There are more than one motivation theories. Firstly, the Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory comprises the major motivation theories. The theory was determined by Abraham Maslow. Maslow’s theory is explained using a pyramid which is divided into five segments. The lower segments of the pyramid represent the basic needs of human beings (Ramlall & Minneapolis, 2004). Essentially, the basic components of daily life that inspire human beings to act in particular ways. Starting from the lower layer, Maslow proclaimed that human actions are inspired by several factors. These include psychological needs, the need for safety, the need to be loved and belong, esteem needs and lastly, the need for self-actualization. Maslow’s theory assumes that some needs are more demanding than others. The higher order needs include self-actualization and esteem needs. The lower-order needs include social, safety, and physiological needs. [Click Essay Writer to order your essay]
The Alderfer’s ERG Theory comprises the next motivational theory. The Alderfer’s ERG theory of motivation is almost similar to the Maslow’s theory. However, unlike the Maslow’s theory of motivation, the Alderfer’s ERG theory is made up of three segments. These include growth needs, relatedness needs, and existence needs. This theory reinforces that as one strives to fulfill the higher needs, the more demanding these needs become. Essentially, the more one gains power, the more they get addicted to the phenomenon. [Need an essay writing service? Find help here.]
The third theory of motivation is known as the Expectancy theory. This theory was developed by Victor Vroom in 1964. According to Vroom, human behavior is influenced by the expectations they have on the action engaged. For instance, in a work scenario, one will engage in work simply because they stand to benefit financially from the venture. There are three predominant variables in the Expectancy theory. They include Expectancy, Instrumentality, and Valence (Ramlall & Minneapolis, 2004). Essentially, the expectancy variable enhances the efficiencies of one’s actions. The instrumentality variable explains that enhanced performance comes with rewards. Lastly, the valence variable explains the significance with which one extends to the rewards they stand to gain.
McClelland’s Need Theory provides that people mainly draw their motivation from achievements, power, and affiliation (Ramlall & Minneapolis, 2004). Essentially, the degree of one’s persistence is determined by the three factors. The theory, developed by David McClelland, prevails that people who are motivated by achievement tend to engage in tasks that are both demanding and difficult. People who draw their inspiration from power, tend to place value in power. They further engage positions that are influential and power. Affiliation as a motivational component influences one to align themselves with people with power. These individuals are not necessary disposed to work but would rather have people with status around them.
The Hertzberg’s Two-Factor theory was developed by Frederick Herzberg. It is commonly known as the motivation-hygiene theory. The two-factor theory is used to mainly explain the situations of employees in the working place. Bases on responses from different individuals, Hertzberg prevailed that human actions were inspired by two factors. He divided these factors into motivator factors and Hygiene factors (Ramlall & Minneapolis, 2004). He proclaimed that motivator factors serve to enhance the satisfaction of the employees while hygiene factors negatively influence human motivation. Still, Hertzberg prevailed that each of these factors operated independently of the other.
Comparison between the Maslow’s and the ERG Theories of Motivation
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory and the Alderfer’S ERG theory share several similarities. To begin with, both of the theories reinforce the classification of needs into different segments. Each segment addresses a specific need of human beings and how these needs influence their actions (Shenoy, 2016). Furthermore, in both the theories, human needs are projected to have a pattern. Thus, there are lower and higher needs in both the theories. Both Alderfer and Maslow recognized the immensity of human needs in determining the degree of persistence one gives to a particular action. Maslow indicates that one needs leads to a desire for the next. In a similar tone, Alderfer prevails that continued satisfaction of a need leads to addiction.
Still, the two theories project significant differences. Firstly, Maslow reinforces the hierarchical order of needs. He prevailed that the lower needs had to be satisfied before the higher needs were addressed. Thus, when one is hungry, they will not care for the design of the garments they have donned. According to Maslow, the needs have to follow the pre-established order without deviation. Alternatively, the ERG theory of motivation acknowledges that human needs are divided into segments. However, the satisfaction of these needs does not follow a hierarchical order. Each of the segments of needs in the ERG theory of motivation can precede the other. Furthermore, while the Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory reinforces five segments, the ERG theory prevails that there are only three segments (Shenoy, 2016). Lastly, Maslow’s theory, unlike the ERG theory, does not align itself with the concept of addiction. Thus, one’s particular need does not increase as they achieve more of it.
The Hertzberg’s Two-factor Theory and the Supermarket Debacle
In 2013, I worked as an attendant in a small supermarket. The supermarket was performing dismally. The sales were poor, and the employees were secretive and lukewarm. They complained about their working conditions and did not seem to love their jobs. Soon enough, the little clients that had remained loyal to the supermarket started disappearing. Essentially, the employees loathe for their situation had communicated itself to the customers. Clients did not want to engage gloomy attendants.
To mitigate the situation, the manager should have engaged the Hertzberg two-factor theory. Firstly, none of the employees was feeling appreciated. The motivator factors provide for the best frameworks that would have served to mitigate this occurrence. Based on these frameworks, the manager should have enhanced the communication lines between himself and us as the employees. Open communication would have gone a long way in solving the problems that were facing the employees.
In addition, based on the motivator factors, the manager of the supermarket should have provided the best work conditions for us as employees. Most of us were working at the minimum wage for more than 11 hours. After our duties, we were very tired and uninspired. This greatly negated our attitudes towards our duties. Essentially, based on the hygiene factors, our salaries and benefits should have been improved. The Hertzberg two-factor theory would have gone a long way to ensuring that the supermarket’s situation was improved. [“Write my essay for me?” Get help here.]
Ramlall, S., & Minneapolis, T. (2004). A Review of Employee Motivation Theories and their Implications for Employee Retention within Organizations. The Journal of American Academy of Business, 52-64.
Shenoy, S. (2016). 5 Motivational Theories That A Project Manager Must Know About!