employee responses
are calculated (as shown in Figure 7.4) to determine a score for
each of the five dimensions of job characteristics (skill variety,
task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback), and
scores for each dimension are entered into an equation to
determine the overall motivating potential score (MPS) for the
job.
Figure 7.4: Calculating motivation potential from the job
characteristics model
According to Hackman and Oldham's model, the higher these
five job characteristics are in a particular job, the more
motivating and satisfying the job will be because it will create
and nurture three desired psychological states. In particular, the
first three job characteristics in Hackman and Oldham's model
(variety, identity, and significance) additively influence the
psychological state of work meaningfulness. This allows these
three dimensions to substitute for one another. For example, a
highly specialized job can still be motivating and satisfying if it
is high on identity and significance. Note that in the equation,
the subdimensions of skill variety, task identity, and task
significance are combined. The higher people rate their job in
any or all of the three subdimensions, the more likely they are
to perceive their work as important, interesting, and meaningful.
On the other hand, the fourth characteristic, autonomy, affects a
different psychological state: responsibility of outcomes. Jobs

24. that score high in autonomy increase workers' feelings of
responsibility for their work. Finally, the fifth characteristic
(feedback) influences a third psychological state: knowledge of
results. Jobs that provide considerable feedback ensure that the
worker has a clear understanding of his or her performance.
Studies have shown that people who perceive that their jobs
contain meaning, responsibility, and feedback typically feel
intrinsically motivated (Gagné & Deci, 2005). Additionally,
jobs with high motivating potential positively impact employee
motivation, work satisfaction, organizational commitment, and
job performance. Furthermore, as you can see in the equation,
the effect of the three psychological states is multiplicative:
Deficiencies in one state can be detrimental for the motivational
potential of the whole job, because these states cannot
substitute for one another. For example, a highly meaningful job
is not motivating if it provides no feedback to allow for
knowledge of results or if it provides no autonomy to facilitate
perceptions of responsibility for outcomes.
Interestingly, there are some situations in which jobs will not be
motivating, no matter how high their motivating potential scores
are. This often happens when workers become dissatisfied with
outside factors, such as pay, policies, supervision, or the work
environment. Additionally, workers must possess the skills and
abilities needed to perform a job, or they will end up frustrated
and angry. Finally, if workers have a high need for growth and
development (called growth need strength), they will experience
more psychological satisfaction from working in a meaningful
job, but if workers do not have high growth need strength, they
will not be motivated in the job, even if it should be, according
to a job diagnostic survey, highly motivating. Simply put, even
if you have the best job in the world, it's hard to be motivated if
you can't do the job, dislike your manager, or have no desire to
meet the demands of highly meaningful, challenging jobs.

25. Figure 7.5: The job characteristics model
From Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). The job
characteristics model. Organizational Behavior and Human
Decision Processes, 16, 256. Reprinted by permission of
Elsevier.
Redesigning Jobs
Consider the following scenario: Zach S., an e-business
development specialist, sits slumped at his desk. "I can't wait to
quit this job," he thinks to himself. "I'm so bored. Every day is
the same: review some reports, find some information, enter it
into the computer. Any monkey could do this job. I don't care
how much they pay me, I need some challenges! And my boss
needs to stop micromanaging me; I'm sick of having to ask for
his approval every time I need to make a change to my data
entries." Zach sighs, frustrated. Then he sits up straight in his
chair, a smile playing about his lips. "That's it . . . I'm going to
make my idea for a lawn care business a reality! Sure, it'll be
tough, especially at first, plus I know I won't make as much
money . . . but the work will be challenging and will change
every day—and, best of all, I'll be my own boss." His mind
made up, Zach stands, sets his shoulders, and strides
purposefully out of his cubicle to speak with his manager about
his decision to quit his job.
As we can see from this example, Zach's job as an e-business
specialist involved unchallenging, repetitive tasks for which he
perceived little meaning. To make matters worse, he had very
little autonomy to make his own decisions, even in minor
situations. As the head of his own lawn-care business, however,
Zach would not only be constantly challenged with a variety of
meaningful tasks, he would also have the autonomy to meet
each challenge with actions that directly affected the business.
Zach's actions illustrate the basic tenet of the job characteristics
model: that work needs to contain the right combination of

26. meaning, autonomy, and performance feedback in order to be
motivating. Let's look now at how organizations can use the job
characteristics model to maximize a job's motivating power.
Job Rotation
Job rotation involves workers periodically moving from one job
or task to another. The goal of job rotation is twofold: first, to
keep workers challenged and stimulated when the original job
has become routine and second, to help workers learn new
knowledge, skills, and abilities they can use later in their
career. For example, large companies like GE and PepsiCo
adopt rotation programs in which high-performing leaders rotate
through the major functions of the business as a way to increase
their business knowledge and leadership skills. Factories may
train employees on all segments of the assembly line so they
can be moved as needed. Giving workers the opportunity to
perform a larger number and variety of tasks improves job
interest while reducing boredom and stagnation. Job rotation
also helps workers better understand how their job contributes
to the organization as a whole, which improves perceptions of
the job's significance.
Job Enlargement
Job enlargement involves increasing a job's diversity by
expanding the number and variety of tasks workers perform
within that job. For example, a customer service position might
require a representative to address incoming customer
questions. However, the job could be enlarged if representatives
were also instructed to cross-sell products during calls. The
differences between job rotation and job enlargement are subtle
but important. Unlike job enlargement, job rotation does not
involve redesign, because the worker simply moves from one
established job to another. Although job enlargement often
leads to enhanced work motivation and satisfaction, the

27. additional activities can be viewed negatively if they result in
stress and burnout.
Job Involvement
Photo of two business colleagues seated at a table having a
conversation.
Participative management is a form of job involvement in which
the employee and supervisor work jointly to make decisions and
share the decision-making power equally, thus boosting
employee enthusiasm and work commitment.
Although not a job-redesign mechanism per se, increasing job
involvement—or the degree to which workers are involved in
decisions that affect their work—does have a positive impact on
workers' motivation. One form of job involvement studied
extensively in organizations is participative management, in
which the employee and supervisor work jointly to make
decisions and thus share the decision-making power equally.
Participative management has garnered considerable support in
organizations due to the belief that it boosts employees'
enthusiasm and work commitment. The job characteristics
model also supports the idea of job involvement, because
greater involvement in one's job should increase a worker's
feelings of responsibility (autonomy) and job meaningfulness,
which should then go on to improve the worker's satisfaction
and motivation. For example, a loan officer who was required to
obtain manager approval for all new loans entering the bank
would feel less involved with her job than she would if she were
part of a committee that worked together to make final loan
decisions.
Although job involvement seems to be an important part of
stimulating worker motivation, research on the subject is mixed.
Miller and Monge (1986) have shown that job involvement has a
moderate relationship with motivation, satisfaction, and

28. productivity. It is possible that the impact of participation on
these outcomes may depend on the amount of responsibility
workers want to have. For example, people who are
uncomfortable making decisions yet good at following
directions may be better suited to work in positions that require
little job involvement.
Money As a Motivator
At the beginning of this chapter, you were asked to think about
what motivated you at work. Did money make the list? If not,
you're not alone. As an extrinsic motivator, pay is not usually
the driving factor in job satisfaction. However, compensation
does have an important role in how organizations attract and
retain top performers. As you learned earlier in Herzberg's
model, although pay may not be a motivator that promotes job
satisfaction, adequate pay can be considered a hygiene factor
that prevents job dissatisfaction. A survey asked high
performers in many large companies to consider what would
cause them to leave their jobs, and 71% of respondents
indicated that compensation would play a role (White, 2006).
As you can see, pay can be very important to workers. If
designed properly, compensation systems can be a strategic tool
used to motivate employees.
Pay for Performance
Photo of a woman holding several hundred dollar bills to her
face.
Piece-rate pay systems compensate workers for each unit they
complete, which may lead to increased productivity but at the
expense of overall quality.
Unfortunately, compensation systems are frequently not
designed to motivate workers. Take the example of school
teachers. Very often, their compensation is based strictly on

29. seniority and not on teaching style or effectiveness. These
teachers may be tempted to think that putting in extra effort is
needless, because they will be paid the same regardless. Indeed,
most workers do not see a strong link between their pay and
their performance; one survey found that only 29% of American
workers believe they are rewarded for doing good work
(Compensation and Benefits Report, 2003).
Two types of pay-for-performance programs are piece-rate pay
and merit-based pay. Piece-rate pay is the most effective
method of linking pay to performance on production jobs. Under
a piece-rate system, workers do not typically get a base salary.
Instead, they receive a set amount of money for each unit they
complete. A data processor could be paid this way, perhaps
receiving $1 for each page he entered into the system. The
better he performs, the more pages he would complete and the
more money he would receive, resulting in a strong link
between job performance and compensation. Commission-based
pay for sales jobs is another example.
Piece-rate pay systems have a number of limitations. First, they
can sometimes increase productivity at the expense of quality.
When production is the sole measure of performance, workers
are likely to focus their attention solely on producing as many
pieces as possible in order to maximize their reward.
Organizations can counter this either by implementing
appropriate control mechanisms to monitor quality or by
including a quality metric as part of the payment criteria. Our
data processor, then, might be paid only for each page that
contained zero errors. Another limitation of piece-rate systems
is that they reward individual productivity, which can decrease
cooperation among workers. Finally, these systems are simply
not feasible for many professional-level workers, such as
managers, customer service representatives, and marketing
professionals. Although piece-rate pay is motivating for and
relevant to some jobs, it is not the only way to pay workers

30. based on their performance.
Merit-Based Pay
Compared with production jobs, white-collar jobs have fewer
objective performance criteria, making them more difficult to
compensate according to a pay-for-performance system.
Attempts to link pay with performance in white-collar jobs are
called merit-based pay plans. In these systems, managers are
required to periodically evaluate their employees' performance
on pre-established dimensions. Based on these evaluations,
managers then recommend whether employees should be
rewarded some amount of merit pay over and above their base
salaries.
In addition to a positive relationship with job performance,
merit-based pay plans (also called variable-pay plans) have the
support of managers, who readily appreciate the value of
rewarding high performers and recognize that merit pay is one
way to keep their most valuable workers from being recruited
and hired away by a competitor. Variable-pay programs allow
top employees to be recognized and compensated for their hard
work and effort, which increases their overall pay satisfaction
(Williams, McDaniel, & Nguyen, 2006). Additionally, with
these systems, higher pay is no longer simply a form of
entitlement.
Although most companies employ merit-based pay, the plans are
usually poorly executed. Unfortunately, a merit system is only
as good as the performance evaluation upon which it is based,
and as you recall from chapter 5, managers tend to have a
difficult time accurately describing and measuring superior
performance. As a result, managers might be unable or
unwilling to discriminate between excellent, average, and poor
performers, resulting in unfair distribution of merit pay.
Additionally, depending on the company's financial situation,

31. the size of the incentive pool might be quite small, which would
not serve as an effective motivator.
Executive Compensation
Photo of a businessman gripping a cluster of hundred dollar
bills.
Because CEOs get paid more than the average worker, there is a
perceived inequality between executives' pay and that of the
average employee.
Compensation for top executives has received quite a bit of
attention from both researchers and the media, possibly because
of the perceived inequity between executives' pay and that of
the average worker. In 2010, CEOs of publicly traded
companies earned an average of $11.4 million, 343 times more
than the average worker (AFL-CIO, 2011). With all the scandals
and bailouts and turmoil in which companies are currently
involved, many people are asking whether large salaries and
lavish perks are truly justified.
It may come as a surprise that research has found the statistical
link between CEOs' pay and their organizations' performance,
for the most part, to be significant (Jensen & Murphy, 1990).
For example, a study examined the relationship between CEO
pay and company performance for 280 companies between 2006
and 2009. Again, CEO pay was positively related to company
performance, as measured by return on equity (Sigler, 2011).
However, work by Wallsten (2000) indicates that this
relationship may be more complex than it appears. Wallsten
found that when companies do well, the top executives receive
large salary increases in proportion to the high performance. On
the other hand, when the companies perform poorly, there is
very little change in the executives' pay, upward or downward.
This suggests that executive pay is insulated from the negative
impact of poor organizational performance, making it less

32. effective as a motivational tool. For executive pay to be truly
motivational, boards of directors may need to be willing to
adjust compensation downward when the company's
performance is low.
Alternative Work Arrangements
Concepts in Motion:
Motivational Strategies
Beyond job redesign and pay, organizations are using
alternative work arrangements to satisfy and motivate workers.
The typical American employee works 40 hours, five days a
week. With the advent of an increasingly diverse workforce and
constantly advancing technology, however, companies are
experimenting with ways to modify the traditional work
schedule. Common forms of alternative scheduling include flex-
time, the compressed work week, and telecommuting.
Flex-Time
Flex-time, short for flexible work time, is an alternative work
schedule in which the worker has the discretion to determine his
or her arrival and quitting times. Typically, employees on flex-
time are expected to work eight hours a day and to be in
attendance during core hours (usually 9 a.m.–3 p.m., with a
lunch break at midday), but they are free to structure their
remaining hours any way they wish. For example, if an office is
open from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m., a worker on flex-time could choose
to work from 6 a.m. to 3 p.m. with an hour for lunch.
These flexible work schedules have become popular with both
organizations and employees. A study by the Society of Human
Resource Management (SHRM) in 2011 found that 63% of
American employees have access to flex-time. Organizations

33. appreciate the value of flex-time because it helps attract new
workers, such as stay-at-home mothers and retired workers, who
require greater flexibility and would not otherwise be willing to
work. For the worker, flex-time allows for easier, more
effective management of work and personal schedules, and has a
positive effect on productivity, job satisfaction, satisfaction
with work schedules, and lower employee absenteeism (Baltes,
Briggs, Huff, Wright, & Neuman, 1999). A major drawback is
that flex-time is not feasible for every job, which can sometimes
reduce morale for workers who believe they are missing out on
a benefit that others are receiving, leading to perceptions of
inequity. For example, jobs that require availability to and
personal contact with customers do not lend themselves to flex-
time.
Compressed Work Week
Another work schedule option is the compressed work week, in
which an employee works the same number of hours as a typical
work week (usually 40 hours) but in fewer days. Most
commonly, employees do this by working 10 hours a day, four
days a week. Organizations or departments following
compressed work schedules may then choose either to operate
just four days a week or to institute a system of rotation to
cover more days of the week. As with flex-time scheduling,
compressed work weeks provide employees with greater
scheduling flexibility, and despite the longer days, they
appreciate the added free day and use it for personal activities,
errands, and tasks and to spend more time with friends and
family. Research supports a positive relationship between
compressed schedules and productivity and job satisfaction
(Baltes et al., 1999). However, compressed work schedules can
also increase fatigue and error rates, reducing productivity,
especially when employees work over 12 hours in one day
(Monk & Folkard, 1992; Rogers, Hwang, Scott, Aiken, &
Dinges, 2004; Scott, Hwang, & Rogers, 2006).

34. Telecommuting
Cartoon illustration of a rancher talking on a phone while
surrounded by a herd of sheep and a large telephone. The
caption reads "Henry, a ranch hand can't telecommute no matter
the size of his phone."
Have you ever thought about what it would be like to work from
home? There would be no dreary commute, you could work in
your pajamas, and you wouldn't have to worry about many of
the usual work distractions (coworkers' voices, machine noise,
unscheduled interruptions, etc.). This option, also referred to as
telecommuting, lets employees work at home while staying in
touch with their office.
Organizations that utilize telecommuting experience a number
of advantages and disadvantages. On the positive side, offering
a telecommuting option makes organizations more attractive to
job candidates, which serves to increase the labor pool. It also
lowers organizational expenditures, because it reduces turnover
as well as the need for as much office space and equipment. On
the other hand, managers often struggle with the telecommuting
option because they are unable to supervise workers directly.
Additionally, telecommuting can interfere with managers'
attempts to foster teamwork within a highly collaborative and
team-oriented work environment.
For employees, as with other forms of alternative scheduling,
telecommuting is beneficial in that it offers greater flexibility
and work-life balance. For some people, however, going in to
work addresses an important social need. Telecommuting
interferes with the satisfaction of this need because it can be
isolating, which can lead to job dissatisfaction. Additionally,
although traditional work distractions are minimized at home,
new distractions can arise. Children, daily chores, television,

35. and Internet surfing can easily compromise a telecommuter's
overall productivity. Telecommuting, then, is not an optimal
option for all workers.
7.5 Special Issues in Motivation
As you may have noticed, motivation is not a new topic to I/O
psychology. In fact, interest in human motivation can be traced
to centuries of writing and research in a wide range of fields
such as philosophy, psychology, sociology, anthropology,
political science, education, and more recently management and
organizational sciences. However, new perspectives have
emerged on how organizations can build on those traditional
approaches to increase the motivation of their managers and
employees, leading to higher productivity and yielding desirable
financial outcomes at the organizational level. In this section,
we introduce three of these new perspectives, namely,
motivation across cultures, behavioral management, and
positivity.
Motivation Across Cultures
With globalization, organizations often must motivate managers
and employees from different cultural backgrounds. In the last
chapter, you were introduced to some recognized cross-cultural
differences. These differences may affect not only
communication but also motivation across cultures. For
example, Citigroup managers from different cultures were found
to vary in their perceptions of whether their employees were
intrinsically and/or extrinsically motivated, which affected their
appraisals of their employees' performance (DeVoe & Iyengar,
2004).
As a result of cross-cultural differences, motivation theories
designed primarily for Western cultures may not always lend

36. themselves to application in other cultures. This is because,
although many motives, such as need for achievement, seem to
be universal, the factors that drive these motives are not
generalizable across cultures. These factors include goals and
aspirations, feedback mechanisms, reward systems, job and
organizational characteristics, and job satisfaction (Gelfand,
Erez, & Aycan, 2007). Thus, motivation theories should be
fitted with and adapted to the cultural context in which they are
applied in order to successfully leverage employee motivation.
Behavioral Management: Which Rewards Will Produce the
Desired Performance Outcomes?
Have you ever tried to train a pet to behave in a certain way?
What did you do? You probably rewarded the desired behavior
to reinforce it and punished the undesirable behavior until it
disappeared. The same behavioral management foundations have
been applied to motivation in the workplace. Unlike the process
theories of motivation you studied earlier, behavioral
management is not too concerned with why people are
motivated by certain rewards or the mental processes that
explain their motivation. Behavioral management emphasizes
observable behavior and how it can be predicted using specific
environmental cues and tangible or measurable reward systems.
The foundations of behavioral management date back to
Pavlov's 19th-century experiments, in which he conditioned
dogs to salivate at the sound of a bell that was associated with
the presence of food, and Skinner's early-20th-century operant-
conditioning experiments, in which he manipulated the behavior
of lab rats and pigeons by varying the consequences he
administered for various types of behavior. Thorndike's law of
effect, published in 1905, captured the essence of behavioral
management, which is that behaviors followed by positive
consequences tend to increase in frequency, whereas those
followed by negative consequences tend to decrease in

37. frequency.
Interest then shifted to conditioning human behavior. The
question became, Can we shape people's behavior by managing
the consequences of that behavior? Studies support that indeed
this is possible and can yield many desirable outcomes in many
settings, including the workplace. In fact, behavioral
management principles are the foundation for many reward
systems today; the entire process has become known as
organizational behavior modification. In the workplace,
behavioral modification can be achieved in five steps: (1)
identifying critical performance-related behaviors, (2)
measuring the current frequency of those behaviors, (3)
analyzing the antecedents and consequences of the behaviors,
(4) intervening with positive reinforcers contingent upon the
desired behaviors, and (5) evaluating the results (Luthans &
Kreitner, 1975).
Three decades of extensive research studies consistently support
this approach (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1997, 2003). Specifically,
three types of reinforcers have consistently emerged as effective
in the workplace: money, feedback, and recognition (Luthans &
Stajkovic, 1999). Interestingly, although feedback and
recognition can be used at no cost to the organization or the
manager, they have been found to result in similar (and
sometimes higher) performance outcomes than money.
However, the key to the motivational potential of those rewards
is that they have to be administered contingently upon the
desired behaviors rather than just being given randomly (e.g., a
manager who praises or berates employees depending on
whether he or she is having a good day or a bad day), being
spread equally (e.g. companywide bonuses or layoffs), or
becoming an entitlement (e.g., a fixed paycheck or seniority
based promotion instead of merit-based pay).
Meta-analytical research findings show that behavioral

38. modification and management interventions in the workplace,
comparable to the five-step process described above, can
increase performance by about 17% on average and have a
success rate of about 63% (Stajkovic & Luthans, 1997, 2003).
Although people have different needs and different motivators,
the motivational potential of money, feedback, and recognition,
when administered contingently, tends to generalize across most
worker populations not only in the United States but in other
cultures as well (Welsh, Luthans, & Sommer, 1993).
7.6 The Heart of Motivation: Applying Positive Psychology
An interesting development in the recent positive psychology
movement that can be directly applicable to motivation is the
concept of flow, developed by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, who is
one of the founders of the movement. Earlier in this chapter,
you considered the motivational effect of activities that you
really enjoy; certain activities are so fully absorbing, we tend to
lose track of time when we engage in them. At the end of these
activities, we feel good. These thoughts and feelings describe
the state of flow. When we are in flow, activities are so
intrinsically motivating and rewarding that time may seem as
though it is standing still (Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi,
2002). Now think for a moment. Wouldn't it be wonderful if
employees could experience flow on the job? What would it
take for people to experience flow in the workplace on a regular
basis?
The key is to understand when and how flow takes place. Flow
occurs when one's experienced level of challenge in a given
situation is perfectly balanced with one's perceived ability to
meet the demands of that situation. When challenges are
perceived to be higher than skills, this can lead to stress and
anxiety. When challenges are perceived to be lower than one's
skill level, this can lead to boredom and apathy

39. (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975). Even when challenges and skills are
matched but are both at a low level (unchallenging task that one
has skills to accomplish), this is not conducive to flow. Flow is
most likely to take place when challenges and skills are
balanced at a high level, because it immerses the person in an
exciting state of pursuing something that is difficult and
worthwhile enough to warrant attention and energy
(Csikszentmihalyi, 1997).
Applications of flow to job design, goal-setting, training and
development, and organizational design are evident. Jobs that
are designed to have variety, identity, significance, autonomy,
and feedback are more likely to provide the requisite challenges
for experiencing flow, as do goals that gradually stretch the
employees' abilities without being too challenging for their
skills and abilities. Effective training and development can
enhance employee capabilities to rise to new challenges and
balance new work demands, leading to higher levels of flow.
Organizational design that facilitates the allocation of
appropriate resources—such as managerial support, adequate
information, the right tools for the job, an environment that is
conducive to productivity, as well as financial resources—is
also critical. It can help alleviate the tension and
discouragement that employees may experience if they feel
inadequately equipped for the challenges ahead, which can
hinder those valuable experiences of flow moments at work.