Assessment Task 2 (10%)

Question : Describe the three key elements of motivation; Contrast the

elements of self-determination theory and goal-setting theory

Employee motivations play a significant role in the field of management.

Motivation influences the performance of each employee at all level in the
organization thus impacting the organizational effectiveness. If the employees
are not happy with their jobs and not driven to deliver their tasks or realize their
goals, the organization will fall short of success. Leaders must be capable of to
understand, predict and control employee behaviour besides knowing what
the employee be looking for from their job (Dobre, 2013). Classical and modern
theories have contributed to shed numerous effective management strategies
to tackle these especially in the aspect of motivation and performance of the
employee (Steers, Mowday, & Shapiro, 2004).

The term motivation derives from the Latin word to move. On the basis of that,
Atkinson elaborated motivation can be viewed as“the contemporary
(immediate) influence on direction, vigour, and persistence of action”
(Atkinson, 1964). Meanwhile, Pinder insinuated motivation as energetic forces
that originate both within as well as beyond an individual’s being that
influence the initiation, direction, intensity, and duration of action (Pinder,
1998).

Based on the finding of behavioural scientist’s in simplification, motivation

can be reflected as an internal state that causes an individual to move toward
some goal. These internal state can be trigger from an internal factor or
external factor. The focus is on the aspect why we are doing certain action or
behaviour instead of what or how we end up doing certain actions or
behaviours. And it all depends on three key component direction, intensity,
and persistence (Ivancevich, Konopaske, & Matteson, 2014).

Direction associates to what an individual prefers to do when handed with a

number of potential alternatives. When an employee is given a task by the
management of the organizations, he or she can either complete the task as
agreed upon while accepting the task or decided to set aside the task and
continue doing other unrelated task which is not within the desired outcome
of the organizations, in both situations the employee is considered motivated
but later action is not what the management have desired to happen. Hence
performing towards a set of goals (direction) is very important in attaining the
success.
Intensity refers to the strength of the response once the choice (direction) is
made. The employee may decide to complete the task assigned by the
management but with less vigour or intensity or otherwise. Therefore, the effort
(intensity) that is shown by an employee and focus towards direction will
create behaviour towards achieving the desired goal set by the
management. Intensity alone is worthless without clear direction toward the
goal.

The final essential component of motivation is persistence. This can be

attributed to tenacity or perseverance of an individual staying with their effort
long enough towards the direction on accomplishing the desired goal. Neither
internal or external factor was able to break the person from abandoning or
ending the task abruptly.

Works Cited
Pinder, C. C. (1998). Work motivation in organizational behaviour. Saddle River, New Jersey:
Prentice Hall.
Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Shapiro, D. L. (2004). The future of work motivation
theory . Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 379-387.
Atkinson, J. W. (1964). Introduction to Motivation. (D. C. McClelland, Ed.) Princeton, New
Jersey: D. Van Nostrand Company Inc.
Dobre, O.-I. (2013). Employee motivation and organizational performance. Review of
Applied Socio- Economic Research, 5(1), 53.
Ivancevich, J. M., Konopaske, R., & Matteson, M. T. (2014). Organizational Behavior and
Management (10th Edition ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Leaders in the organizations acknowledge the importance of learning and

understanding the factors that influence positive motivation in the place of
work. The undeniable truth is that every single member of the organization
need some form of motivation regardless of the size or number of staff of the
business. Till date motivation in workplace poses a greatest challenge to every
leader in any organization. Emergent of motivation theories has create
opportunity for the leaders especially the managers to comprehend, describe
and influence human behaviour toward accomplishing organizational goals.
Both classical and contemporary theories have allowed the leaders to identify
rationales for people’s actions, desires and needs.

Classical theories of motivation over the years have faced criticism due to lack
of supported by empirical research meanwhile contemporary or modern
theories have largely been favored because it is well supported by research.
Among others are the self-determination theory and goal setting theory which
is widely debated and studied by psychologist.
Self- Determination Theory

Ryan and Deci postulate that Self-determination theory is a metatheory of

human motivation and personality development since its incorporate six mini
theories (Table1). Its provides comprehension of human motivation and
functioning that individuals innately adapt themselves toward growth and self-
organization. Thus each and every individual will tries understand and expand
themselves by seeking out to (Legault, 2017):
i. incorporate new experiences;
ii. cultivate their needs, desires, and interests; and
iii. connect with others and the outside world.

Self-determination theory (SDT) centers on three innate psychological needs

that an individual requires to function at their best. The three needs are : -
iv. Autonomy (the need to feel free and self-directed)
v. Competence (the need to feel effective), and
vi. Relatedness (the need to connect closely with others)

Figure 1 below illustrate the context and event that fulfill the psychological
needs and the subsequent effect on intrinsic and autonomous forms of
extrinsic motivation.

Figure 1: Self Determination Theory

If these psychological needs of an individual are met, these individual will be

highly motivated and experiences a better mental health compared to the
individual that the needs are not fulfilled. Therefore outcomes of interactions,
an individual become either engaged, curious, connected, and whole, or
demotivated, ineffective, and detached (Legault, 2017).

No Theory Explanation
1. Cognitive centers on the factors that shape intrinsic
Evaluation Theory motivation by affecting perceived autonomy
and competence
 2. Organismic Concerns extrinsic motivation and the manner in
Integration Theory which it may be internalized
3. Causality describes personality dispositions – that is, are
Orientations theory individuals generally autonomous, controlled, or
impersonal
4. Basic Psychological outlines the manner in which social environments
Need Theory can neglect, thwart, or satisfy people’s basic
psychological needs
5. Goal Content concerned with how intrinsic and extrinsic goals
Theory influence health and wellness
6. Relationship focused on the need to develop and maintain
Motivation Theory close relationships and describes how optimal
relationships are those that help people satisfy
their basic psychological needs for autonomy,
competence, and relatedness

Table 1: Summary of six mini theory of Self-Determination Theory

SDT expresses that when people exposed to situation which allows them to
exercise their personal initiative and have control over their actions they most
likely feels interested and engaged or motivated. If a leader or manager of
organizations uses extrinsic rewards as payoffs for superior performance,
according to SDT the employees will end up feeling less motivate in doing the
job because they feel that they have to do what the organization wants. By
eliminating such extrinsic rewards, a shift will occur from external to internal
whereby the person now able to exercise their own reasoning and being
autonomous in making desired conclusion on the task. Nevertheless, many
studies have shown that extrinsic rewards such as verbal praise and feedback
about competence elevate motivation and to some extends improve intrinsic
motivation.

Goal-setting Theory

Edwin Locke and Gary Latham developed the goal-setting theory (GST) which
describes what causes some people to perform better (better productivity) on
work-related tasks than others. According to the theory, individual’s values and
intentions (goals) seem to be two determinants of their behaviors. Locke and
Latham suggest that the emotion of the individual plays a crucial in
establishing one’s value (Lunenburg, 2011).

This values later initiate desire to do things in line with the emotional state. Goals
which direct attention and action inspires individuals to develop strategies that
will enable them to perform at the expected goal levels. In the end, achieving
the goal can lead to satisfaction and further motivation, or frustration and
lower motivation if the goal is not accomplished (Lunenburg, 2011). Figure 2
illustrates simplified view of goal-setting theory.

Locke and Latham also highlighted that challenging goals mobilize energy,
lead to higher effort and focus, and increase persistent effort that direct all
attention and exhilarate the individuals to work harder (higher performance).
And also individual will do better when they get feedback on how well they
are progressing toward their goals especially if it is self-generated.
The theory also further acknowledges that remuneration irrelevant goals are
an important determinant of employees’ motivation to work and hence
influence their productivity (Minambres, 2012).

Figure 2: General model of goal-setting theory

The relationship between goals and performance depends on how

committed the individual is to the goal as well as how specific the tasks are.
Most of the research has been done in the United States so the suitability of this
theory to Malaysian cultures is questionable.

Reference
Pinder, C. C. (1998). Work motivation in organizational behaviour. Saddle River, New Jersey:
Prentice Hall.
Steers, R. M., Mowday, R. T., & Shapiro, D. L. (2004). The future of work motivation
theory . Academy of Management Review, 29(3), 379-387.
Atkinson, J. W. (1964). Introduction to Motivation. (D. C. McClelland, Ed.) Princeton, New
Jersey: D. Van Nostrand Company Inc.
Dobre, O.-I. (2013). Employee motivation and organizational performance. Review of
Applied Socio- Economic Research, 5(1), 53.
Ivancevich, J. M., Konopaske, R., & Matteson, M. T. (2014). Organizational Behavior and
Management (10th Edition ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Minambres, J. G. (2012). Motivation through goal setting. Journal of Economic
Psychology(33), 1223-1239.
Lunenburg, F. C. (2011). Goal-Setting Theory of Motivation. International Journal Of
Management, Business, and Administration, 15(1).
Legault, L. (2017). Self-Determination Theory. Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual
Differences.

SDT shows that if the employees see themselves has be persuaded to perform
a task, their motivation level to complete the task will be fade away, therefore
the leaders need to understand what actually drive each employee and
provide intrinsic as well as extrinsic incentives for employees to perform at their
best.

They need to make the work 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.

There are contingencies in goal-setting theory. In addition to goal

acceptance, difficulty level, and feedback, three other factors influence the
goals-performance relationship: goal commitment, task characteristics, and
national culture.
Goal-setting theory presupposes that an individual is committed to the goal,
believes it can be achieved, and wants to achieve it. Goal commitment is
most likely to occur when goals are made public, when the individual has an
internal locus of control, and when the goals are self-set rather than assigned.
Goals themselves seem to affect performance more strongly when task
characteristics are: simple rather than complex; well-learned rather than novel;
and independent rather than interdependent. On interdependent tasks,
group goals are preferable.
Setting specific, difficult individual goals may have different effects in different
cultures. Research has not shown that group-based goals are more effective
in collectivists than in individualist cultures. In collectivist and high-power-
distance cultures, achievable moderate goals can be more highly motivating
than difficult ones. Finally, assigned goals appear to generate greater goal
commitment in high than in low power-distance cultures. More research is
needed to assess how goal constructs might differ across cultures.
Research has also found that people differ in the way they regulate their
thoughts and behaviors during goal pursuit. Generally, people fall into one of
two categories, though they could belong to both. Those with a promotion
focus strive for advancement and accomplishment and approach conditions
that move them closer toward desired goals. Those with a prevention focus
strive to fulfill duties and obligations and avoid conditions that pull them away
from desired goals. Which is the better strategy? Ideally, it’s probably best to
be both promotion and prevention oriented.
How do you put goal-setting operations into practice? Management by
Objectives (MBO) allows employees to participatively set goals that are
tangible, verifiable, and measurable. As shown in Exhibit 7-4, an organization’s
overall objectives are translated into specific objectives for each succeeding
level. Four ingredients common to MBO programs are: goal specificity;
participation in decision making; explicit time period; and performance
feedback. MBO programs are common in many business, healthcare,
educational, government, and nonprofit organizations.
The relationship between goal setting and ethics is quite complex: if we
emphasize the attainment of goals, what is the cost? The answer is probably
found in the standards we set for goal achievement. If we are put under time
pressure and worry about that, thoughts about time turn against us.
Time pressure often increases as we are nearing a goal, which can tempt us to
act unethically to achieve it. We may forgo mastering tasks and adopt
avoidance techniques so we don’t look bad, both of which can incline us
toward unethical choices.