More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (14)
Similar to Power is the great motivator
Similar to Power is the great motivator (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Power is the great motivator
- 2. Introduction What is Management ? What is motivation ? Classification of Managers on the basis of Social Motives Key Points of the Review Conclusion Harvard Business Review
- 3. The process of dealing with or controlling things or people. The responsibility for and control of a company or organization. Harvard Business Review
- 4. A reason or reasons for acting or behaving in a particular way. Harvard Business Review
- 5. The Three Social Motives > Achievement: “better” = innovation, improvement, efficiency > Affiliation: “friendliness” = belonging, intimacy, wanting to be liked > Influence/Power: “influence” = impact on others, influencing Harvard Business Review
- 6. Harvard Business Review Need for achievement. Achievement-motivated people do things themselves. The manager’s job seems to call more for someone who can influence people. The top manager’s need for power ought to be greater than his or her need to be liked.
- 7. Harvard Business Review Real-world performance are hard to measure. Successful salespeople, may not be suited for management. Absence of some standard measure of performance.
- 8. The better the manager creates the morale, better are the results. Harvard Business Review
- 9. Harvard Business Review Examining the motive scores of over 50 managers. Over 70% managers were high in power motivation. Individuals high in power and in control are more institution minded.
- 10. Institutional Managers - are high in power motivation, low in affiliation motivation, and high in inhibition. Affiliative Managers – people with higher need for affiliation. Personal-Power Managers - those in whom the need for power is higher than the need for affiliation but whose inhibition score is low. Harvard Business Review
- 12. They are more organization ‑ minded; Willing to sacrifice their own self-interest. Harvard Business Review
- 13. Workshops provide an opportunity to study the motivation patterns. Filling of questionnaire and story writing. Harvard Business Review
- 14. To find out what kind of managerial style the participants had. Survey at least three subordinates of each manager at the workshop. Harvard Business Review
- 15. “Managers Can Change Their Style” The managers were clearly more effective after coming to terms with their styles. Morale was higher. Harvard Business Review
- 16. Training managers clearly improves their employees’ morale. Harvard Business Review
- 17. Ken Briggs was doing so poorly as a manager. He had almost no interest in influencing others. He preferred to work back into sales. Harvard Business Review
- 18. Workshops should be organised to identify the true potential of the managers. Top management requires managers who can influence others rather than the ones who want to get the work done themselves or who wants to be liked. Middle level managers should be the one with affiliation motivation factors, to create a work environment chaos free. The employees such as salesperson should be achievement motivated to get better results. Harvard Business Review
Editor's Notes
- Management in all business and organizational activities is the act of coordinating the efforts of people to accomplish desired goals and objectives using available resources efficiently and effectively.
- Motivation is a psychological feature that arouses an organism to act towards a desired goal .Motivation is the purpose or psychological cause of an action.
- The key to their success has turned out to be what psychologists call the need for achievement. But, Achievement-motivated people want to do things themselves. The manager’s job seems to call more for someone who can influence people than for someone who does things better alone. The top manager’s need for power ought to be greater than his or her need to be liked.
- Real-world performance measures are hard to come by if one is trying to rate managerial effectiveness in production, marketing, finance, or research and development. Successful salespeople, as a consequence, may be promoted into managerial jobs for which they, ironically, are unsuited. Absence of some standard measure of performance, we decided that the next best index of a manager’s effectiveness would be the climate he or she creates in the office, reflected in the morale subordinates.
- The manager who can create high morale among salespeople can also do the same for employees in other areas (production, design, and so on), which leads to better overall performance.
- In examining the motive scores of over 50 managers of both high and low morale units in all sections of the same large company, we found that most of the managers (over 70%) were high in power motivation compared with men in general. Individuals high in power and in control, on the other hand, are more institution minded; they tend to get elected to more offices, and to have a desire to serve others.
- Institutional Managers - are high in power motivation, low in affiliation motivation, and high in inhibition. They care about institutional power and use it to stimulate their employees to be more productive. Affiliative Managers - those people for whom the need for affiliation is higher than the need for power. Personal-Power Managers - those in whom the need for power is higher than the need for affiliation but whose inhibition score is low.
- Subordinates of managers with different motive profiles report different levels of responsibility, organizational clarity, and team spirit.
- They are more organization ‑ minded; that is, they tend to join more organizations and to feel responsible for building up these organizations. They seem quite willing to sacrifice some of their own self-interest for the welfare of the organization they serve.
- Workshops provide an opportunity to study which motivation pattern, whether it be a concern for achievement, power, people, or a combination thereof, makes the best managers. When the managers first arrived at the workshops, they were asked to fill out a questionnaire about their job. Each participant analysed his job, explaining what he or she thought it required of him. The managers were asked to write a number of stories to pictures of various work situations.
- To find out what kind of managerial style the participants had, a questionnaire is given in which they had to choose how they would handle various realistic work situations in office settings. The styles depicted were democratic, affilitative, pace‑setting, coaching, coercive, and authoritarian. The managers were asked to comment on the effectiveness of each style and to name the style that they prefer. One way to determine how effective managers are, is to ask the people who work for them. Survey at least three subordinates of each manager at the workshop.
- “Managers Can Change Their Styles,” where employee morale scores are compared before and after their managers attended workshop training. To judge by their subordinates’ responses, the managers were clearly more effective after coming to terms with their styles. The subordinates felt that they received more rewards, that the organizational procedures were clearer, and that morale was higher.
- Ken Briggs, for example, who found that the reason he was doing so poorly as a manager was because he had almost no interest in influencing others. He understood how he would have to change if he were to do well in his present job, but in the end decided, with the help of management, that he would prefer to work back into sales.