Week 12 · Chapter

Chapter 12 — Keeping People Engaged: Motivation

Introduction to Business Free sample edition

The module's primary reading · ~40–50 minutes · Objective 6 (explain how organizations recruit, select, develop, pay, and motivate people — including labor relations, the major federal employment statutes, and the classic and contemporary motivation theories in their order of publication — and diagnose a workplace situation with them), Objective 5 (apply the core organizational-structure concepts — the organization chart, line and staff, span of control, centralization, and tall vs. flat — and the four functions of management, the types of planning, the leadership styles, and the managerial skills to an organization at two sizes) · Read it first this week; the lecture, the slides, the tutorial, and the quiz all build on it.

In plain language

The coffee cart has hired a part-time helper, and the helper is paid fairly and works in a clean, safe cart. Yet the helper does the same counter work every shift and never gets a say in anything. This week asks why people put effort into their work and what a manager can change so they keep doing it. That force is motivation (what starts a person's effort, directs it toward a goal, and keeps it going). You will meet the best-known theories about it in the order they were published, then use them to make a motivation diagnosis (a short analysis that sorts a workplace's facts with a theory and recommends a fix).

Why you already care about this

Think about two jobs, team roles, or volunteer shifts you have had. In one, you watched the clock. In the other, you stayed late without being asked. The pay may have been the same, or the better-paid one may have been the clock-watching one. Something other than the paycheck made the difference, and you probably felt it before you could name it.

The coffee cart has reached that moment. In Week 11 you built its hiring plan: one part-time helper at 16 dollars an hour, 20 hours a week, for 50 weeks. That is 1,000 hours and 16,000 dollars a year. The cart is clean and safe, and the pay is above the federal minimum. Still, the helper never chooses the weekly special and never trains the new hire. Is the helper engaged, or only not unhappy? This chapter gives you the tools to tell the difference.

By the end of this chapter you will be able to:

define motivation and put the major theories in their order of publication;
tell Taylor's scientific management from the human-relations view that followed it;
describe the Hawthorne studies in words and explain why the Hawthorne effect is a contested reading;
use Maslow's hierarchy of needs as a loose order, not a strict ladder;
sort a job's features into Herzberg's hygiene factors and motivators and diagnose a motivator gap;
explain Theory X and Theory Y as a manager's assumptions and link them to the leadership styles;
state the core claim of equity theory, expectancy theory, goal-setting theory, and Theory Z;
choose a job-design tool, such as job enrichment or empowerment, and defend it with a theory.

Carry this line with you: a raise fixes a hygiene factor — not a motivator gap.

Where we are

Already covered: Week 6, Making the Product: Operations, Quality & Information Systems, found the cart's capacity of 30 drinks an hour; Week 7, Who Buys and at What Price: Marketing, Products & Pricing, found the 12,000-drink break-even; Week 8, Midterm Review & the Growth Question, drew the cart's chart and named decentralization; Week 10, Leading the Work: Management & Leadership, set out the leadership styles and the idea of a standard; Week 11, Hiring and the Law: Human Resources & Labor Relations, built the hiring plan for the helper.
This week: what motivation is; the classic theories of Taylor, the Hawthorne studies, Maslow, Herzberg, and McGregor; the contemporary theories of equity, expectancy, goal-setting, and Theory Z; and the job-design tools that put the theories to work.
How they connect: Week 11 hired the helper and set the pay; this week asks what keeps the helper engaged once the pay is settled, and it leans on Week 10's leadership styles to ask how a manager's assumptions shape the way the manager leads.
Where we're going next: Week 13, Keeping Score: Accounting & Financial Statements, turns from people to the numbers and reads a full year of the cart's results.

Three earlier weeks matter most here. In Week 11 the helper's pay came out to 20 × 50 × 16 = 16,000 dollars a year. In Week 10 you met three leadership styles: autocratic (the leader decides alone), participative (the leader involves the group), and free-rein (the group decides within broad limits). You also met a standard, the target a result is measured against, and the cart's break-even pace of 12,000 ÷ 250 = 48 drinks a day. In Week 8 you met decentralization, pushing decisions down to the people closer to the work. All of these return this week.

1. Define the force: motivation and the theories in order

Picture the helper at 7 in the morning. The helper could greet each customer by name, wipe the counter between orders, and suggest a new drink. Or the helper could do the minimum and wait for the shift to end. Both helpers earn the same 16 dollars an hour. What makes the difference is motivation.

Motivation is the set of forces that start a person's effort at work, direct it toward a goal, and keep it going.

People have studied motivation at work for more than a century, and the ideas came in waves. You will meet them in the order they were published, because each one answered a question the one before it left open.

Worked example — the theories on a timeline. The years come from each theorist's original publication.

Taylor 1911: study the task.
The Hawthorne studies, from 1924 into the early 1930s: notice the people and the group.
Maslow 1943: name the needs.
Herzberg 1959: separate what prevents unhappiness from what builds satisfaction.
McGregor 1960: name the manager's assumptions.
Adams 1963, Vroom 1964, and Locke 1968: compare, expect, and aim.
Ouchi's Theory Z, first published in 1981: build long-term employment and shared decisions.

In words: the classic theories run from Taylor to McGregor, and the contemporary theories run from Adams to Ouchi; you will read each one as it arrived.

Honesty note: two of these dates are softer than the rest. The Hawthorne studies ran for years and accounts give different end dates, and later printings of Ouchi's book carry 1982 instead of 1981. This course teaches those two in words and never asks you to recall them as exact years.

Misconception check. Students often think the newest theory replaced all the older ones, so only the latest one matters. That is tempting, because "newer" often means "better" with phones. But managers still use Herzberg's two factors and Maslow's needs every day, alongside goal-setting. The cure is to treat the theories as tools in one kit: each answers a different question.

Memory hook: task, people, needs, factors, assumptions — then compare, expect, aim.

2. Study the task: Taylor's scientific management

Think of a busy fast-food kitchen where every station has a laminated card showing exactly how to build each order, step by step. Someone studied the job, found a fast way to do it, and taught it to everyone. That habit of studying the task goes back more than a century.

Taylor (1911), The Principles of Scientific Management, set out the approach.

Scientific management is Taylor's approach to work, which studies each task, finds the one best way to do it, trains workers in that way, and pays them by their output.

Worked example — Taylor's question on the cart. The cart's figures are illustrative, constructed for this course; time is in minutes and volume in drinks.

Study the task: preparing a drink takes 2 minutes on the cart's one espresso machine.
Find the limit: an hour has 60 minutes, so the machine can make 60 ÷ 2 = 30 drinks an hour.
Stretch it across the rush: a four-hour morning rush holds 30 × 4 = 120 drinks.

In words: Taylor would stand beside the machine with a watch and ask whether the 2-minute step is being done the one best way, because that step sets the cart's 30-drinks-an-hour limit. Week 6 called that slowest step the bottleneck.

Notice what Taylor's question leaves out. It asks how the task is done. It does not ask how the helper feels about doing it, whom the helper talks to, or whether the helper wants more say. Those questions came next.

Misconception check. Students often think Taylor's scientific management and the human-relations view that followed it are the same thing, since both try to raise output. That is tempting, because both were about getting more done. But Taylor studied the task and the one best way to do it, while the human-relations view studied the people and the group around the task. The cure is to ask what each one looks at: the work, or the workers.

Memory hook: Taylor times the task.

3. Notice the people: the Hawthorne studies

Have you ever worked harder because a new manager was watching, or because your group decided together to finish early? That everyday experience sits near the center of one of the most retold studies in business history.

The Hawthorne studies were a program of workplace studies at Western Electric's Hawthorne Works near Chicago. They began with tests of workplace lighting in 1924. They moved to a relay assembly test room in 1927 and drew in the researcher Elton Mayo from 1928. The program ran into the early 1930s, and accounts give different end years.

The reading most often drawn from the studies is that attention and group relations change output. That reading launched the human-relations view, the view of work that attention, group relations, and how people feel about their work affect how much they produce.

Worked example — reading the studies in words. The example uses no figures beyond the dates.

Taylor's question: what is the one best way to do the task?
The human-relations question: how do attention, the group, and people's feelings about the work change what they produce?
On the cart: the helper's output may depend on whether anyone notices the helper's work and on how the helper gets along with the cart lead, not only on how fast the machine runs.

In words: the Hawthorne studies turned managers' eyes from the stopwatch to the people, and that shift is why the rest of this chapter exists.

The studies also gave us a phrase. The Hawthorne effect is the idea that people change their behavior when they know they are being studied or given attention.

Caveat: the Hawthorne effect is a contested reading of an old study, not a settled law of behavior. People still argue over what the studies showed and why output changed. Use the phrase as a name for an idea worth testing, never as proof.

Misconception check. Students often think the Hawthorne effect is a proven rule: watch people and their output rises. That is tempting, because the story is short and easy to repeat. But it is one reading of a set of studies that ran for years under changing conditions, and that reading is still argued over. The cure is to say "one reading of the Hawthorne studies suggests" and never "the Hawthorne effect proves".

Pause and try this. Choose one: (a) describe a time you worked differently because someone was paying attention to you, and say what else might have changed at the same time; or (b) explain in two sentences why a single famous study should not be treated as a law of behavior.

Memory hook: Hawthorne looked up from the task to the team.

4. Name the needs: Maslow's hierarchy

Think about a student who has not eaten since breakfast. In that moment, a lecture on career goals will not land. Once lunch is handled, the student may care a great deal about whether classmates respect the work they turned in. Needs seem to come in a rough order.

Maslow (1943), "A Theory of Human Motivation", Psychological Review, put that idea into a model. The hierarchy of needs is Maslow's classroom model of five human needs, in a loose order.

Physiological needs are the bodily needs for food, water, and rest that keep a person alive.
Safety needs are the needs for security, stability, and freedom from danger.
Love or belonging needs are the needs for friendship, affection, and acceptance by a group.
Esteem needs are the needs for respect from others and for self-respect, such as being trusted with a decision.
Self-actualization is the need to become what a person is capable of becoming, such as growing into a new skill or role.

Maslow himself wrote that the order is not as rigid as it sounds. People can work on several needs at once, and some skip ahead.

Worked example — the helper's needs. The case is illustrative, constructed for this course.

Pay: the helper earns 16,000 dollars a year. In the model, a paycheck is one way a job helps meet the lower needs, physiological and safety.
Belonging: the helper works beside the owner and talks with regular customers, which can feed belonging.
Esteem: the helper is never trusted to choose the weekly special, so the job offers little for esteem.
Self-actualization: the helper never trains the new hire, so the job offers no chance to grow into a new role.

In words: the job covers the lower needs and some belonging, but it gives the helper almost nothing for esteem or growth.

Misconception check. Students often think Maslow's levels are a strict ladder no one ever skips: a person must fully meet one level before the next one matters. That is tempting, because the model is usually drawn as a pyramid with neat layers. But Maslow himself wrote that the order is not as rigid as it sounds, and a person can care about respect at work while still worried about money. The cure is to read the hierarchy as a loose order of what tends to press first.

Memory hook: body, safety, belonging, esteem, growth — a loose order, not a ladder.

5. Separate two kinds of factors: Herzberg's hygiene factors and motivators

Picture an illustrative warehouse with broken air conditioning in summer. Fixing it stops the complaints. Does it make anyone love the job? Probably not. Now picture the same warehouse letting its most careful picker design a better route through the shelves. That can make the picker proud of the work. These two changes do different jobs.

Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman (1959), The Motivation to Work, built a model on that difference. The two-factor theory is their classroom model that separates hygiene factors, which prevent dissatisfaction, from motivators, which build satisfaction.

A hygiene factor is a condition of a job, such as pay, supervision, working conditions, company policy, relations at work, or job security, that prevents dissatisfaction when it is met but does not by itself build satisfaction.
A motivator is a part of the work itself, such as achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, or growth, that builds satisfaction when it is present.

The model has one surprising consequence. A job can have every hygiene factor in place and still leave a person disengaged. That diagnosis has a name in this course.

A motivator gap is the diagnosis when a job's hygiene factors are met but its motivators are missing, so a worker is not dissatisfied but is not engaged either.

Worked example — diagnosing the helper. The cart's figures are illustrative, constructed for this course, not real data; money is in dollars and time in hours and weeks.

Hours a year: 20 hours a week × 50 weeks = 1,000 hours.
Yearly pay: 1,000 hours × 16 dollars an hour = 16,000 dollars, the same as 20 × 50 × 16 = 16,000.
Hygiene factors: pay of 16 dollars an hour and clean, safe working conditions are met, so the helper is not dissatisfied.
Motivators: the helper never chooses the weekly special, never trains the new hire, and gets no recognition or growth, so the motivators are missing.
The diagnosis: hygiene factors met + motivators missing = a motivator gap.
Pricing a raise: each extra dollar an hour costs 1,000 hours × 1 dollar = 1,000 dollars a year, and it works on pay, a hygiene factor, so it does not close a motivator gap.
The fix: job enrichment, letting the helper choose the weekly special and train the new hire, which adds responsibility, recognition, and growth.

In words: the helper earns 16,000 dollars a year in decent conditions, so the hygiene factors are met, but the job offers no responsibility or recognition, so the cart has a motivator gap; a raise of a dollar an hour would cost 1,000 dollars a year and would not close it, while letting the helper choose the weekly special and train the new hire costs no extra pay and works on the motivators Herzberg names.

Look at the two sizes side by side: 16,000 dollars a year versus 320 dollars a week, so the year's pay is 50 times one week's pay. That is why a small hourly raise turns into a real yearly cost.

In practice (your tools). You can price a raise in any free spreadsheet, such as Google Sheets. Type 20 in cell B2 for the weekly hours, 50 in cell B3 for the weeks, and 16 in cell B4 for the hourly wage. In cell B5 type =B2*B3*B4 for the yearly pay. Type the size of a raise per hour in cell B6, and in cell B7 type =B2*B3*B6 to see what that raise costs in a year.

Limitation: the two-factor theory is a classroom model. Pay can matter a great deal to someone short of money, and the model does not say pay is unimportant. It says meeting a hygiene factor stops dissatisfaction rather than building satisfaction.

Misconception check. Students often think a hygiene factor is a motivator: "a raise will make them love the job." That is tempting, because a raise feels good on the day it arrives. But in Herzberg's model pay is a hygiene factor; meeting it removes a complaint without adding satisfaction. The cure is to ask whether a change touches the conditions around the work or the work itself.

Pause and try this. Choose one: (a) list one hygiene factor and one motivator from a job, class, or volunteer role you have had, and say which one changed your effort more; or (b) explain in two sentences why the cart's owner should try enrichment before a raise.

Memory hook: hygiene stops the complaint; motivators build the drive.

6. Name the manager's assumptions: Theory X and Theory Y

Picture two managers at an illustrative call center. One listens in on every call and posts a list of who took too long on breaks. The other shares the team's goals and lets each agent choose how to handle a tricky caller. The agents may be the same people. The managers are making different guesses about them.

McGregor (1960), The Human Side of Enterprise, named those guesses.

Theory X is a set of assumptions a manager may hold that people dislike work, avoid responsibility, and must be directed and watched; it describes the manager's assumptions, not a type of worker.
Theory Y is a set of assumptions a manager may hold that people can enjoy work, will seek responsibility, and will direct themselves toward goals they are committed to.

These assumptions connect to Week 10. A manager who holds Theory X assumptions about the helper may lean toward close supervision and the autocratic style. A manager who holds Theory Y assumptions may try the participative or free-rein style.

Worked example — two owners, one helper. The case is illustrative and uses no figures.

An owner with Theory X assumptions: checks the helper's work all shift, decides the weekly special alone, and keeps training for the owner. The style is autocratic.
An owner with Theory Y assumptions: asks the helper to propose the weekly special and to train the new hire, then checks the result. The style is participative, moving toward free-rein as trust grows.
The helper: the same person in both cases.

In words: the helper did not change between the two cases; the owner's assumptions did, and they shaped how the owner led.

Misconception check. Students often think Theory X and Theory Y are two kinds of worker, the lazy ones and the keen ones. That is tempting, because the theories describe people. But McGregor's two theories describe what a manager assumes about people, not who the people are. The cure is to put the word "assumes" in every sentence: "this manager assumes the helper avoids work."

Pause and try this. Choose one: (a) think of a coach, boss, or teacher you have had and say which set of assumptions they seemed to hold, with one piece of evidence; or (b) explain in two sentences how a Theory X assumption could make itself come true.

Memory hook: X and Y live in the manager's head, not the worker's file.

7. Compare, expect, and aim: the contemporary theories

The classic theories asked what people need. The next wave asked how people think about effort. Picture an illustrative public library page, the worker who shelves returned books. The page notices that a co-worker shelves the same carts but gets thanked at every staff meeting. The page also wonders whether working faster would lead anywhere. Both questions are about how people weigh their effort.

Equity theory is Adams's theory that people compare their own ratio of outcomes to inputs with someone else's and are motivated to close any gap they see. Adams (1963), "Towards an understanding of inequity", set it out.

An outcome-to-input ratio is what a person gets from a job, such as pay and thanks, compared with what the person puts in, such as hours and effort.

Worked example — an equity check on the cart. The cart's figures are illustrative, constructed for this course; money is in dollars and time in hours.

Assume a barista at the second cart is paid the same 16 dollars an hour for the same 20 hours as the helper.
Each earns 20 × 16 = 320 dollars a week.
Each outcome-to-input ratio is 320 ÷ 20 = 16 dollars an hour, so the ratios match.

In words: if the pay and hours match, the pay side of the comparison feels fair. The library page shows the other side: equal pay can still feel unequal when one worker gets the thanks and the other does not.

In practice (your tools). You can lay out an equity check in a free spreadsheet. Put each person's weekly pay in column C and weekly hours in column D, starting in row 2. In cell E2 type =C2/D2 and fill it down; matching values in column E mean matching ratios on pay and hours.

Expectancy theory is Vroom's theory that effort follows a person's belief that effort will lead to performance, that performance will lead to an outcome, and how much the person values that outcome. Vroom (1964), Work and Motivation, set it out. Picture an illustrative call center that offers a bonus for a monthly target the agents believe they cannot reach. Effort stays flat, because the first link, effort to performance, looks broken.

Goal-setting theory is Locke's theory that specific, hard goals raise performance more than vague goals such as doing your best. Locke (1968), "Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives", set it out.

Worked example — a specific goal on the cart. The cart's figures are illustrative, constructed for this course; volume is in drinks.

A vague goal: "sell as many drinks as you can."
A specific goal: the break-even pace is 12,000 drinks ÷ 250 operating days = 48 drinks a day, a specific goal the cart lead can track, unlike "do your best".
A check on reach: the cart can make 30 × 4 = 120 drinks in a four-hour morning rush, so 48 a day is hard enough to matter and still within what one machine can make.

In words: a specific daily number gives the cart lead and the helper something to aim at and check, which is the same number Week 10 used as the standard for controlling the work. An illustrative warehouse picker given a specific count of orders for a shift has the same kind of target.

Theory Z is Ouchi's description of a management approach built on long-term employment and shared decisions. It comes from Ouchi's book Theory Z: How American Business Can Meet the Japanese Challenge, first published in 1981; later printings carry 1982, so the year is taught in words.

Misconception check. Students often think equity theory is about equal pay only. That is tempting, because pay is the easiest outcome to count. But the outcomes a person compares include thanks, schedules, and chances to grow, and the inputs include effort and skill, not only hours. The cure is to list every outcome and every input on both sides before calling a comparison fair.

Pause and try this. Choose one: (a) describe a goal you were given that was vague and rewrite it as a specific, hard goal; or (b) explain in two sentences which link of expectancy theory breaks when a target looks out of reach.

Memory hook: compare the ratio, expect the payoff, aim at a number.

8. Put theory to work: job design and empowerment

Picture an illustrative hospital kitchen. One cook makes the same salad all shift, every shift. The kitchen could hand that cook more salads, move the cook among stations, let the cook plan the salad menu, or let the cook pick shifts. Each change is a different tool, and each one comes from a theory you have met.

Job design is the choices a business makes about which tasks, responsibilities, and schedules make up a job. These are the tools:

Job enlargement is adding more tasks at the same level of responsibility to a job, such as giving a counter worker the restocking too.
Job enrichment is adding responsibility and control to a job, such as letting a worker plan part of the work or train others, so the job offers more of the motivators.
Job rotation is moving a person among different jobs on a schedule so the person learns more of the work and the routine changes.
Flexible scheduling is letting people choose when they work, within limits the business sets, instead of working one fixed schedule.
Recognition is noticing good work and saying so, in private or in front of others, so the person knows the work was seen.
Empowerment is giving employees the authority to make decisions about their own work instead of waiting for a manager to decide.

Worked example — choosing tools for the helper. The case is illustrative and uses no new figures.

Enlargement: add the restocking and the end-of-day cleaning to the counter work. More tasks, same responsibility, so it does not close a motivator gap.
Enrichment: let the helper choose the weekly special and train the new hire. This adds responsibility, recognition, and growth, the motivators Herzberg names.
Recognition: the owner names the helper's weekly special on the menu board.
Empowerment: the helper decides how to handle a customer's complaint about a drink, within limits the owner sets.

In words: enrichment, recognition, and empowerment all work on the helper's motivator gap, while enlargement adds work without adding responsibility.

Empowerment ties this week to two earlier ones. It is close to Week 10's participative and free-rein styles, where the group shares in decisions. It is also close to Week 8's decentralization, where decisions move down to the people nearer the work. All three move a decision closer to the person doing it.

Misconception check. Students often think job enlargement and job enrichment are the same thing, since both make a job bigger. That is tempting, because both add something to the job. But enlargement adds more tasks at the same level, while enrichment adds responsibility and control. The cure is to ask whether the change adds more of the same work or more say over the work.

Pause and try this. Choose one: (a) pick a job you know and propose one enrichment and one flexible-scheduling change, saying which theory backs each; or (b) explain in two sentences why job rotation alone may not close a motivator gap.

Memory hook: more tasks enlarge; more say enriches.

9. Diagnose and recommend: a motivation diagnosis

You now hold a kit of theories. A manager facing a disengaged worker needs to pick one, apply it to the facts, and say what to do. That three-part move has a name.

A motivation diagnosis is a short analysis that names the facts of a workplace case, sorts them with a motivation theory, and recommends a fix with its reason.

Worked example — the helper's diagnosis, written out. The case is illustrative, constructed for this course.

Facts the case states: 16 dollars an hour, 20 hours a week for 50 weeks, 16,000 dollars a year; a clean, safe cart; no say in the weekly special; no part in training the new hire.
The theory: Herzberg's two factors.
The sort: pay and conditions are hygiene factors, and they are met; responsibility, recognition, and growth are motivators, and they are missing. The diagnosis is a motivator gap.
The fix and its reason: enrich the job by letting the helper choose the weekly special and train the new hire, because those changes add the missing motivators at no extra pay.
What would change the answer: if the helper said the pay was not enough to live on, the hygiene factor of pay would not be met, and the diagnosis would change.

In words: the diagnosis keeps what the case states apart from what the owner judges, names its theory, and says what new fact would change the recommendation.

Caveat: every theory in this chapter is a classroom model, a simplification you can hold in one hand. None has been proven for every workplace. A good diagnosis names the theory it uses, because another theory might suggest a different fix.

Misconception check. Students often think a motivation diagnosis means finding the one theory that is right. That is tempting, because tests often reward one right answer. But the theories are lenses, and the strength of a diagnosis is how well it fits the facts and how honestly it says what would change it. The cure is to name the theory, sort the facts, and add one sentence on what would change your answer.

Memory hook: facts, theory, sort, fix — and what would change it.

Key terms

motivation — The set of forces that start a person's effort at work, direct it toward a goal, and keep it going. (first used: 1. Define the force: motivation and the theories in order)
scientific management — Taylor's approach to work, which studies each task, finds the one best way to do it, trains workers in that way, and pays them by their output. (first used: 2. Study the task: Taylor's scientific management)
Hawthorne studies — A program of workplace studies at Western Electric's Hawthorne Works near Chicago that began with lighting tests in 1924 and ran into the early 1930s, most often read as showing that attention and group relations change output. (first used: 3. Notice the people: the Hawthorne studies)
human-relations view — The view of work, associated with the Hawthorne studies, that attention, group relations, and how people feel about their work affect how much they produce. (first used: 3. Notice the people: the Hawthorne studies)
Hawthorne effect — The idea that people change their behavior when they know they are being studied or given attention; it is a contested reading of an old study, not a settled law of behavior. (first used: 3. Notice the people: the Hawthorne studies)
hierarchy of needs — Maslow's classroom model of five human needs, physiological, safety, love or belonging, esteem, and self-actualization, arranged in a loose order rather than a strict ladder. (first used: 4. Name the needs: Maslow's hierarchy)
physiological needs — In Maslow's model, the bodily needs for food, water, and rest that keep a person alive. (first used: 4. Name the needs: Maslow's hierarchy)
safety needs — In Maslow's model, the needs for security, stability, and freedom from danger. (first used: 4. Name the needs: Maslow's hierarchy)
love or belonging needs — In Maslow's model, the needs for friendship, affection, and acceptance by a group. (first used: 4. Name the needs: Maslow's hierarchy)
esteem needs — In Maslow's model, the needs for respect from others and for self-respect, such as being trusted with a decision. (first used: 4. Name the needs: Maslow's hierarchy)
self-actualization — In Maslow's model, the need to become what a person is capable of becoming, such as growing into a new skill or role. (first used: 4. Name the needs: Maslow's hierarchy)
two-factor theory — Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman's classroom model that separates hygiene factors, which prevent dissatisfaction, from motivators, which build satisfaction. (first used: 5. Separate two kinds of factors: Herzberg's hygiene factors and motivators)
hygiene factor — A condition of a job, such as pay, supervision, working conditions, company policy, relations at work, or job security, that prevents dissatisfaction when it is met but does not by itself build satisfaction. (first used: 5. Separate two kinds of factors: Herzberg's hygiene factors and motivators)
motivator — A part of the work itself, such as achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, or growth, that builds satisfaction when it is present. (first used: 5. Separate two kinds of factors: Herzberg's hygiene factors and motivators)
motivator gap — The diagnosis when a job's hygiene factors are met but its motivators are missing, so a worker is not dissatisfied but is not engaged either. (first used: 5. Separate two kinds of factors: Herzberg's hygiene factors and motivators)
Theory X — A set of assumptions a manager may hold that people dislike work, avoid responsibility, and must be directed and watched; it describes the manager's assumptions, not a type of worker. (first used: 6. Name the manager's assumptions: Theory X and Theory Y)
Theory Y — A set of assumptions a manager may hold that people can enjoy work, will seek responsibility, and will direct themselves toward goals they are committed to. (first used: 6. Name the manager's assumptions: Theory X and Theory Y)
equity theory — Adams's theory that people compare their own ratio of outcomes to inputs with someone else's and are motivated to close any gap they see. (first used: 7. Compare, expect, and aim: the contemporary theories)
outcome-to-input ratio — What a person gets from a job, such as pay and thanks, compared with what the person puts in, such as hours and effort. (first used: 7. Compare, expect, and aim: the contemporary theories)
expectancy theory — Vroom's theory that effort follows a person's belief that effort will lead to performance, that performance will lead to an outcome, and how much the person values that outcome. (first used: 7. Compare, expect, and aim: the contemporary theories)
goal-setting theory — Locke's theory that specific, hard goals raise performance more than vague goals such as doing your best. (first used: 7. Compare, expect, and aim: the contemporary theories)
Theory Z — Ouchi's description of a management approach built on long-term employment and shared decisions. (first used: 7. Compare, expect, and aim: the contemporary theories)
job design — The choices a business makes about which tasks, responsibilities, and schedules make up a job. (first used: 8. Put theory to work: job design and empowerment)
job enlargement — Adding more tasks at the same level of responsibility to a job, such as giving a counter worker the restocking too. (first used: 8. Put theory to work: job design and empowerment)
job enrichment — Adding responsibility and control to a job, such as letting a worker plan part of the work or train others, so the job offers more of the motivators. (first used: 8. Put theory to work: job design and empowerment)
job rotation — Moving a person among different jobs on a schedule so the person learns more of the work and the routine changes. (first used: 8. Put theory to work: job design and empowerment)
flexible scheduling — Letting people choose when they work, within limits the business sets, instead of working one fixed schedule. (first used: 8. Put theory to work: job design and empowerment)
recognition — Noticing good work and saying so, in private or in front of others, so the person knows the work was seen. (first used: 8. Put theory to work: job design and empowerment)
empowerment — Giving employees the authority to make decisions about their own work instead of waiting for a manager to decide. (first used: 8. Put theory to work: job design and empowerment)
motivation diagnosis — A short analysis that names the facts of a workplace case, sorts them with a motivation theory, and recommends a fix with its reason. (first used: 9. Diagnose and recommend: a motivation diagnosis)

Summary

Motivation starts effort, directs it toward a goal, and keeps it going.
The classic theories run Taylor 1911, the Hawthorne studies from 1924, Maslow 1943, Herzberg 1959, and McGregor 1960.
The contemporary theories run Adams 1963, Vroom 1964, Locke 1968, and Ouchi's Theory Z, first published in 1981.
Taylor studied the task; the human-relations view studied the people and the group.
The Hawthorne effect is a contested reading of an old study, not a law.
Maslow's five needs come in a loose order, not a strict ladder.
Hygiene factors prevent dissatisfaction; motivators build satisfaction.
The helper's 16,000 dollars a year and decent conditions meet the hygiene factors; the missing motivators make a motivator gap, and each extra dollar an hour would cost 1,000 dollars a year.
Theory X and Theory Y are a manager's assumptions, not types of workers.
Enlargement adds tasks; enrichment adds responsibility; empowerment moves decisions down.

Check your understanding

Work these before looking at the answers — they are ungraded, and the answers (with reasoning) are at the bottom of the page.

An illustrative bike shop has two part-time mechanics. One works 30 hours a week and is paid 540 dollars; the other works 25 hours a week and is paid 500 dollars. Find each mechanic's pay per hour and say what equity theory predicts the first mechanic will feel.
An illustrative community food bank pays a part-time driver 15 hours a week for 48 weeks. The driver says the pay is fine but complains of never being allowed to plan the delivery routes. Find the yearly cost of a 2-dollar-an-hour raise, and say whether Herzberg's model expects the raise to fix the complaint.
A cook in an illustrative hospital kitchen lists four things about the job: the pay, the head chef's way of supervising, the chance to design a new menu item, and being praised in front of the team. Sort each as a hygiene factor or a motivator.
At an illustrative city transit agency, a supervisor says, "Drivers only work hard when someone checks on them." Name the set of assumptions this reflects, say which leadership style it tends toward, and say whether moving drivers among routes each month is job rotation, job enlargement, or job enrichment.

Answers (worked reasoning — read after attempting)

First mechanic: 540 ÷ 30 = 18 dollars an hour. Second mechanic: 500 ÷ 25 = 20 dollars an hour. The first mechanic's ratio is 20 − 18 = 2 dollars an hour lower, so equity theory predicts the first mechanic will feel under-rewarded and may try to close the gap, by asking for more pay or by putting in less effort, unless other outcomes, such as thanks or a better schedule, balance it.
Hours a year: 15 × 48 = 720 hours. Raise cost: 720 × 2 = 1,440 dollars a year. The driver says the pay is fine, so the hygiene factor is met; the complaint is about responsibility, a motivator. Herzberg's model expects the raise to cost 1,440 dollars a year without fixing the complaint, while letting the driver plan routes, job enrichment, works on the motivator.
The pay: hygiene factor. The head chef's way of supervising: hygiene factor. The chance to design a new menu item: motivator (responsibility and achievement). Being praised in front of the team: motivator (recognition).
The supervisor holds Theory X assumptions, a guess about drivers, not a fact about them. Those assumptions tend toward close supervision and the autocratic style. Moving drivers among routes on a schedule is job rotation: it moves each driver among jobs, but it does not add more tasks to one job (enlargement) or add responsibility (enrichment).

Next up in this module: the Readings & Resources page, the lecture tutorial, the practice set, and the quiz — and next week the accounting equation and the three financial statements add up the cart's first full year.

Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com