text:
For the Assignment, conduct research on three different countries cultures. Use the Kaplan library or the Internet, then respond to the questions found in the rubric file below.
The minimum page count is two to three pages of body text in APA format, this does not include the cover page or the references page. Please remember: Grammar, spelling, punctuation, sentence structure, and word usage always count!
Please use a Reliable Source
Additional Requirements
Min Pages: 2
Max Pages: 3
Level of Detail: Show all work
Other Requirements: please use reliable source and use citations, thank you
MT302_u4assignment.pdf Download Attachment
Unit 4 [MT302: Organizational Behavior]
Assignment Details and Rubric
International Organizational Behavior-Cultural Differences in
Job Characteristics and Job Satisfaction
How do...Unit 4 [MT302: Organizational Behavior]
Assignment Details and Rubric
International Organizational Behavior-Cultural Differences in
Job Characteristics and Job Satisfaction
How do various factors of one's job contribute to satisfaction in different cultures?
A recent study attempted to answer this question in a survey of over 49 countries. The authors of the
study distinguished between intrinsic job characteristics (having a job that allows one to use one's
skills, frequently receiving recognition from one's supervisor) and extrinsic job characteristics
(receiving pay that is competitive within a given industry, working in an environment that has
comfortable physical conditions) and assessed differences between the two in predicting employee
job satisfaction.
The study found that, across all countries, extrinsic job characteristics were positively and
consistently related to satisfaction with one's job. However, countries differed in the extent to which
intrinsic job characteristics predicted job satisfaction. Richer countries, countries with stronger social
security, countries that stress individualism rather than collectivism, and countries with a smaller
power distance (those that value a more equal distribution of power in organizations and institutions)
showed a stronger relationship between the presence of intrinsic job characteristics and job
What explains these findings? One explanation is that in countries with greater wealth and social
security, they take concerns over survival for granted, and thus employees have the freedom to place
greater importance on intrinsic aspects of the job. Another explanation is that cultural norms
emphasizing the individual and less power asymmetry socialize individuals to focus on the intrinsic
aspects of their job. In other words, such norms tell individuals that it is okay to want jobs that are
intrinsically rewarding.
Based on:
Huang X. & Van De Vliert, E. (2003). Where intrinsic job satisfaction fails to work: National
moderators of intrinsic motivation. Journal of... View Full Attachment Show more
MT302_Robbins_15th ed_Ch07.pdf Download Attachment
After studying this chapter,
you should be able to:
Describe the three key
elements of motivation.
Identify early theories of...THE MOTIVATIONS OF THE 99ERS
After studying this chapter,
you should be able to:
Describe the three key
elements of motivation.
Identify early theories of
motivation and evaluate
their applicability today.
Apply the predictions of
self-determination theory
to intrinsic and extrinsic
Understand the implications
of employee engagement
for management.
Compare and contrast
goal-setting theory and
management by objectives.
Contrast reinforcement
theory and goal-setting
Demonstrate how
organizational justice is a
refinement of equity theory.
Apply the key tenets of
expectancy theory to
motivating employees.
Compare contemporary
theories of motivation.
Sources: W. M. Welch, "Long-Term Unemployed See Benefits Rolled Back," USA Today (May 17,
2011), p. A1; D. Hunsinger, Long-Term Unemployed Face Stigmas in Job Search," USA Today
(January 23, 2011), downloaded May 2, 2011, from www.usatoday.com/money/; M. Thornton,
"99ers and the Long-term Unemployed Are the Elephants in the Economic Recovery Room,"
Huffington Post (May 15, 2011), downloaded May 25, 2011, from www.huffingtonpost.com/;
C. B. Mulligan, "Do Jobless Benefits Discourage People From Finding Jobs?" New York Times
(March 17, 2010), downloaded May 2, 2011, from http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/.
2 00
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Access a host of interactive
learning aids to help strengthen
your understanding of the
chapter concepts at
hile the economy shows signs of improving, the sluggish nature
of the recovery has left behind more long-term unemployed than
anyone has seen since the Great Depression.
Typically, unemployment insurance lasts 6 months. As the great recession
continued, Congress extended these benefits—up to 99 weeks for those in
27 states hit hardest by the recession.
The 99ers are those who have been unemployed more than 99 weeks.
They number about 2 million, and millions more are underemployed or have
withdrawn from the labor market altogether. Among the hardest hit are
older workers who struggle to convince employers to hire them.
St. Louis resident Peter Gordon, 53, has been unemployed more than a
year. Once he becomes a 99er, his unemployment check will run out. "I will
be OK for another 20 weeks," Gordon said. "But I'm going crazy." Akron's
Susan Harrell has been jobless more than 2 years and has exhausted her
unemployment benefits. Laid off from her $60,000/year telecommunications
job, she finds employers unwilling to hire her because she is unemployed, 58,
or both. "They look at me and say, 'How long are you really going to work?' "
Should the government help those in need by extending unemployment
benefits further? The question is complicated and divides Republicans and
Democrats. But put aside ideology for a moment, and consider the motivational dynamics at play. Many have lost their jobs through no fault of their
own. Not only are unemployment benefits compassionate, they provide an
opportunity for people to retrain for a new occupation. Benefits thus motivate them to move into more viable occupations.
On the other hand, many economists argue that extending benefits
p rovides disincentives for finding employment. One concludes,
"Unemployment insurance is not free: It results in less employment and less
output, not more." Paying people not to work gives them incentives not to
work, this argument goes.
Our nation will probably never agree on the motivational effects of
unemployment insurance. However, with or without insurance, there is
troubling evidence that some individuals like Peter Gordon and Susan Harrell
will remain out of work for a very long time. "This is horrible," says Harrell. "It's
embarrassing and humiliating."
Luke: "I don't believe it."
Yoda: "That is why you fail."
Photo: Anne Strauss speaks at a protest and rally by '99ers. Source: b09/ZUMA Press/Newscom
—The Empire Strikes Back
2 01
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
2 02
Motivation Concepts
ebates about motivation can occupy a central role in important public
policy debates, and as we will see, they also rank among the most
important questions managers need to answer.
However, motivation is not simply about working hard—it also reflects your
view of your own abilities. Try a self-assessment of your confidence in your
ability to succeed.
Motivation is one of the most frequently researched topics in OB.1 A recent
Gallup poll revealed one reason—a majority of U.S. employees (54 percent) are
not actively engaged in their work, and another portion (17 percent) are actively disengaged.2 In another study, workers reported wasting roughly 2 hours
per day, not counting lunch and scheduled breaks (usually Internet surfing and
talking with co-workers).3 Clearly, motivation is an issue. The good news is that
all this research provides useful insights into how to improve it.
In this chapter, we'll review the basics of motivation, assess motivation
theories, and provide an integrative model that fits the best of these theories
How Confident Am I in My Abilities to Succeed?
In the Self-Assessment Library (available on CD or online), take assessment
IV.A.3 (How Confident Am I in My Abilities to Succeed?) and answer the following
1. How did you score relative to other class members? Does that surprise you?
2. Do you think self-confidence is critical to success? Can a person be too
Defining Motivation
Describe the three key
elements of motivation.
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Some individuals seem driven to succeed. But the same student who struggles
to read a textbook for more than 20 minutes may devour a Harry Potter book in a
day. The difference is the situation. So as we analyze the concept of motivation,
keep in mind that the level of motivation varies both between individuals and
within individuals at different times.
We define motivation as the processes that account for an individual's
intensity, direction, and persistence of effort toward attaining a goal.4 While
general motivation is concerned with effort toward any goal, we'll narrow
the focus to organizational goals in order to reflect our singular interest in
work-related behavior.
The three key elements in our definition are intensity, direction, and
persistence. Intensity describes how hard a person tries. This is the element
most of us focus on when we talk about motivation. However, high intensity
is unlikely to lead to favorable job-performance outcomes unless the effort
is channeled in a direction that benefits the organization. Therefore, we consider the quality of effort as well as its intensity. Effort directed toward, and
consistent with, the organization's goals is the kind of effort we should be seeking. Finally, motivation has a persistence dimension. This measures how long a
person can maintain effort. Motivated individuals stay with a task long enough
to achieve their goal.
E arly Theories of Motivation
2 03
Early Theories of Motivation
Identify early theories of
motivation and evaluate
their applicability today.
Four theories of employee motivation formulated during the 1950s, although
now of questionable validity, are probably still the best known. We discuss more
valid explanations later, but these four represent a foundation on which they
have grown, and practicing managers still use them and their terminology.
Hierarchy of Needs Theory
The best-known theory of motivation is Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs.5
Maslow hypothesized that within every human being, there exists a hierarchy of
five needs:
Physiological. Includes hunger, thirst, shelter, sex, and other bodily needs.
Safety. Security and protection from physical and emotional harm.
Social. Affection, belongingness, acceptance, and friendship.
Esteem. Internal factors such as self-respect, autonomy, and achievement,
and external factors such as status, recognition, and attention.
5. Self-actualization. Drive to become what we are capable of becoming;
includes growth, achieving our potential, and self-fulfillment.
Although no need is ever fully gratified, a substantially satisfied need no longer motivates. Thus as each becomes substantially satisfied, the next one becomes
dominant. So if you want to motivate someone, according to Maslow, you need to
understand what level of the hierarchy that person is currently on and focus on
satisfying needs at or above that level, moving up the steps in Exhibit 7-1.
Maslow separated the five needs into higher and lower orders. Physiological
and safety needs, where the theory says people start, were lower-order needs,
E xhibit 7 -1
Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
Source: A. H. Maslow, Motivation and Personality, 3rd ed., R. D. Frager and J. Fadiman (eds.). © 1997. Adapted by permission of
Pearson Education, Inc., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey.
motivation The processes that
account for an individual's intensity,
direction, and persistence of effort
toward attaining a goal.
hierarchy of needs Abraham Maslow's
hierarchy of five needs—physiological,
safety, social, esteem, and selfactualization—in which, as each need
is substantially satisfied, the next need
becomes dominant.
lower-order needs Needs that
are satisfied externally, such as
physiological and safety needs.
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
2 04
Motivation Concepts
Myth or Science?
"The Support of Others Improves Our Chances
of Accomplishing Our Goals"
urprisingly, this statement appears
to be false.
There is some research on how
team goals facilitate team performance.
However, until recently, we knew very
little about whether others help or hinder
our individual chances of meeting a goal.
Generally, whether it's reaching a
w eight loss goal, successfully completing an undergraduate course, or
c ompleting a work task, help and
support from others actually appears
t o hinder our chances and make us
feel worse rather than better.
Why? First, research has found that
help is often, well, unhelpful. Advice
and direction from others is seldom
w ell suited for accomplishing our
goal. If you're trying to meet a work
deadline using your approach, it's not
often useful for a co-worker to advise
you to use his or her method instead.
Second, such advice and assistance
generally makes us feel less confident
and positive about achieving the goal.
The more help is offered, the more
negative feelings and stress we have
about the goal.
The upshot? Generally, you'll do a
better job of meeting your individual
work goals if you "just do it" by yourself. Of course, sometimes you do
need the help of others. But keep that
help focused on specific questions
and not on advice for attaining the
general goal.
Sources: H. B. Kappes and P. E. Shrout,
"When Goal Sharing Produces Support
That Is Not Caring," Personality and Social
P sychology Bulletin 3 7, no. 5 (2011),
p p. 662–673; P. E. Shrout, N. Bolger,
M . Iida, C. Burke, M. E. Gleason, and
S. P. Lane, "The Effects of Daily Support
T ransactions During Acute Stress:
Results from a Diary Study of Bar Exam
Preparation," in K. Sullivan and J. Davila
( Eds.), S upport Processes in Intimate
Relationships (New York: Oxford University
Press, 2010), pp. 175–199.
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
and social, esteem, and self-actualization were higher-order needs. Higher-order
needs are satisfied internally (within the person), whereas lower-order needs are
predominantly satisfied externally (by things such as pay, union contracts, and
The hierarchy, if it applies at all, aligns with U.S. culture. In Japan, Greece,
and Mexico, where uncertainty-avoidance characteristics are strong, security
needs would be on top of the hierarchy. Countries that score high on nurturing
characteristics—Denmark, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands, and Finland—
would have social needs on top.6 Group work will motivate employees more
when the country's culture scores high on the nurturing criterion.
Maslow's theory has received wide recognition, particularly among practicing managers. It is intuitively logical and easy to understand. When introduced,
it provided a compelling alternative to behaviorist theories that posited only
physiological and safety needs as important. Unfortunately, however, research
does not validate it. Maslow provided no empirical substantiation, and several
studies that sought to validate it found no support for it.7 There is little evidence
that need structures are organized as Maslow proposed, that unsatisfied needs
motivate, or that a satisfied need activates movement to a new need level.8 But
old theories, especially intuitively logical ones, apparently die hard.
Some researchers have attempted to revive components of the need hierarchy concept, using principles from evolutionary psychology.9 They propose
that lower-level needs are the chief concern of immature animals or those
with primitive nervous systems, whereas higher needs are more frequently
observed in mature animals with more developed nervous systems. They also
note distinct underlying biological systems for different types of needs. Time
will tell whether these revisions to Maslow's hierarchy will be useful to practicing managers.
E arly Theories of Motivation
2 05
Theory X and Theory Y
Douglas McGregor proposed two distinct views of human beings: one basically
negative, labeled Theory X, and the other basically positive, labeled Theory Y.10
After studying managers' dealings with employees, McGregor concluded that
their views of the nature of human beings are based on certain assumptions
that mold their behavior.
Under Theory X, managers believe employees inherently dislike work and must
therefore be directed or even coerced into performing it. Under Theory Y, in contrast, managers assume employees can view work as being as natural as rest or play,
and therefore the average person can learn to accept, and even seek, responsibility.
To understand more fully, think in terms of Maslow's hierarchy. Theory Y
assumes higher-order needs dominate individuals. McGregor himself believed
Theory Y assumptions were more valid than Theory X. Therefore, he proposed
such ideas as participative decision making, responsible and challenging jobs,
and good group relations to maximize an employee's job motivation.
Unfortunately, no evidence confirms that either set of assumptions is valid
or that acting on Theory Y assumptions will lead to more motivated workers.
OB theories need empirical support before we can accept them. Theory X and
Theory Y lack such support as much as the hierarchy of needs.
Two-Factor Theory
Believing an individual's relationship to work is basic, and that attitude toward
work can determine success or failure, psychologist Frederick Herzberg wondered, "What do people want from their jobs?" He asked people to describe,
in detail, situations in which they felt exceptionally good or bad about their
jobs. The responses differed significantly and led Hertzberg to his two-factor
theory—also called motivation-hygiene theory.11
As shown in Exhibit 7-2, intrinsic factors such as advancement, recognition,
responsibility, and achievement seem related to job satisfaction. Respondents
who felt good about their work tended to attribute these factors to themselves, while dissatisfied respondents tended to cite extrinsic factors, such as
supervision, pay, company policies, and working conditions.
To Hertzberg, the data suggest that the opposite of satisfaction is not
dissatisfaction, as was traditionally believed. Removing dissatisfying characteristics from a job does not necessarily make the job satisfying. As illustrated in
Exhibit 7-3, Herzberg proposed a dual continuum: The opposite of "satisfaction"
is "no satisfaction," and the opposite of "dissatisfaction" is "no dissatisfaction."
According to Herzberg, the factors that lead to job satisfaction are separate and distinct from those that lead to job dissatisfaction. Therefore, managers who seek to eliminate factors that can create job dissatisfaction may bring
about peace, but not necessarily motivation. They will be placating rather than
motivating their workers. As a result, Herzberg characterized conditions such
as quality of supervision, pay, company policies, physical working conditions,
relationships with others, and job security as hygiene factors. When they're
self-actualization The drive to
become what a person is capable of
higher-order needs Needs that are
satisfied internally, such as social,
esteem, and self-actualization needs.
Theory X The assumption that
employees dislike work, are lazy,
dislike responsibility, and must be
coerced to perform.
Theory Y The assumption that
employees like work, are creative, seek
responsibility, and can exercise selfdirection.
two-factor theory A theory that relates
intrinsic factors to job satisfaction
and associates extrinsic factors with
dissatisfaction. Also called motivationhygiene theory.
hygiene factors Factors—such as
company policy and administration,
supervision, and salary—that, when
adequate in a job, placate workers.
When these factors are adequate,
people will not be dissatisfied.
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Motivation Concepts
E xhibit 7 -2
Comparison of Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers
Factors characterizing 1,844
events on the job that lead to
extreme dissatisfaction
Factors characterizing 1,753
events on the job that lead to
extreme satisfaction
Work Itself
Relationship with peers
Work conditions
Relationship with
Policy and administration
2 06
Source: Based on Harvard Business Review. "Comparison of Satisfiers and Dissatisfiers." An exhibit from One More Time: How Do You
Motivate Employees? by Frederick Herzberg, January 2003. Copyright © 2003 by the Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation.
All rights reserved.
E xhibit 7 -3
Contrasting View of Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction
Traditional view
Herzberg's view
No satisfaction
Hygiene factors
No dissatisfaction
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
adequate, people will not be dissatisfied; neither will they be satisfied. If we
want to motivate people on their jobs, Herzberg suggested emphasizing factors
associated with the work itself or with outcomes directly derived from it, such
as promotional opportunities, personal growth opportunities, recognition,
responsibility, and achievement. These are the characteristics people find
intrinsically rewarding.
E arly Theories of Motivation
2 07
The two-factor theory has not been well supported in the literature, and it
has many detractors.12 Criticisms include the following:
1. Herzberg's methodology is limited because it relies on self-reports. When
things are going well, people tend to take credit. Contrarily, they blame
failure on the extrinsic environment.
2. The reliability of Herzberg's methodology is questionable. Raters have to
make interpretations, so they may contaminate the findings by interpreting
one response in one manner while treating a similar response differently.
3. No overall measure of satisfaction was utilized. A person may dislike part of
a job yet still think the job is acceptable overall.
4. Herzberg assumed a relationship between satisfaction and productivity,
but he looked only at satisfaction. To make his research relevant, we must
assume a strong relationship between satisfaction and productivity.
Regardless of the criticisms, Herzberg's theory has been widely read, and few
managers are unfamiliar with its recommendations.
McClelland's Theory of Needs
Source: Seth Wenig/AP Images
You have one beanbag and five targets set up in front of you, each farther away
than the last. Target A sits almost within arm's reach. If you hit it, you get $2.
Target B is a bit farther out, but about 80 percent of the people who try can hit
it. It pays $4. Target C pays $8, and about half the people who try can hit it. Very
few people can hit Target D, but the payoff is $16 for those who do. Finally,
Target E pays $32, but it's almost impossible to achieve. Which would you try
for? If you selected C, you're likely to be a high achiever. Why? Read on.
McClelland's theory of needs was developed by David McClelland and his
associates.13 It looks at three needs:
As a high achiever, Patricia Woertz
is motivated by work that demands
a high degree of personal responsibility. Today, she is the CEO, president, and chair of Archer Daniels
Midland, an agricultural food
processing business. She started her
career as a certified public accountant but was attracted to the complexity and opportunity of global
energy. For the next 30 years she
worked for Gulf Oil and Chevron in
refining, marketing, strategic planning, and finance positions. Since
joining ADM, Woertz continues to
shift company resources toward fuel
production in a drive to accelerate
ADM's global leadership in bioenergy and has led the company to
record financial results.
McClelland's theory of needs A theory
that states achievement, power, and
affiliation are three important needs
that help explain motivation.
need for achievement (nAch) The drive
to excel, to achieve in relationship
to a set of standards, and to strive to
Need for achievement (nAch) is the drive to excel, to achieve in
relationship to a set of standards.
Need for power (nPow) is the need to make others behave in a way they
would not have otherwise.
Need for affiliation (nAff) is the desire for friendly and close interpersonal
McClelland and subsequent researchers focused most of their attention
on nAch. High achievers perform best when they perceive their probability
of success as 0.5—that is, a 50–50 chance. They dislike gambling with high
odds because they get no achievement satisfaction from success that comes
by pure chance. Similarly, they dislike low odds (high probability of success)
because then there is no challenge to their skills. They like to set goals that
require stretching themselves a little.
R elying on an extensive amount of research, we can predict some
relationships between achievement need and job performance. First, when jobs
have a high degree of personal responsibility and feedback and an intermediate degree of risk, high achievers are strongly motivated. They are successful in
need for power (nPow) The need
to make others behave in a way in
which they would not have behaved
need for affiliation (nAff) The desire
for friendly and close interpersonal
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
2 08
Motivation Concepts
entrepreneurial activities such as running their own businesses, for example,
and managing self-contained units within large organizations.14 Second, a high
need to achieve does not necessarily make someone a good manager, especially
in large organizations. People with a high achievement need are interested in
how well they do personally, and not in influencing others to do well. HighnAch salespeople do not necessarily make good sales managers, and the good
general manager in a large organization does not typically have a high need
to achieve.15 Third, needs for affiliation and power tend to be closely related
to managerial success. The best managers are high in their need for power
and low in their need for affiliation.16 In fact, a high power motive may be a
requirement for managerial effectiveness.17
The view that a high achievement need acts as an internal motivator presupposes two U.S. cultural characteristics—willingness to accept a moderate degree
of risk (which excludes countries with strong uncertainty-avoidance characteristics) and concern with performance (which applies to countries with strong
achievement characteristics). This combination is found in Anglo-American
countries such as the United States, Canada, and Great Britain18 and much less
in Chile and Portugal.
Among the early theories of motivation, McClelland's has had the best
research support. Unfortunately, it has less practical effect than the others.
Because McClelland argued that the three needs are subconscious—we may
rank high on them but not know it—measuring them is not easy. In the most
common approach, a trained expert presents pictures to individuals, asks
them to tell a story about each, and then scores their responses in terms of the
three needs. However, the process is time consuming and expensive, and few
organizations have been willing to invest in measuring McClelland's concept.
Contemporary Theories of Motivation
Early theories of motivation either have not held up under close examination
or have fallen out of favor. In contrast, contemporary theories have one thing
in common: each has a reasonable degree of valid supporting documentation.
This doesn't mean they are unquestionably right. We call them "contemporary
theories" because they represent the current state of thinking in explaining
employee motivation.
Self-Determination Theory
Apply the predictions of
self-determination theory
to intrinsic and extrinsic
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
"It's strange," said Marcia. "I started work at the Humane Society as a volunteer.
I put in 15 hours a week helping people adopt pets. And I loved coming to
work. Then, 3 months ago, they hired me full-time at $11 an hour. I'm doing
the same work I did before. But I'm not finding it nearly as much fun."
Does Marcia's reaction seem counterintuitive? There's an explanation for
it. It's called self-determination theory, which proposes that people prefer
to feel they have control over their actions, so anything that makes a previously enjoyed task feel more like an obligation than a freely chosen activity will
undermine motivation.19 Much research on self-determination theory in OB
has focused on cognitive evaluation theory, which hypothesizes that extrinsic
rewards will reduce intrinsic interest in a task. When people are paid for work,
it feels less like something they want to do and more like something they have
to do. Self-determination theory also proposes that in addition to being driven
C ontemporary Theories of Motivation
2 09
An Ethical Choice
Motivated to Behave Unethically
he popular press often reports
about ethical lapses in business
by focusing on employees and
managers who are "loose cannons,"
deviating from organizational rules and
norms to produce bad consequences
for society and business. However,
sometimes unethical behavior is not
just ignored by organizational leaders
but actively encouraged by the company's motivational structures. In fact,
one survey found that 56 percent of
U.S. workers experience pressure from
their superiors to behave in an unethical manner. Craig E. Johnson sums up
the problem, noting, "Examine nearly
any corporate scandal—AIG Insurance,
Arthur Andersen, Enron, Health South,
S otheby's Auction House, Fannie
Mae, Hollinger International, Marsh &
M cLennan, Quest—and you'll find
l eaders who engaged in immoral
behavior and encouraged their followers to do the same."
How do managers create pressure
to behave unethically? Management
scholar Ben Tepper notes that structures in place in organizations often encourage unethical behavior. Incentives
m ight go to individuals who maximize sales without regard to whether
they achieved these ends honestly.
Lawyers often are paid in such a way
that tacitly encourages them to overbill their clients. Or perhaps rewards
might be offered for producing products at low cost without considering
the social and environmental impacts
of production decisions. In all these
cases, the reward systems in place
in organizations can serve to motivate
unethical behavior.
S o what can you do as a manager or employee to confront these
powerful motivations to behave unethically? First and foremost, decision
makers should consider the unintended
c onsequences of reward systems.
Second, top management should foster an organizational culture of honesty
and fair dealing and disseminate it
through all levels of the organizational
hierarchy. Finally, organizations might
even consider finding ways to explicitly
reward those employees who engage
in "above and beyond" instances of
ethical behavior.
Sources: B. J. Tepper, "When Managers
P ressure Employees to Behave Badly:
T oward a Comprehensive Response,"
B usiness Horizons 5 3, no. 6 (2010),
pp. 591–598; C. E. Johnson, Meeting the
Ethical Challenges of Leadership: Casting
Light or Shadow, 3rd ed. (San Francisco:
Sage, 2009).
by a need for autonomy, people seek ways to achieve competence and positive
connections to others. A large number of studies support self-determination
theory.20 As we'll show, its major implications relate to work rewards.
W hen organizations use extrinsic rewards as payoffs for superior
performance, employees feel they are doing a good job less because of their
own intrinsic desire to excel than because that's what the organization wants.
Eliminating extrinsic rewards can also shift an individual's perception of why
she works on a task from an external to an internal explanation. If you're reading a novel a week because your English literature instructor requires you to,
you can attribute your reading behavior to an external source. However, if you
find yourself continuing to read a novel a week after the course is over, your
natural inclination is to say, "I must enjoy reading novels because I'm still
reading one a week."
Studies examining how extrinsic rewards increased motivation for some
creative tasks suggest we might need to place cognitive evaluation theory's
predictions in a broader context.21 Goal-setting is more effective in improving
self-determination theory A theory of
motivation that is concerned with the
beneficial effects of intrinsic motivation
and the harmful effects of extrinsic
cognitive evaluation theory A version
of self-determination theory which
holds that allocating extrinsic rewards
for behavior that had been previously
intrinsically rewarding tends to
decrease the overall level of motivation
if the rewards are seen as controlling.
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
2 10
Motivation Concepts
Autonomy Needs Around the Globe
uch of the research we have
presented on needs for autonomy and self-determination
h as been conducted in the United
States and Canada, two countries that
place a high value on personal independence and freedom of choice. But
some researchers question whether
a n eed for autonomy is universal
or whether some cultures foster a
greater need for relatedness.
S ome research does suggest
universal needs for autonomy, while
other studies find that different cultures
see autonomy differently. In a survey
of 40 nations, collectivistic countries
valued social order, obedience, and
respect for tradition more, and within
cultures, individuals who value autonomy tend to put less value on social
connectedness and vice versa.
In a study with Chinese Canadian
and European Canadian participants,
those from Chinese culture expressed
lower levels of autonomy, but autonomy was related to well-being for both
Chinese and European respondents.
Although different cultures view their
autonomy differently, it appears people across cultures are higher in wellbeing when they perceive they have
freedom of choice.
Sources: C. Vauclair, K. Hanke, R. Fischer,
and J. Fontaine, "The Structure of Human
Values at the Culture Level: A Meta-Analytical
Replication of Schwartz's Value Orientations
Using the Rokeach Value Survey," Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology 42, no. 2 (2011),
pp. 186–205; and D. Rudy, K. M. Sheldon,
T. Awong, and H. H. Tan, "Autonomy,
Culture, and Well-Being: The Benefits of
Inclusive Autonomy," Journal of Research in
Personality 41, no. 5 (2007), pp. 983–1007.
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
motivation, for instance, when we provide rewards for achieving the goals.
The original authors of self-determination theory acknowledge that extrinsic
rewards such as verbal praise and feedback about competence can improve
even intrinsic motivation under specific circumstances. Deadlines and specific
work standards do, too, if people believe they are in control of their behavior.22
This is consistent with the central theme of self-determination theory: rewards
and deadlines diminish motivation if people see them as coercive.
What does self-determination theory suggest for providing rewards? If a
senior sales representative really enjoys selling and making the deal, a commission indicates she's been doing a good job and increases her sense of competence by providing feedback that could improve intrinsic motivation. On the
other hand, if a computer programmer values writing code because she likes
to solve problems, a reward for working to an externally imposed standard she
does not accept, such as writing a certain number of lines of code every day,
could feel coercive, and her intrinsic motivation would suffer. She would be less
interested in the task and might reduce her effort.
A r ecent outgrowth of self-determination theory is s elf-concordance ,
which considers how strongly peoples' reasons for pursuing goals are consistent with their interests and core values. If individuals pursue goals because of
an intrinsic interest, they are more likely to attain their goals and are happy
even if they do not. Why? Because the process of striving toward them is fun.
In contrast, people who pursue goals for extrinsic reasons (money, status, or
other benefits) are less likely to attain their goals and less happy even when
they do. Why? Because the goals are less meaningful to them.23 OB research
suggests that people who pursue work goals for intrinsic reasons are more
satisfied with their jobs, feel they fit into their organizations better, and may
perform better.24
What does all this mean? For individuals, it means choose your job for reasons other than extrinsic rewards. For organizations, it means managers should
provide intrinsic as well as extrinsic incentives. They need to make the work
C ontemporary Theories of Motivation
2 11
interesting, provide recognition, and support employee growth and development. Employees who feel what they do is within their control and a result of
free choice are likely to be more motivated by their work and committed to
their employers.25
Job Engagement
When nurse Melissa Jones comes to work, it seems that everything else in her
life goes away, and she becomes completely absorbed in what she is doing. Her
emotions, her thoughts, and her behavior are all directed toward patient care.
In fact, she can get so caught up in her work that she isn't even aware of how
long she's been there. As a result of this total commitment, she is more effective
in providing patient care and feels uplifted by her time at work.
Melissa has a high level of job engagement, the investment of an employee's
physical, cognitive, and emotional energies into job performance.26 Practicing
managers and scholars alike have lately become interested in facilitating job
engagement, believing something deeper than liking a job or finding it interesting drives performance. Many studies attempt to measure this deeper level
of commitment.
The Gallup organization has been using 12 questions to assess the extent to
which employee engagement is linked to positive work outcomes for millions
of employees over the past 30 years.27 There are far more engaged employees in highly successful than in average organizations, and groups with more
engaged employees have higher levels of productivity, fewer safety incidents,
and lower turnover. Academic studies have also found positive outcomes. One
examined multiple business units for their level of engagement and found a
OB Poll
More Employees Are Disengaged Than Engaged
by Their Jobs
Degree to which employee is engaged by his/her job
Actively disengaged
Actively engaged
Source: A. Fox, "Raising Engagement," HR Magazine (May 2010), pp. 35–40; "Gallup's Customer Engagement Index"
(March 11, 2010), www.smartKPIs.com.
self-concordance The degree to
which peoples' reasons for pursuing
goals are consistent with their interests
and core values.
job engagement The investment of
an employee's physical, cognitive,
and emotional energies into job
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
2 12
Motivation Concepts
positive relationship with a variety of practical outcomes.28 Another reviewed
91 distinct investigations and found higher levels of engagement associated
with task performance and citizenship behavior.29
What makes people more likely to be engaged in their jobs? One key is the
degree to which an employee believes it is meaningful to engage in work. This
is partially determined by job characteristics and access to sufficient resources
to work effectively.30 Another factor is a match between the individual's values
and those of the organization.31 Leadership behaviors that inspire workers to
a greater sense of mission also increase employee engagement.32
One of the critiques of engagement is that the construct is partially
redundant with job attitudes like satisfaction or stress.33 However, engagement
questionnaires usually assess motivation and absorption in a task, quite unlike
job satisfaction questionnaires. Engagement may also predict important work
outcomes better than traditional job attitudes.34 Other critics note there may
be a "dark side" to engagement, as evidenced by positive relationships between
engagement and work–family conflict.35 Individuals might grow so engaged in
their work roles that family responsibilities become an unwelcome intrusion.
Further research exploring how engagement relates to these negative outcomes
may help clarify whether some highly engaged employees might be getting "too
much of a good thing."
Goal-Setting Theory
Understand the implications
of employee engagement
for management.
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Gene Broadwater, coach of the Hamilton High School cross-country team,
gave his squad these last words before they approached the starting line for the
league championship race: "Each one of you is physically ready. Now, get out
there and do your best. No one can ever ask more of you than that."
You've heard the sentiment a number of times yourself: "Just do your best.
That's all anyone can ask." But what does "do your best" mean? Do we ever
know whether we've achieved that vague goal? Would the cross-country runners
have recorded faster times if Coach Broadwater had given each a specific goal?
Research on goal-setting theory in fact reveals impressive effects of goal specificity, challenge, and feedback on performance.
In the late 1960s, Edwin Locke proposed that intentions to work toward a
goal are a major source of work motivation.36 That is, goals tell an employee
what needs to be done and how much effort is needed.37 Evidence strongly
suggests that specific goals increase performance; that difficult goals, when
accepted, result in higher performance than do easy goals; and that feedback
leads to higher performance than does nonfeedback.38
Specific goals produce a higher level of output than the generalized goal
"do your best." Why? Specificity itself seems to act as an internal stimulus. When
a trucker commits to making 12 round-trip hauls between Toronto and Buffalo,
New York, each week, this intention gives him a specific objective to attain.
All things being equal, he will outperform a counterpart with no goals or the
generalized goal "do your best."
If factors such as acceptance of the goals are held constant, the more difficult
the goal, the higher the level of performance. Of course, it's logical to assume
easier goals are more likely to be accepted. But once a hard task is accepted, we
can expect the employee to exert a high level of effort to try to achieve it.
But why are people motivated by difficult goals?39 First, challenging goals get
our attention and thus tend to help us focus. Second, difficult goals energize
us because we have to work harder to attain them. Do you study as hard for an
easy exam as you do for a difficult one? Probably not. Third, when goals are difficult, people persist in trying to attain them. Finally, difficult goals lead us to
discover strategies that help us perform the job or task more effectively. If we
C ontemporary Theories of Motivation
2 13
Source: Ahn Young-joon/AP Images
Chung Mong-koo, chairman of
Hyundai Motor Company, is well
known for articulating difficult
and specific goals as a potent
motivating force. For example,
although Hyundai was a latecomer
in the development of a hybrid
vehicle, the South Korean automaker launched its first U.S.
hybrid in 2010, with annual sales
set at 50,000 units. By 2018, the
company expects hybrid sales to
balloon to 500,000 units worldwide.
Challenging employees to reach
high goals has helped Hyundai
experience tremendous growth in
recent years.
have to struggle to solve a difficult problem, we often think of a better way to
go about it.
People do better when they get feedback on how well they are progressing
toward their goals, because it helps identify discrepancies between what they
have done and what they want to do—that is, feedback guides behavior. But all
feedback is not equally potent. Self-generated feedback—with which employees are able to monitor their own progress—is more powerful than externally
generated feedback.40
If employees can participate in the setting of their own goals, will they
try harder? The evidence is mixed.41 In some cases, participatively set goals
yielded superior performance; in others, individuals performed best when assigned goals by their boss. But a major advantage of participation may be that
it increases acceptance of the goal as a desirable one toward which to work.42
Commitment is important. Without participation, the individual assigning the
goal needs to clearly explain its purpose and importance.43
In addition to feedback, three other factors influence the goals–performance
relationship: goal commitment, task characteristics, and national culture.
Goal-setting theory assumes an individual is committed to the goal and determined not to lower or abandon it. The individual (1) believes he or she
can achieve the goal and (2) wants to achieve it.44 Goal commitment is most
likely to occur when goals are made public, when the individual has an internal
locus of control (see Chapter 4), and when the goals are self-set rather than
assigned.45 Goals themselves seem to affect performance more strongly when
tasks are simple rather than complex, well learned rather than novel, and independent rather than interdependent.46 On interdependent tasks, group goals
are preferable.
Finally, setting specific, difficult, individual goals may have different effects in different cultures. Most goal-setting research has been done in the
United States and Canada, where individual achievement and performance
are most highly valued. To date, research has not shown that group-based
goal-setting theory A theory that says
that specific and difficult goals, with
feedback, lead to higher performance.
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
2 14
Motivation Concepts
goals are more effective in collectivists than in individualist cultures. In
collectivistic and high-power-distance cultures, achievable moderate goals
can be more highly motivating than difficult ones.47 Finally, assigned goals
a ppear to generate greater goal commitment in high than in low powerdistance cultures.48 More research is needed to assess how goal constructs
might differ across cultures.
Although goal-setting has positive outcomes, some goals may be too effective.49 W hen learning something is important, goals related to performance undermine adaptation and creativity because people become too
focused on outcomes and ignore changing conditions. In this case, a goal
t o learn and generate alternative solutions will be more effective than a
goal to perform. Some authors argue that goals can lead employees to focus
on a single standard and exclude all others. Consider the narrow focus on
boosting short-term stock prices in many businesses—it may have led organizations to ignore long-term success and even to engage in such unethical
behavior as accounting fraud or excessively risky investments. (Of course,
organizations can establish goals for ethical performance.) Other studies
show that employees low in conscientiousness and emotional stability experience greater emotional exhaustion when their leaders set goals.50 Despite
differences of opinion, most researchers do agree that goals are powerful in
shaping behavior. Managers should make sure they are actually aligned with
the company's objectives.
R esearch has begun to examine subconscious goals—that is, goals we
are not even aware of setting. 51 One study primed people to think about
goals by having them assemble scrambled words into sentences with achievement themes, while other people assembled sentences without achievement
t hemes. The people who made the achievement sentences were subconsciously primed. That might not sound like a very strong manipulation, but
this group performed more effectively in a brainstorming task than those
given easier goals. Another study found similar results when a picture of a
woman winning a race was the subconscious prime rather than assembling
sentences. Interestingly, these studies do not find that conscious and subconscious goal-setting are related.
What Are My Course Performance Goals?
In the Self-Assessment Library (available on CD or online), take assessment I.C.5
(What Are My Course Performance Goals?).
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Implementing Goal-Setting As a manager, how do you make goal-setting
theory operational? That's often left up to the individual. Some managers
set aggressive performance targets—what General Electric called "stretch
goals." Some CEOs, such as Procter & Gamble's A. G. Lafley and SAP AG's
Hasso Plattner, are known for the demanding performance goals they
set. But many managers don't set goals. When asked whether their job
had clearly defined goals, only a minority of employees in a recent survey
said yes.52
A m ore systematic way to utilize goal-setting is with m anagement by
objectives (MBO), which emphasizes participatively set goals that are tangible, verifiable, and measurable. As in Exhibit 7-4, the organization's overall objectives are translated into specific objectives for each level (divisional,
C ontemporary Theories of Motivation
E xhibit 7-4
Cascading of Objectives
2 15
XYZ Company
Consumer products division
Industrial products division
departmental, individual). But because lower-unit managers jointly participate in setting their own goals, MBO works from the bottom up as well as
from the top down. The result is a hierarchy that links objectives at one level
to those at the next. And for the individual employee, MBO provides specific
personal performance objectives.
Four ingredients are common to MBO programs: goal specificity, participation in decision making (including the setting of goals or objectives), an explicit
time period, and performance feedback.53 Many elements in MBO programs
match propositions of goal-setting theory. For example, having an explicit time
period to accomplish objectives matches goal-setting theory's emphasis on goal
specificity. Similarly, we noted earlier that feedback about goal progress is a
critical element of goal-setting theory. The only area of possible disagreement
between MBO and goal-setting theory is participation: MBO strongly advocates
it, whereas goal-setting theory demonstrates that managers' assigned goals are
usually just as effective.
You'll find MBO programs in many business, health care, educational, government, and nonprofit organizations.54 Their popularity does not mean they
always work.55 When MBO fails, the culprits tend to be unrealistic expectations,
lack of commitment by top management, and inability or unwillingness to
allocate rewards based on goal accomplishment.
Self-Efficacy Theory
Self-efficacy (also known as social cognitive theory or social learning theory) refers
to an individual's belief that he or she is capable of performing a task.56 The
higher your self-efficacy, the more confidence you have in your ability to succeed. So, in difficult situations, people with low self-efficacy are more likely to
lessen their effort or give up altogether, while those with high self-efficacy will
management by objectives (MBO) A
self-efficacy An individual's belief
program that encompasses specific
goals, participatively set, for an explicit
time period, with feedback on goal
that he or she is capable of performing
a task.
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
2 16
M otivation Concepts
try harder to master the challenge.57 Self-efficacy can create a positive spiral in
which those with high efficacy become more engaged in their tasks and then,
in turn, increase performance, which increases efficacy further.58 Changes in
self-efficacy over time are related to changes in creative performance as well.59
Individuals high in self-efficacy also seem to respond to negative feedback with
increased effort and motivation, while those low in self-efficacy are likely to
lessen their effort after negative feedback.60 How can managers help their employees achieve high levels of self- efficacy? By bringing goal-setting theory and
self-efficacy theory together.
Goal-setting theory and self-efficacy theory don't compete; they complement each other. As Exhibit 7-5 shows, employees whose manager sets difficult
goals for them will have a higher level of self-efficacy and set higher goals for
their own performance. Why? Setting difficult goals for people communicates
your confidence in them. Imagine you learn your boss sets a higher goal for you
than for your co-workers. How would you interpret this? As long as you didn't
feel you were being picked on, you would probably think, "Well, I guess my
boss thinks I'm capable of performing better than others." This sets in motion
a psychological process in which you're more confident in yourself (higher selfefficacy) and you set higher personal goals, performing better both inside and
outside the workplace.
The researcher who developed self-efficacy theory, Albert Bandura, proposes
four ways self-efficacy can be increased:61
Enactive mastery.
Vicarious modeling.
Verbal persuasion.
According to Bandura, the most important source of increasing self-efficacy
is enactive mastery—that is, gaining relevant experience with the task or job. If
you've been able to do the job successfully in the past, you're more confident
you'll be able to do it in the future.
E xhibit 7-5
Joint Effects of Goals and Self-Efficacy on Performance
Individual has
confidence that given
level of performance
will be attained
Manager sets
difficult, specific
goal for job or task
Individual has
higher level of job
or task performance
Individual sets
higher personal
(self-set) goal for
their performance
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Source: Based on E. A. Locke and G. P. Latham, "Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal Setting and Task Motivation: A 35-Year
Odyssey," American Psychologist (September 2002), pp. 705–717.
C ontemporary Theories of Motivation
2 17
Toyota Motor Corporation applies
social learning theory in teaching
employees skills they need to meet
the company's high standards of
quality and efficiency. At its Global
Production Center training facilities
in Japan, England, and the United
States, workers and managers from
factories around the world learn
production techniques through
observation and direct experience.
Trainees first watch computerized visual manuals to learn basic
skills. Then, under the tutelage of
an experienced production master, they practice the skills. In this
photo, a trainee practices the skill
of bolt tightening at Toyota's training center in Toyota City, Japan.
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Source: Toru Yamanaka/AFP/Getty Images/Newscom
The second source is vicarious modeling—becoming more confident because
you see someone else doing the task. If your friend slims down, it increases your
confidence that you can lose weight, too. Vicarious modeling is most effective
when you see yourself as similar to the person you are observing. Watching
Tiger Woods play a difficult golf shot might not increase your confidence in
being able to play the shot yourself, but if you watch a golfer with a handicap
similar to yours, it's persuasive.
The third source is verbal persuasion: becoming more confident because
someone convinces you that you have the skills necessary to be successful.
Motivational speakers use this tactic.
Finally, Bandura argues that arousal increases self-efficacy. Arousal leads to
an energized state, so the person gets "psyched up" and performs better. But if
the task requires a steady, lower-key perspective (say, carefully editing a manuscript), arousal may in fact hurt performance.
What are the OB implications of self-efficacy theory? Well, it's a matter
of applying Bandura's sources of self-efficacy to the work setting. Training
p rograms often make use of enactive mastery by having people practice
and build their skills. In fact, one reason training works is that it increases
self-efficacy.62 Individuals with higher levels of self-efficacy also appear to
reap more benefits from training programs and are more likely to use their
training on the job.63
The best way for a manager to use verbal persuasion is through the Pygmalion
effect or the Galatea effect. As discussed in Chapter 5, the Pygmalion effect is a
form of self-fulfilling prophecy in which believing something can make it true.
In some studies, teachers were told their students had very high IQ scores when,
in fact, they spanned a range from high to low. Consistent with the Pygmalion
effect, the teachers spent more time with the students they thought were smart,
gave them more challenging assignments, and expected more of them—all of
which led to higher student self-efficacy and better grades.64 This strategy also
has been used in the workplace.65 Sailors who were told convincingly that they
would not get seasick were in fact much less likely to do so.66
Intelligence and personality are absent from Bandura's list, but they can
increase self-efficacy.67 People who are intelligent, conscientiousness, and
2 18
Motivation Concepts
emotionally stable are so much more likely to have high self-efficacy that some
researchers argue self-efficacy is less important than prior research would suggest.68 They believe it is partially a by-product in a smart person with a confident
personality. Although Bandura strongly disagrees with this conclusion, more
research is needed.
Reinforcement Theory
Compare and contrast
goal-setting theory and
management by objectives.
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
Goal-setting is a cognitive approach, proposing that an individual's purposes
direct his action. Reinforcement theory, in contrast, takes a behavioristic view,
arguing that reinforcement conditions behavior. The two theories are clearly at
odds philosophically. Reinforcement theorists see behavior as environmentally
caused. You need not be concerned, they would argue, with internal cognitive
events; what controls behavior is reinforcers—any consequences that, when
immediately following responses, increase the probability that the behavior will
be repeated.
Reinforcement theory ignores the inner state of the individual and
concentrates solely on what happens when he or she takes some action. Because
it does not concern itself with what initiates behavior, it is not, strictly speaking, a theory of motivation. But it does provide a powerful means of analyzing
what controls behavior, and this is why we typically consider it in discussions of
O perant conditioning theory, p robably the most relevant component of
reinforcement theory for management, argues that people learn to behave
to get something they want or to avoid something they don't want. Unlike
r eflexive or unlearned behavior, operant behavior is influenced by the
reinforcement or lack of reinforcement brought about by its consequences.
Therefore, reinforcement strengthens a behavior and increases the likelihood
it will be repeated.70 B. F. Skinner, one of the most prominent advocates of
operant conditioning, argued that creating pleasing consequences to follow
specific forms of behavior would increase the frequency of that behavior.
He demonstrated that people will most likely engage in desired behaviors if
they are positively reinforced for doing so; that rewards are most effective if
they immediately follow the desired response; and that behavior that is not
rewarded, or is punished, is less likely to be repeated. We know a professor
who places a mark by a student's name each time the student makes a contribution to class discussions. Operant conditioning would argue this practice is
motivating because it conditions a student to expect a reward (earning class
credit) each time she demonstrates a specific behavior (speaking up in class).
The concept of operant conditioning was part of Skinner's broader concept
of behaviorism, which argues that behavior follows stimuli in a relatively
unthinking manner. Skinner's form of radical behaviorism rejects feelings,
thoughts, and other states of mind as causes of behavior. In short, people
learn to associate stimulus and response, but their conscious awareness of this
association is irrelevant.71
You can see illustrations of operant conditioning everywhere that reinforcements are contingent on some action on your part. Your instructor says if you
want a high grade in the course, you must supply correct answers on the test.
A commissioned salesperson wanting to earn a sizable income finds doing so is
contingent on generating high sales in her territory. Of course, the linkage can
also teach individuals to engage in behaviors that work against the best interests of the organization. Assume your boss says if you work overtime during the
next 3-week busy season you'll be compensated for it at your next performance
appraisal. However, when performance-appraisal time comes, you are given no
positive reinforcement for your overtime work. The next time your boss asks
C ontemporary Theories of Motivation
2 19
you to work overtime, what will you do? You'll probably decline! Your behavior
can be explained by operant conditioning: if a behavior fails to be positively
reinforced, the probability it will be repeated declines.
Although reinforcers such as pay can motivate people, the process is much
more complicated than stimulus–response. In its pure form, reinforcement
theory ignores feelings, attitudes, expectations, and other cognitive variables
known to affect behavior. In fact, some researchers look at the same experiments reinforcement theorists use to support their position and interpret the
findings in a cognitive framework.72
Reinforcement is undoubtedly an important influence on behavior, but few
scholars are prepared to argue it is the only one. The behaviors you engage in
at work and the amount of effort you allocate to each task are affected by the
consequences that follow. If you're consistently reprimanded for outproducing
your colleagues, you'll likely reduce your productivity. But we might also explain your lower productivity in terms of goals, inequity, or expectancies.
Individuals can learn by being told or by observing what happens to other
people, as well as through direct experiences. Much of what we have learned
comes from watching models—parents, teachers, peers, film and television performers, bosses, and so forth. This view that we can learn through both observation and direct experience is called social-learning theory.73
Although social-learning theory is an extension of operant conditioning—
that is, it assumes behavior is a function of consequences—it also acknowledges
the effects of observational learning and perception. People respond to the
way they perceive and define consequences, not to the objective consequences
Models are central to the social-learning viewpoint. Four processes determine their influence on an individual:
1. Attentional processes. People learn from a model only when they recognize and pay attention to its critical features. We tend to be most influenced
by models that are attractive, repeatedly available, important to us, or similar to us in our estimation.
2. Retention processes. A model's influence depends on how well the individual remembers the model's action after the model is no longer readily
3. Motor reproduction processes. After a person has seen a new behavior by
observing the model, watching must be converted to doing. This process
demonstrates that the individual can perform the modeled activities.
4. Reinforcement processes. Individuals are motivated to exhibit the modeled behavior if positive incentives or rewards are provided. Positively reinforced behaviors are given more attention, learned better, and performed
more often.
Equity Theory/Organizational Justice
Contrast reinforcement
theory and goal-setting
reinforcement theory A theory that
says that behavior is a function of its
Jane Pearson graduated from State University last year with a degree in accounting. After interviews with a number of organizations on campus, she accepted
a position with a top public accounting firm and was assigned to its Boston office. Jane was very pleased with the offer she received: challenging work with
a prestigious firm, an excellent opportunity to gain valuable experience, and
behaviorism A theory that argues that
behavior follows stimuli in a relatively
unthinking manner.
social-learning theory The view that
we can learn through both observation
and direct experience.
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
2 20
Motivation Concepts
the highest salary any accounting major at State was offered last year—$4,550
per month—but Jane was the top student in her class; she was articulate and
mature, and she fully expected to receive a commensurate salary.
Twelve months have passed. The work has proved to be as challenging
and satisfying as Jane had hoped. Her employer is extremely pleased with her
performance; in fact, Jane recently received a $200-per-month raise. However,
her motivational level has dropped dramatically in the past few weeks. Why?
Jane's employer has just hired a fresh graduate out of State University who
lacks the year of experience Jane has gained, for $4,600 per month—$50
more than Jane now makes! Jane is irate. She is even talking about looking for
another job.
Jane's situation illustrates the role that equity plays in motivation. Employees
perceive what they get from a job situation (salary levels, raises, recognition) in relationship to what they put into it (effort, experience, education,
competence), and then they compare their outcome–input ratio with that of
relevant others. This is shown in Exhibit 7-6. If we perceive our ratio to be equal
to that of the relevant others with whom we compare ourselves, a state of equity exists; we perceive that our situation is fair and justice prevails. When we
see the ratio as unequal and we feel underrewarded, we experience equity tension that creates anger. When we see ourselves as overrewarded, tension creates
guilt. J. Stacy Adams proposed that this negative state of tension provides the
motivation to do something to correct it.74
The referent an employee selects adds to the complexity of equity theory.75
There are four referent comparisons:
1. Self–inside. An employee's experiences in a different position inside the
employee's current organization.
2. Self–outside. An employee's experiences in a situation or position outside
the employee's current organization.
3. Other–inside. Another individual or group of individuals inside the
employee's organization.
4. Other–outside. Another individual or group of individuals outside the
employee's organization.
Employees might compare themselves to friends, neighbors, co-workers, or
colleagues in other organizations or compare their present job with past jobs.
Which referent an employee chooses will be influenced by the information the
employee holds about referents as well as by the attractiveness of the referent.
Four moderating variables are gender, length of tenure, level in the organization, and amount of education or professionalism.76
E xhibit 7-6
Equity Theory
Ratio Comparisons*
Inequity due to being underrewarded
Inequity due to being overrewarded
represents the employee; and
represents relevant others
Organizational Behavior, Fifteenth Edition, by Stephen P. Robbins and Timothy A. Judge. Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc.
C ontemporary Theories of Motivation
2 21
Women are typically paid less than men in comparable jobs and have lower
pay expectations than men for the same work.77 So a woman who uses another
woman as a referent tends to calculate a lower comparative standard. Of course,
employers' stereotypes about women (for example, the belief that women are
less committed to the organization or that "women's work" is less valuable) also
may contribute to the pay gap.78 While both men and women prefer same-sex
comparisons, employees in jobs that are not sex segregated will likely make more
cross-sex comparisons than those in jobs that are male or female dominated.
Employees with short tenure in their current organizations tend to have
l ittle information about others inside the organization, so they rely on
their personal experiences. Employees with long tenure rely more heavily
on co-workers for comparison. Upper-level employees, those in the professional ranks, and those with higher amounts of education tend to have better
information about people in other organizations and will make more other–
outside comparisons.
Based on equity theory, employees who perceive inequity will make one of
six choices:79
In perceiving inequity in pay, these
American... View Full Attachment Show more
Unable to do it
please find... View Full Answer
Download Preview:
Running Head: JOB SATISFACTION
Factors influencing Job Satisfaction
Job satisfaction is influenced by number of factors like the quality of relationship with
supervisors, the quality...
Related Questions
Q. The question is attached on the word Document
- Not Rated Yet
- View Answer
Q. Please help with my java assignment! Thank you:)
- Not Rated Yet
- View Answer


text:
It's been scaring people of all ages in Charlotte, Iowa for 20 years, but tonight the town's community-run haunted house has been shut down.
Organizers got word less than 24 hours before opening night that this haunted house was a no go.
"'Sorry to say if we open haunted house, EMC Insurance will cancel all insurance for the city immediately. It's a no go,'" a text message from Charlotte mayor Peggy Sellnau said Friday.
"I got the phone call, and I really thought it was a joke," Volunteer Seth Stoller says.
The haunted house is put together by volunteers and is not for profit; instead all the money goes back to the town's community center.
But organizers say yesterday some city council members and a risk management assessor went through without any notice. What they saw was an unfinished haunted house with various materials and props spread out along the halls.
But organizers say they would've cleared all this before opening night if they were given the chance.
Organizers got word less than 24 hours before opening night and spent hours all night into the early morning trying to finish the haunted attraction, but it was too little too late.
"We're going to have a number of people who would be otherwise volunteering here, they're planning on coming up and kind of hanging out and providing phone numbers for council members and things if people want to get in touch with them," Charlotte Area Activity Center (CAAC) Board Member Bridget Boehmer-Campbell says.
The city doesn't have building or fire codes, but state fire code says that an inspection report must be provided to the people responsible for the building.
Organizers say a copy of the violations was given to a city council member, but not them.
"We have a vague idea of what they are," Boehmer-Campbell says.
Even without a fire code, organizers say they do their own inspections and ten volunteer firefighters are on staff working the haunted house each night.
"Usually the night before we open up, everybody has their room done, and we will walk through," Stoller, who is also a Charlotte volunteer firefighter, says, "We look at everything, we make sure there's no nails sticking out; we don't want anybody getting hurt."
Organizers say they passed an inspection in January and have never had anyone get hurt in 20 years. But they say what hurts the most is the lack of desperately needed funds at the community center.
"We use the community center for Christmas parties and Halloween parties for the kids, basketball practice," Stoller says, "If the haunted house is shut down, nobody can enjoy the benefits of having a community center."
TV6 did try to get in touch with those city council members and the insurance company; so far we have not heard back.
For now, the haunted house is closed until further notice, and the unexpected shut down has had many upset Charlotte residents voicing their concerns on the haunted house's Facebook page.
805 Brady Street, Davenport, IA 52803
Telephone: 563.383.7000
Fax: 563.383.7131
Email: email@example.com

subset: commoncrawl