LOCKE, MASLOW, AND HERZBERG's THEORIES OF MOTIVATION EXPLAINED....
- WHO DID WHICH?
Abraham Maslow ‘Hierarchy of Needs’
Frederick Herzberg ‘Two-Factor Motivational Theory’
Edwin Locke‘Goal-Setting Theory’
Abraham Maslow (1943): ‘Hierarchy of needs’ (represented as a pyramid)
A five-stage hierarchy with needs ranked from the most basic needs (physiological and safety needs) situated at the bottom of the hierarchy, progressing to higher level needs at the top of the hierarchy (social, self-esteem and self-actualisation needs)
Once a particular need is satisfied it is no longer a motivator.
Similar to Locke—lower to higher level needs (cf. Locke’s less challenging to more challenging goals); but Maslow’s external/internal satisfaction of needs is unique to this theorist
Hertzberg (1959): ‘Two-factor theory’ of work motivation
Two factors:
Hygiene factors (lower level):
relate to the work environment— such as work safety, pay and working conditions, job security status, quality of supervision, administration
Motivational factors (higher level):
linked to job satisfaction and performance—achievement, recognition, responsibility, promotional opportunities, advancement
Similar to Maslow and Locke—lower level factors (cf. levels of needs and goals) are easier to achieve
Locke (1968): ‘Goal-setting theory’
A motivation technique based on what effect setting goals has on a person’s performance—easily attained goals tend to correlate with lower performance than more difficult goals
A number of factors are important:
• the goals are challenging but achievable
• the goals are understood and accepted by employees
• motivation increases with the difficulty of the task
• clearly defining the goal (goal specificity) will increase the probability of achieving it
• managers provide feedback on progress towards achieving goals
• if an individual participates in selecting workplace goals they will have a higher commitment to them
I'm sure this will help you achieve 100% on these questions.
T. Ford - Business Management Uniits 3 and 4 2012. Study Score: 48