Motivation Profiles and Management in Organizations

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Maslow’s theory of motivation
Analysis
Conclusion
References

Introduction

Motivation can be defined as the internal state that activates behavior and energizes individuals to a goal-oriented behavior. It is a composition of desire, value, and beliefs that directs one to take action. Motivation can include things such as inspiration, encouragement and support. Motivating factor are the root causes and the stepping stone for the growth and elevation of an individual. Abraham Maslow, a noted psychologist, came forward with a theory which says that motivation is based upon hierarchy of needs. These needs, in order of importance, are Self Actualization, Esteem, Belongingness, Safety and Physiological. (Ratelle, 2004)

Maslow’s theory of motivation

Maslow’s theory of motivation thus concludes that motivation may be rooted in the basic need to minimize agony and maximize comfort, or it may include specific needs such as eating and resting, or a desired goal or object. Different individuals have different motives for their work. Even when their goals are same, their motives vary. Such motivation profiles are classified under various motivational theories, such as biological, psychosocial, and interactionist. (Michalak, 2006) These theories are illustrated by Ella, Marcelo, Masoko and Sam’s strive for promotion at their place of employment.

Analysis

Ella

Ella’s motivation is accounted by the biological theory of motivation. According to this theory, an individual strive for success, to meet his lower level of desires. Ella is characterized as the one, at some point of time, who has seen poverty and lacked the basic needs of food, shelter, security and safety. She probably is working towards the promotion not only to have a bigger house and a better pay, but also social and emotional satisfaction, which comes along with the elevated position. (Hofer, 2006)

Ella, who comes across as the one who occupies the lowest level in the Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, is the achiever. Highly motivated by her social insecurities, Ella strives to excel at things and attain success.

Marcelo

Marcelo, the second candidate vying for promotion, is governed by the psychosocial theory of motivation. Psychosocial theories, in contrast to biological theory of motivation, states that self-actualization of the humans’ potential drives the personality for each individual. According to it, a person is motivated for higher accomplishment once the motivation for lesser accomplishments is achieved. Erik Erikson, a famous psychologist in this field says that at all stages of human life are marked by self-conflicts which may or may not have positive outcomes. For the successful resolution of these conflicts, one needs to experience the extremes of both the conflicting conditions and accept both the conditions. (Ratelle, 2004)

Marcelo, an egoistic person by nature, is one whose self-actualization is governed by his participation and stature in society. Marcelo is likely to belong from a background of intensive competition, where there is no recognition for second or third positions.

His success is solely accounted by his advances in his society. (Ratelle, 2004) As a psychosocial being, Marcelo craves to resolve his internal conflict, which is to prove himself as the ‘best’ among his peers. His strive for success is not merely for the joy of success, but to earn appreciation and respect of those in his surroundings. The promotion, for him, is a prize he wouldn’t leave any stones unturned for, even if that means to resort to dirty and harmful means. This puts Marcelo in bad light among his co-workers. Marcelo’s dangerous hunger for success is likely to put him in bad books and hence, he is least likely to earn the promotion. (Ratelle, 2004)

Masoko

Masoko is a person who is very unlike Marcelo. His motivational policies are governed by interactionist theory. Interactionists defy class and they would rather not generalize. Interactionists want to understand and study each individual as they are. They believe that everyone has their own set of attributes such as attitudes, virtues, beliefs, culture and values. The motivation of the interactionists lies in their communication with the others in their surroundings. If this communication is under the threat of breakdown, the interactionists would rather conform to others’ expectations. (Hofer, 2006)

Masoko, the interactionist, can be said to be ego-less. She is the “people’s person”. Her motivation towards the workplace is by the interactions which she shares with her co-workers. She’s the one who is most liked by her peers, and also may be the most favored one for the rise. However, Masoko is not professionally driven. Her concerns about her relationships with her co-workers and how these are going to be affected might even prompt Masoko to pull out of the race for the elevation. Masoko’s professional growth has probably comprised of some very valued, close relationships, which according to her, would be too much of a compromise to give up. Hence, Masoko’s chances for the new position are the lowest. (Ratelle, 2004)

Sam

Sam, the last competitor for the promotion, is governed by a combination of the three discussed motivation theories. Sam, thus is the most balanced among the four competitors. Sam strikes a balance between his physiological, psychological and social needs. Sam understands that although his current position satisfies his basic needs, the promotion is likely to fulfill his desires he has planned for his future. The increased stature in the society, and respect among his peers that comes along with the promotion is a further motivation for Sam. (Ratelle, 2004) This would help him to construct the positive self image he strives to build.

However, Sam with his balanced self-ego and honest approach towards his commitments is highly unlikely to hinder others’ growth, and harming his relationships at his work place. Sam’s personality reflects his skills to work in a team and lead them as well. (Hofer, 2006)

Conclusion

Sam’s very balanced personality and body language suggests a much nurtured upbringing in the healthiest of conditions than his counterparts. Sam’s resolution for success is much better motivated, as he is more developed through Maslow’s hierarchy, than Ella, Marcelo or Masoko. Hence, among the four applicants vying for the promotion at their workplace, Sam, because of his higher positive motivations and balanced nature, is likely to focus more on his work. Thus, Sam would be the obvious choice for the promotion.

References

Hofer, J. (2006). Congruence between social values and implicit motives: effects on life satisfaction across three cultures. European Journal of Personality, 20(4), 305-324.

Michalak, J. (2006). Implicit motives and explicit goals: two distinctive modes of motivational functioning and their relations to psychopathology. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, 13(2), 81-96.

Ratelle, C.F. (2004), Cognitive adaptation and mental health: A motivational analysis. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34(4), 459-476.

Click Here To Order Now!