The document discusses several theories of motivation: 1. Motivation-Hygiene Theory (also known as Two-Factor Theory) developed by Frederick Herzberg, which suggests that job satisfaction and dissatisfaction are influenced by different factors. 2. Learned Needs Theory proposed by David McClelland, which argues that people acquire needs like achievement, affiliation, and power from their culture. 3. Process theories like Self-Efficacy Theory, Expectancy Theory, Equity Theory, and Goal-Setting Theory that explain how motivation occurs in organizational settings.

1. Maricel T. Esogon
MAED- Administration and Supervision
Presenter
Sr. Linda Gurrero
Professor

2. ADMINITRATIVE A
SUPERVISION
MOTIVATION-HYGIENE THEORY
LEARNED NEEDS THEORY
PROCESS THEORIES:
1. Self-Efficacy Theory
2. Expectancy Theory
3. Equity Theory
4. Goal-Setting Theory
J
Administration and
Supervision of Instruction

3. F r e d e r i c k H e r z b e r g ( 1 9 9 3 )
D e v e l o p e d a u n i q u e a n d e x c i t i n g
m o t i v a t i o n t h e o r y t h a t b u i l d s o n
M a s l o w ’ s a n d A l d e r f e r ’ s e a r l i e r
w o r k . T h e t h e o r y h a s b e e n c a l l e d
t h e m o t i v a t i o n - t h e o r y , t h e t w o
f a c t o r t h e o r y , a n d t h e d u a l f a c t o r
t h e o r y . L i k e M a s l o w ’ s n e e d
h i e r a r c h y h y g i e n e t h e o r y s e e k s t o
d e t e r m i n e f a c t o r s t h a t c a u s e
m o t i v a t i o n . R a t h e r t h a n l o o k i n g f o r
n e e d s e n e r g i z e d w i t h i n t h e
i n d i v i d u a l , H e r z b e r g f o c u s e d
a t t e n t i o n o n t h e w o r k e n v i r o n m e n t
t o i d e n t i f y f a c t o r s t h a t a r o u s e i n
p e o p l e e i t h e r p o s i t i v e o r n e g a t i v e
a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d t h e i r w o r k .
* Developed by Frederick Herzberg
* Also known as the Two-Factor Theory
* Suggests that job satisfaction and
dissatisfaction are influenced by different
factors
* Hygiene factors include company policies,
working conditions, salary, and
interpersonal relationships
* Motivators include recognition,
achievement, growth opportunities, and
responsibility
MOTIVATION-HYGIENE THEORY
MOTIVATION-HYGIENE
THEORY
• Developed by Frederick Herzberg
• Also known as the Two-Factor Theory
• Suggests that job satisfaction and
dissatisfaction are influenced by different
factors (Psychological and Physical factors)
• Psychological factors include achievement,
recognition, the work itself, responsibility,
advancement and, growth.
• Herzberg named these content factors “job
satisfiers” or “motivators” because they fulfill
an individual’s need for psychological growth.

4. HYGIENE FACTORS:
ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPERVISION
MOTIVATION-HYGIENE
THEORY
• Reported bad feelings, on the other hand,
were generally associated with
environment surrounding the job-context,
extrinsic, or physical factors.
• These include company policies,
supervision, interpersonal relations,
working conditions and salary.
• Herzberg reported named these context
factors “Job dissatisfiers“ or Hygiene factor
because they are preventative and
environmental.

5. Comparison of Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers

6. D a v i d C . M c C l e l l a n d ( 1 9 7 6 ) h a s
p r o p o s e d a l e a r n e d n e e d t h e o r y o f
m o t i v a t i o n . T h e t h e o r y a r e b a s e o n
t h e p r e m i s e t h a t p e o p l e a c q u i r e o r
l e a r n c e r t a i n n e e d s f r o m t h e i r
c u l t u r e . A m o n g t h e c u l t u r a l
i n f l u e n c e s a r e f a m i l y , p e r s o n a l a n d
o c c u p a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e , a n d t h e
t y p e o f o r g a n i z a t i o n f o r w h i c h a
p e r s o n w o r k s . t h r e e o f t h i s l e a r n e d
n e e d s a r e t h e n e e d f o r a c h i e v e m e n t
( n A c h ) , t h e n e e d f o r a f f i l i a t i o n
( n A f f ) , a n d t h e n e e d f o r p o w e r
( n P o w ) . M c C e l l a n d S u g g e s t e d t h a t
w h e n a n e e d i s s t r o n g i n p e r s o n , i t s
e f f e c t i s t o m o t i v a t e t h e p e r s o n t o
u s e b e h a v i o r t o s a t i s f y t h e n e e d .
1. Achievement
2. Affiliation
3. Power
THE THREE PRIMARY NEEDS
LEARNED NEED THEORY

7. D a v i d C . M c C l e l l a n d ( 1 9 7 6 ) h a s
p r o p o s e d a l e a r n e d n e e d t h e o r y o f
m o t i v a t i o n . T h e t h e o r y a r e b a s e o n
t h e p r e m i s e t h a t p e o p l e a c q u i r e o r
l e a r n c e r t a i n n e e d s f r o m t h e i r
c u l t u r e . A m o n g t h e c u l t u r a l
i n f l u e n c e s a r e f a m i l y , p e r s o n a l a n d
o c c u p a t i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e , a n d t h e
t y p e o f o r g a n i z a t i o n f o r w h i c h a
p e r s o n w o r k s . t h r e e o f t h i s l e a r n e d
n e e d s a r e t h e n e e d f o r a c h i e v e m e n t
( n A c h ) , t h e n e e d f o r a f f i l i a t i o n
( n A f f ) , a n d t h e n e e d f o r p o w e r
( n P o w ) . M c C e l l a n d S u g g e s t e d t h a t
w h e n a n e e d i s s t r o n g i n p e r s o n , i t s
e f f e c t i s t o m o t i v a t e t h e p e r s o n t o
u s e b e h a v i o r t o s a t i s f y t h e n e e d .
• People with a strong need achievement want to
accomplish reasonably challenging but
attainable goals through their own effort.
• They prepare working alone rather than in
teams.
• they choose tasks with a moderate degree of
difficulty.
• High nAch people also desire specific feedback
and recognition for their accomplishment.
• Therefore, money is a weak motivator, except
when it provides feedback and recognition
(McClelland, 1976)
NEED FOR ACHIEVEMENT (NACH)
LEARNED NEED THEORY

8. • People with a high need for affiliation (nAff) have the
desire for friendly and close interpersonal relationships.
• they prepare to spend more time maintaining social
relationship, joining group, and wanting to be loved.
• High nAff people tend to be helpful and supportive.
• They contribute greatly to the school and committees
through their efforts to promote positive interpersonal
relation.
• Conflict can be difficult through their attempts to reduce
tension. The relationships they have with others are close
and personal, emphasizing friendship and companionship.
NEED FOR AFFILIATION (NAFF)

9. • People with a high need for while power want to influence others,
take control, and change people and situation.
• They frequently rely on persuasive communication and make more
suggestions in meetings
• There two types of power: personalized power and socialized power.
• Those who have a high need for personalized power enjoy their
power for its own sake, use it to advance personal interest, and
display its as a status symbol.
• Those who have a high need for socialized power are concerned for
others, have an interest in organizational goals, and have a desire to
be useful to the organization and society.
NEED FOR POWER (NPOW)

10. T h e f o l l o w i n g
g u i d e l i n e s a r e
r e c o m m e n d e d t o s c h o o l
a d m i n i s t r a t o r s i n
f o s t e r i n g a c h i e v e m e n t
m o t i v a t i o n o f
f o l l o w e r s :
• provide good role models of
achievement.
• guide members‘ aspirations
• provide periodic feedback on
members performance
• help followers modify their
self-image
• Be high in power motivation

11. T h e c o n t e n t t h e o r i e s o f m o t i v a t i o n
a t t e m p t t o i d e n t i f y w h a t m o t i v a t e s
e m p l o y e e s i n
t h e w o r k p l a c e ( e . g . , ) a d v a n c e m e n t ,
s e l f - a c t u a l i z a t i o n , a n d g r o w t h ) . T h e
p r o c e s s t h e o r i e s , o n t h e o t h e r h a n d ,
a r e m o r e c o n c e r n e d w i t h h o w
m o t i v a t i o n o c c u r s - i n o t h e r w o r d s ,
t h e y e x p l a i n e d t h e p r o c e s s o f
m o t i v a t i o n . s e l f - e f f i c a c y t h e o r y ,
e x p e c t a n c y t h e o r y , e q u i t y , a n d g o a l
s e t t i n g t h e o r y a r e t h e f o u r m a j o r
p r o c e s s t h e o r i e s t h a t c o n c e r n t h i s
a p p r o a c h t o m o t i v a t i o n i n
o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s e t t i n g .
• Self-Efficacy
• Expectancy
• Equity Theory
• Goal Setting Theory
PROCESS THEORY
PROCESS THEORY

12. M a i n l y d u e t o t h e w o r k o f A l b e r t
B a n d u r a , S e l f e f f i c a c y h a s a w i d e l y
a c c l a i m e d t h e o r e t i c a l f o u n d a t i o n
( B a n d u r a , 1 9 8 6 ) , a n e x t e n s i v e
k n o w l e d g e b a s e d ( B a n d u r a 1 9 9 7 ) , a n d
a p r o v e n r e c o r d o f a p p l i c a t i o n i n t h e
w o r k p l a c e ( S t a j k o v i c & L u t h a n s ,
1 9 9 8 ) . N i n e l a r g e - s c a l e m e t a - a n a l y s e s
c o n s i s t e n t l y d e m o n s t r a t e s t h a t t h e
e f f i c a c y b e l i e f s o f o r g a n i z a t i o n
m e m b e r s c o n t r i b u t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y t o
t h e i r l e v e l o f m o t i v a t i o n a n d
p e r f o r m a n c e ( B a n d u r a & L o c k e , 2 0 0 3 ) .
• Self-efficacy theory (also known as social
cognitive theory or social learning theory) is
based on a person’s belief that they are
capable of performing a particular task
successfully (Bandura, 1997). Self-Efficacy has
three dimensions:
• Magnitude
• Strength
• Generality
SELF-EFFICACY
SELF-EFFICACY THEORY

13. S e l f - e f f i c a c y a f f e c t s
l e a r n i n g a n d p e r f o r m a n c e
i n t h e f o l l o w i n g w a y s
( B a n d u r a , 1 9 8 2 )
1. Self-efficacy influences the goals that
employees choose for themeselves.
2. Self-efficacy influences learning as well
as the effort that people exert on the job.
3. Self-efficacy influences the persistence
with which people attempt new and difficult
tasks.

14. S o u r c e o f S e l f -
E f f i c a c y
Past Performance
Vicarious
Experience
Verbal Persuasion
Emotion Cues
SEL-EFFICACY

15. EXPECTANCY THEORY
 Victor Vroom (1994) is usually credited with developing the first
complete version of the expectancy theory with application to
organizational settings.
 Expectancy theory is based on four assumptions.
 one assumption is that people join organizations with expectations
about their needs, motivations, and past experiences. these
influence how individuals react to the organization.
 A second assumption is that an individual’s behavior is a result of
conscious choice; that is, people are free to choose those behaviors
suggested by their own expectancy calculations.
 A third assumption is that people want different things from the
organization (e.g., good salary, job security, advancement, and
challenge).
 A fourth assumption is that people will choose among alternatives
so as they optimize outcomes for them personally.

16. BASIC EXPECTANCY MODEL
Expectancy Instrumentality
Effort Performance Rewards
First-Level
Outcomes
Valence
Second-Level
Outcomes
Valence
Expectancy – is the belief that if you work hard (effort) you will be able to hit the targets (performance)
set by your administrator.
Instrumentality – is your assessment of how likely you are to receive a reward if you hit the targets
(performance) that have been set for you.
Valence – is perceived value of the reward to you, it can be negative to zero.

17. • Expectancy- is the strength of belief
that job related effort will result in a
certain performance level. expectancy
is based on probabilities and ranges
from 0 to 1.
• If an employee sees no chance that
effort will lead to the desired
performance level the expectancy is O.
• On the other hand, if the employee is
completely certain that the task will
be completed, the expectancy has a
value of 1.
BASIC EXPECTANCY MODEL

18. • Instrumentality- is the relationship between
performance (first-level outcomes) and
rewards (second-level outcomes).
• As with expectancy, instrumentality range
from 0 to 1.
• If an employee sees that a good performance
rating will always result in a salary increase,
the instrumentality has a value of 1.
• If there is no perceived relationship between
the first-level outcome (good performance
rating) and the second-level outcome (salary
increase), then instrumentality is 0.
BASIC EXPECTANCY MODEL

19. • Valence- is the strength of an employee’s
preference for a particular outcome or
reward. thus, salary increases, promotion,
peer acceptance, recognition by
supervisors, or any other second-level
outcome might have more or less value to
individual employee’s.
• The valence of first-level outcomes is the
sum of the product of the associated
second-level outcomes and their
instrumentalities.
BASIC EXPECTANCY MODEL
EXPECTANCY THEORY

20. E a r l i e r , H e r z b e r g f o u n d
t h a t f e e l i n g s o f i n e q u i t y
w e r e a f r e q u e n t l y
r e p o r t e d s o u r c e o f
d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n a m o n g
e m p l o y e e . A l t h o u g h
H e r z b e r g d i d n o t p a y
m u c h a t t e n t i o n t o t h i s
f i n d i n g s , a n u m b e r o f
t h e o r i s t s h a v e e x a m i n e d
t h e c o n c e p t o f e q u i t y t o
e x p l a i n e m p l o y e e ’ s
m o t i v a t i o n . A m o n g t h e m ,
J . S t a c e y A d a m s ( 1 9 6 5 )
h a s d e v e l o p e d t h e m o s t
d e t a i l e d a n d
o r g a n i z a t i o n a l l y r e l e v a n t
e q u i t y t h e o r y .
• EQUITY THEORY- asserts that employees hold
certain beliefs about the outputs they receive
from their work and the inputs they invest to
obtain these outcomes.
• The outcomes of employment refer to all things
the employee receives as a result of performing
the job, such as salary, promotions, fringe
benefits, job security, working conditions, job
prerequisites, recognition, responsibility, and so
on.
• Inputs- cover all the things that the employee
contribute to performing the job and include
education, experience, ability, training,
personality traits, job efforts, attitude, and so on.
EQUITY THEORY

21. E q u i t y t h e o r y a r g u e s t h a t
e m p l o y e e s e v a l u a t e t h e
e q u i t y , o r f a i r n e s s , o f
t h e i r o u t c o m e s b y a
p r o c e s s o f s o c i a l
c o m p a r i s o n . E m p l o y e e s
c o m p a r e t h e r a t i o o f t h e i r
o u t c o m e s t o i n p u t s w i t h
t h e r a t i o o f o u t c o m e s t o
i n p u t s f o r s o m e
c o m p a r i s o n o t h e r .
T h e c o m p a r i s o n o t h e r
m a y b e c o l l e a g u e o r a
g r o u p a v e r a g e ( s u c h a s
p r e v a i l i n g s t a n d a r d s i n a
s c h o o l d i s t r i c t , o r j o b
r o l e ) .
Outcomes Outcomes
(employee) (comparison others)
Inputs versus Inputs
(employee) ( comparison others)
GENERAL MODEL
Perfect Equity
Outcomes Outcomes
(employee) (comparison others)
Inputs = Inputs
(employee) ( comparison others)

22. S i m p l y p u t , e q u i t y t h e o r y
a r g u e s t h a t e m p l o y e e s
e v a l u a t e t h e e q u i t y , o r
f a i r n e s s , o f t h e i r o u t c o m e s
b y a p r o c e s s o f s o c i a l
c o m p a r i s o n . E m p l o y e e s
c o m p a r e t h e r a t i o o f t h e i r
o u t c o m e s t o i n p u t s w i t h t h e
r a t i o o f o u t c o m e s t o i n p u t s
f o r s o m e c o m p a r i s o n o t h e r .
T h e c o m p a r i s o n o t h e r m a y b e
c o l l e a g u e o r a g r o u p a v e r a g e
( s u c h a s p r e v a i l i n g
s t a n d a r d s i n a s c h o o l
d i s t r i c t , o r j o b r o l e ) .
Outcomes-to-inputs ratio is less than the
comparison others
Outcomes Outcomes
(employee) (comparison others)
Inputs < Inputs
(employee) ( comparison others)
GENERAL MODEL
Outcomes-to-inputs ratio is Greater than the
comparison others
Outcomes Outcomes
(employee) (comparison others)
Inputs > Inputs
(employee) ( comparison others)
Inequity in either direction creates discomfort and tension,
and the employee is motivated to reduce the tension and
restore equity.

23. M e t h o d s o f
R e s t o r i n g E q u i t y
A n e m p l o y e e
m a y e n g a g e i n
a n y o f t h e
f o l l o w i n g
b e h a v i o r s t o
r e s t o r e e q u i t y
( P o r t e r , B i g l e y ,
& S t e e r s , 2 0 0 3 )
• alter Inputs
• alter outcomes
• cognitively distort inputs or
outcomes
• change the Inputs or Outcomes
of the comparison others
• Change the comparison other
• Leave the organization

24. I M P L I C A T I O N F O R
P R A C T I C E
O n e s i g n i f i c a n t
d e v e l o p m e n t i n e q u i t y
t h e o r y c a n b e e x t e n d e d
i n t o w h a t i s n o w c o m m o n l y
r e f e r r e d t o a s
o r g a n i z a t i o n a l j u s t i c e
( G r e e n b e r g & C r o p a n z a n o ,
2 0 0 1 )
O r g a n i z a t i o n a l J u s t i c e i s
t h e e x t e n t t o w h i c h
o r g a n i z a t i o n m e m b e r s
p e r c i e v e t h a t t h e y a r e
t r e a t e d f a i r l y a t w o r k .
T h r e e d i m e n s i o n s o f
o r g a n i z a t i o n a l j u s t i c e a r e
D i s t r i b u t i v e , p r o c e d u r a l ,
a n d i n t e r a c t i o n a l
( C o l q u i i t t , 2 0 0 1 ; W e s s o n ,
L e P i n e , & C o l q u i t t , 2 0 1 6 ) .
• Distributive justice is the perceived
fairness of how rewards are
distributed.
• Procedural justice is the perceived
fairness of the procedures used to
make decisions.
• Interactional justice is the perceived
quality of the treatment organization
members receive when rewards are
distributed and procedures are
implemented.

25. G o a l s h a v e p e r c e i v e i n f l u e n c e o n
b e h a v i o r i n s c h o o l o r g a n i z a t i o n s
a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r a c t i c e s .
N e a r l y e v e r y m o d e r n s c h o o l
o r g a n i z a t i o n h a s s o m e f o r m o f
g o a l s e t t i n g i n o p e r a t i o n . P r o g r a m
s u c h a d c a m p u s i m p r o v e m e n t p l a n
( C I P ) , p l a n n i n g p r o g r a m m i n g
b u d g e t i n g s y s t e m ( P P B S ) ,
m a n a g e m e n t i n f o r m a t i o n s y s t e m
( M I S ) , a s w e l l a s s y s t e m s t h i n k i n g
a n d s t r a t e g i c p l a n n i n g , i n c l u d e
t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f s p e c i f i c g o a l s .
T h e r e h a s b e e n c o n s i d e r a b l e
d e v e l o p m e n t o f g o a l - s e t t i n g t h e o r y
i n i t i a t e d p r i m a r i l y b y t h e w o r k o f
E d w i n L o c k e a n d G a r y L a t h a m
( 2 0 0 2 ) . t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o
g o a l - s e t t i n g t h e o r y a r e t h e
f o l l o w i n g :
• Difficult goals lead to higher task
performance than do easier goals.
• specific goals lead to higher
performance that do vague goals such
as “do your best”
• the mechanisms by which goals affect
performance are directing attention
and action, mobilizing efforts,
increasing persistence, and motivating
a search for appropriate strategies.
GOAL-SETTING THEORY

26. G o a l s h a v e p e r c e i v e
i n f l u e n c e o n b e h a v i o r i n
s c h o o l o r g a n i z a t i o n s a n d
a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p r a c t i c e s .
N e a r l y e v e r y m o d e r n s c h o o l
o r g a n i z a t i o n h a s s o m e f o r m
o f g o a l s e t t i n g i n
o p e r a t i o n . P r o g r a m s u c h a d
c a m p u s i m p r o v e m e n t p l a n
( C I P ) , p l a n n i n g
p r o g r a m m i n g b u d g e t i n g
s y s t e m ( P P B S ) ,
m a n a g e m e n t i n f o r m a t i o n
s y s t e m ( M I S ) , a s w e l l a s
s y s t e m s t h i n k i n g a n d
s t r a t e g i c p l a n n i n g , i n c l u d e
t h e d e v e l o p m e n t o f s p e c i f i c
g o a l s .
T h e r e h a s b e e n
c o n s i d e r a b l e d e v e l o p m e n t
o f g o a l - s e t t i n g t h e o r y
i n i t i a t e d p r i m a r i l y b y t h e
w o r k o f E d w i n L o c k e a n d
G a r y L a t h a m ( 2 0 0 2 ) . t h e i r
c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o g o a l -
s e t t i n g t h e o r y a r e t h e
f o l l o w i n g :
• feedback apperars necessary for goal
setting to work because it allows people
to compare their performance against
their goals.
• Good commitment is necessary if goals are
to affect performance, and expectation of
success and degree of success affect goal
commitment.
• Individual differences in factors like
personality and education are not
generally related to goal-setting
performance. Locke & Latham, 2002
BASIC EXPECTANCY MODEL
GOAL-SETTING THEORY

27. GENERAL MODEL OF
GOAL-setting theory
Values
Emotions
And Desires
Intentions
(Goal)
Directed
Attention
Mobilized Effort
Persistence
Strategies
Behavior
Or
Performance
Outcomes

28. A d m i n i s t r a t o r s t o
c o n s i d e r w h e n
a t t e m p t i n g t o u s e
g o a l s e t t i n g t o
e n h a n c e
m o t i v a t i o n
( G r e e n b e r g , 2 0 1 1 ;
N e w s t o r m ,
2 0 1 5 ) :
1. Goals need to be specific. Organization
members perform at higher levels when asked
to meet a specific high-performance goal.
2. Goals must be difficult but attainable. A goal
that is too easily attained will not bring about
the desired increments in performance.
3. Goals must be accepted. Goals need to be
accepted. Simply assigning goals to
organization members may not result in their
commitment to those goals, especially if the
goal will be difficult to accomplish.
4. Feedback must be provided on goal
attainment. Feedback helps organization
members attain their performance goals.

29. THANK YOU!!!