I declare that to the best of my knowledge that this assignment does not contain material previously published or written by another person, except where due reference are made in the text.

Date: May 21 ^st , 2002 Signed

2

Contents

  page  

  Disclaimer  2

  Contents  3

  Figures  5

1.  Introduction  6

2.  Leadership styles  6

2.1  Autocratic  6

2.2  Laissez Faire  6

2.3  Democratic  7

3.  Leadership Theories  7

3.1  Universalist Leadership Theories  8

3.1.1  Trait Theories  8

3.1.2  Leader Behaviour Theories (Ohio State University Study)  9

3.1.3  Blake and Mouton´s Managerial Grid  9

3.1.4  McGregor´s Theory X and Theory Y  10

3.1.5  Likert´s Leadership Systems  11

3.2  Contingency Leadership Theories  12

3.2.1  Blanchard´s Situational Leadership  12

3

  page  

4.  Motivation Theories  15

4.1  Content Motivation Theories  16

4.1.1  Force and Coercion Model  16

4.1.2  Economic Model  16

4.1.3  Hawthorne Studies (Mayo) The Hawthorne Effect  17

4.1.4  Extrinsic versus Intrinsic Motivation  18

4.1.5  Maslow  18

4.1.6  Alderfer  20

4.1.7  Herzberg  21

4.1.8  McClelland  22

4.2  Process (Cognitive) Motivation Theories  23

4.2.1  Expectancy Theory (VIE)  23

4.2.2  Equity Theory  25

4.2.3  Goal Setting Theory  25

4.3  Reinforcement Motivation Theories  26

4.3.1  Skinner´s Operant Conditioning  26

5.  Leadership and Communication  28

6.  Leadership and Feedback  29

7.  The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy  29

8.  Conclusion  31

9.  References  32

4

  Figures  

  page  

  Figure 1 : The Managerial Grid  

  Figure 2 : Hersey´s and Blanchard´s Situational Leadership Model  

  Figure 3 : The Motivational Process  

  Figure 4 : Maslow´s hierarchy of needs  

  Figure 5 : Alderfer´s ERG-model  

  Figure 6 : Herzberg´s two factor theory  

  Figure 7 : Expectancy theory  

  Figure 8 : Paths A and B  

  Figure 9 : Equity theory  

  Figure 10 : Goal setting theory  

  Figure 11 : Reinforcement theory  

  Figure 12 : The communication process  

  Figure 13 : “Reciprocal process of human interaction  

5

1. Introduction

A human being is, first of all, a social being. We define ourselves for a large part through our social contacts, whose number has highly increased in the last generations. The importance of this interaction led to a heightened interest in social sciences like psychology or sociology or economics. One huge field here is the examination of different leadership styles and motivation techniques.

The aim of this essay is to provide a person without any prior knowledge of the topic with an overview of some leadership and motivation theories, and to be a helpful resource for an exam preparation. This is why it is neither possible to cover each theory with just one sentence nor to explore it in depth. To fulfil this aim it was necessary to extend the word suggestion, while trying to be as succinct as possible.

2. Leadership-styles

These leadership-styles were examined during the studies of the University of Iowa, where boys were divided into hobby clubs and submitted to different styles. They “were designed primarily to examine patterns of aggressive behavior” (Luthans 2002, p. 577), but also showed the effects of leadership-styles.

2.1 Autocratic

The autocratic, or authoritarian leader did not allow any participation and only allowed one way communication, but gave friendly or impersonal attention while praising or criticizing the boys and did not display any hostility (Luthans 2002, p. 577).

This is an appropriate style for the armed forces, emergency situations or situations with high safety issues like climbing, but only possesses a short-term effectiveness. This group tended to show “reactions to the frustration caused by the autocratic leader” (Luthans 2002, p. 577): they were aggressive or apathetic, and the apathetic boys turned to be aggressive, as soon as “the autocratic leader left the room” (Luthans 2002, p. 577).

2.2 Laissez-Faire

Laissez-Faire is French and means roughly ´do what you want´. This leader did not provide any leadership and gave the boys complete freedom (Luthans 2002, p. 577).

6

There was no communication at all, the leader did neither suggest activities nor provide feedback.

Applied to education, for example, a child would learn that fire is hot by burning its hand on the first try. A useful application would be when teaching a group of selfmotivated managers.

This group had the greatest number of aggressive acts.

2.3 Democratic

The democratic leader “encouraged group discussion and decision making. He tried to be “objective” in giving praise or criticism” (Luthans 2002, p. 577). Policies and activities were chosen by the leader and the group and there was two-way communication as well as feedback. Therefore this style has long-term effectiveness. Most political systems of the West are based on democracy. The result here was settled between the two other extremes.

The actual insight from these studies should be that different leadership styles produce different outcomes. It can be concluded that a mixture of all three is most likely to produce the biggest productivity.

3. Leadership Theories

“Leadership may be defined as a process of social interaction between the leader and his or her subordinates, in which the leader seeks to influence his or her subordinates to achieve the objectives of the organisation.” (Petzall, Selvarajah, Willis 1991, p. 143).

In the field of recreation there are different levels of leadership: Supervising, for example babysitting; teaching and instructing, for example a skiing instructor; programming, organizing or coordinating, for example recreation camps; educational leadership, for example as a university teacher; and finally management.

There are two types of leadership theories: Universalist theories, and contingency theories.

7

3.1 Universalist Leadership Theories

These theories assume that “there is one type of leader behaviour which, by nature, is superior to all others”, and that the “´correct´ style is assumed to be universally applicable” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 144).

3.1.1 Trait Theories

There are various kinds of trait theories, but all are based on the assumption that there are “individuals who possess the personal qualities which enable them to encourage their followers to do their will” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 145).

The great man theory assumes that leaders are born with certain inherited traits and cannot be made (Petzall et al 1991, p. 145). There are several historical persons used as examples for this theory like Alexander the Great, Adolf Hitler, or Mahatma Gandhi.

This theory is purely descriptive and does not provide any systematic insight or a suggestion for the development of great persons. But according to Bortz (1999) a theory should attempt to describe, explain and enable to predict behaviour. The trait theories remain on the descriptive state, and therefore should not be called ´theories´.

Another theory assumes that charismatic leaders “are able to inspire collective excitement among their followers so that the latter respond en masse… and surrender themselves totally to the will of their heroic leader” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 146). One example is Adolf Hitler.

According to Conger and Kanungo the five qualities of charismatic organisational leaders are self-confidence, a vision plus an ability to inspire people, total commitment, unconventional behaviour, and ”being perceived as radical change agents” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 146).

The main problem of this theory is its ignorance of situational factors and its mere descriptiveness.

8

3.1.2 Leader Behaviour Theories (Ohio State University Study)

This study developed from the trait theories and examined observable behaviours (Petzall et al 1991, p. 148-149) of successful leaders.

A Leader Behaviour Description Questionnaire was used and the results subjected to a factor analysis, finding two dimensions: initiating structure and consideration. They were found to be independent (Petzall et al 1991, p. 148), meaning that it is possible to get a high grade in both of them. These studies were the basis for many other models.

3.1.3 Blake and Mouton´s Managerial Grid

Blake and Mouton put the findings of the Ohio studies into the ´managerial grid model´. The diagram is produced by two independent variables, the concern for production (initiating structure), and the concern for people (consideration). “There are eighty-one possible styles on their grid, but they argue there are five major styles which categorise most managers” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 148).

Figure 1: The Managerial Grid

(source: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1650/htmlleaderbnm.html )

A 1.1 style means a ´least energy´ manager, with neither concern for people nor for production. This equals a laissez-faire style.

9

1.9 is called ´country club style´ as the major concern is people. This equals democratic leadership.

5.5 is the middle way, called the ´organisation man´ who unites both characteristics in equal parts.

9.1 describes a ´task manager´, with a focus on production. This equals an autocratic leader.

A 9.9 style describes a ´team manager´ who has a high concern for production and people. Blake and Mouton “conclude that a 9.9 style is the best and most effective leadership style” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 150).

One problem, besides its ignorance of situational issues, is the unclear relationship between the two variables. While this theory is based on the Ohio studies, which find them independent, the Michigan studies found the opposite (Petzall et al 1991, p. 148).

3.1.4 McGregor´s Theory X and Theory Y

McGregor´s theories provide assumptions about employees. Theory X assumes that employees are “inherently lazy, …have no ambition… for responsibility, …have no motivation to achieve organisational objectives, …are motivated only by physiological and safety needs” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 151).

These assumptions equal “autocratic management, initiating structure and production-centred behaviour” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 152). In the Managerial Grid this would lead to a 9.1 style.

One example for this would be a poorly educated line worker who only does the same job, never sees the end product and does not enjoy his or her work and therefore will hardly be motivated by anything else than money.

Theory X, however, assumes that “employees find work as natural as play, …can be motivated by higher order needs, …seek responsibility” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 151).

Both theories mention higher and lower order needs. This refers to Maslow´s hierarchy of needs (see 4.1.5.).

10

“Theory Y assumptions seem to underlie democratic management, consideration, and employee-centred behaviour” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 152), and is therefore seen as the better approach by McGregor (Petzall et al 1991, p. 152). In the Managerial Grid this would lead to a 9.9 leadership.

In modern life this attitude can be found among managers or better-earning employees, because they have satisfied their lower order needs (see 4.1.5) and are motivated by higher order needs.

3.1.5 Likert´s Leadership Systems

Likert´s approach is close to McGregor´s theories. He identified four leadership styles, which are called systems.

System one is identified by the management´s low confidence in employees and the fact that “employees are forced to work by threats and punishment” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 152), which equals Theory X, and autocratic or 9.1 leadership. In System two the management has “condescending confidence”, and there are “a few rewards” to motivate workers (Petzall et al 1991, p. 152). In system three management has “substantial confidence in subordinates” and “subordinates (are) permitted to make specific decisions at lower levels” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 152).

In system four finally “management has complete confidence” and “decision making is decentralised” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 153), which equals Theory Y.

Likert concludes that system four is the best approach.

The problems of this approach are the ignorance of situational variables and the lack of independent evidence.

11

3.2 Contingency Leadership Theories

In contrast to the universalist theories, the contingency theories do not assume that there is one “ideal style of leadership for all situations, rather, some styles suit some situations” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 153) better than others.

3.2.1 Hersey and Blanchard´s Situational Leadership Theory This theory is a development of Blake and Mouton’s Managerial Grid, which also uses the findings of the Ohio State Studies (Luthans 2002, p. 614). The main concept is the assumption that “the key for leadership effectiveness … is to match up the situation with the appropriate style” (Luthans 2002, p. 616), and that “the main situational determinant of leader behaviour is the task-relevant readiness (previously called maturity) of the subordinate” (Petzall 1991, p. 153).

Leader behaviour can be divided into two styles: directive and supportive behaviour. Directive behaviour means that “the leader organises and defines roles for member” (Luthans 2002, p. 614) Supportive behaviour, on the other hand, means that ”the leader has close, personal relationships with the members of the group” (Luthans 2002, p. 614).

Figure 2 shows both behaviours, producing a diagram with four quadrants. They are named S1 to S4, with the numbers rising anti-clockwise. S1 is the starting point of the movement through the diagram indicating low supportive and high directive behaviour. S2 implies high directive and supportive behaviour, and so on.

12

Figure 2: Hersey´s and Blanchard´s Situational Leadership Model (source: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1650/htmlblanchard.html )

The subordinate’s readiness also consists of two factors: competence, meaning one’s knowledge and skills, and commitment, describing one’s motivation and confidence (Petzall et al 1991, p. 153). These factors determine the developmental level of employees, shown at the bottom of figure 2. D1 is here the lowest level of development, indicating low competence and high commitment. D2 means some competence with low commitment, D3 high competence and variable commitment, and D4 high competence and commitment. Hersey and Blanchard assume that a person will move though this line from right to left while further developing his or her skills. This movement can also be seen along the curve through the four quadrants.

For the management style this means that “the manager should adjust his or her style to adapt to the employee’s increasing level of readiness by moving from a more directive style… to a more participative style” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 153). In figure 2 this means that a manager first has to identify the subordinate’s level of development between D1 and D4. After this a line is drawn up to the leader behaviour diagram. This line will hit the curve, indicating the leadership style best fitted for this subordinate. There are four styles:

13

The directing style is used for subordinates with a D1 level of development, the enthusiastic beginners, for they are highly motivated but possess little skills yet. This would, for example, be a beginner in horse riding. The trainer mainly needs to display directive behaviour to teach the necessary skills while hardly any supportive behaviour is necessary.

After a while the apprentice will move along the development line and the curve and become a disillusioned learner. He or she has experienced some disappointments and excitement decreased. Here the trainer needs to use the coaching style, which includes supportive behaviour while maintaining the standard of directive behaviour, as the apprentice still has to learn a lot.

Further along the curve, the apprentice becomes a reluctant contributor who possesses most of the necessary skills and only needs support and encouragement from the trainer to keep the training up. This is called supporting style.

Finally the apprentice becomes a peak performer, fully self-sufficient in his or her skills and self-motivated. Here the trainer hardly needs to show any supportive or directing behaviour, which is called delegating style.

The horse rider, however, can move back along the line, for example due to injuries or longer breaks, and then the trainer has to adapt his style to the new situation.

14

4. Motivation Theories

Motivation can be defined as “a process that starts with a physiological or psychological deficiency or need that activates a behavior or a drive that is aimed at a goal or incentive” (Luthans 2002, p. 249).

Figure 3: The Motivational Process (source: Luthans 2002, p. 249)

A need could, for example, be a lack of food, water or friends. This need leads to a drive or motive, which is “a deficiency with a direction” (Luthans 2002, p. 250). This would be hunger, thirst and a drive for affiliation. The end of this process is the incentive, which is “anything that will alleviate a need and reduce a drive” (Luthans 2002, p. 250). Here this is eating, drinking and obtaining friends. Now the imbalance that caused the need is overcome and the drive ends.

There are three kinds of drives or motives:

Primary motives are “unlearned and physiologically based”. Examples are “hunger, thirst, sleep, avoidance of pain, sex, and maternal concern” (Luthans 2002, p. 250). ´Primary`, however, does not imply that these motives are always prior to others. General motives are “unlearned but not physiologically based”, which is true for ”curiosity, manipulation, activity, and affection” (Luthans 2002, p. 250).. Secondary motives describe learned drives. Examples are power, achievement and affiliation (see 2.1.7.)

15

4.1 Content Motivation Theories

“The theories of motivation associated with the forces within us (desires, drives and needs) are categorised as ´need theories´ or ´content theories´…(and) concentrate on the inputs of motivation” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 52). They are static and past- or present-time orientated.

4.1.1 Force and Coercion Model

This model is based on forcing people to do things or change their behaviour by using threats, fear and punishment as negative extrinsic motivators, often destroying intrinsic motivation (see 4.1.4). It is closely related to the autocratic leadership, McGregor´s Theory X, Likert´s system 1 and position 9.1 in the Managerial Grid. It can be observed in correction facilities or the armed forces, where it may be appropriate.

4.1.2 Economic Model

In economic models workers are regarded as machines, neglecting the human factor. Smith stated that “people work primarily for money” (Lecture Notes).

Frederick Taylor developed ´Scientific Management´. He assumed that “workers were often lazy and produced far less than… capable of” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 4). Basically this represents McGregor´s Theory X. He therefore tried to “determine scientifically how workers could maximise output” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 5). His conclusions were, for example, that “money is the primary motivator” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 51), and therefore suggested payment by results. This is related to the equity theory, as Taylor assumes that workers will lose their motivation when feeling paid unfairly (see 4.2.2).

Another characteristic is to break down each job in small components to achieve high specialisation. This neglected the human factor of work, like the negative implications of “dull, routine and unchallenging” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 5) work and lead to its antithesis in the Human Relations approach.

Even though Taylorism became condemned in 1914 (Petzall et al 1991, p. 5), it has been implemented in numerous factories with reasonable success.

16

Weber assumed that “bureaucracy (is) the most efficient and equitable form of structure” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 193). It “is highly standardised, every one knows their duties and follows them to the letter” (Lecture Notes). A good example for this is the system most public or governmental organisations use.

4.1.3 Hawthorne Studies (Mayo) - The Hawthorne Effect

Elton Mayo, the father of the Human Relations Theory, stated that “social factors are the primary source of satisfaction and motivation” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 52). This was his conclusion from the Hawthorne studies. The actual aim was to “examine the relationship between light intensity on the shop floor … and employee productivity” (Luthans 2002, p. 16). To do so the light level was first increased, and productivity rose. But even when “subsequent phases brought the level of light down to moonlight intensity” (Luthans 2002, p. 17), productivity kept rising, which suggested the existence of another factor: the human factor.

In subsequent phases studies in the relay room were conducted. Here “specific variables, such as length of workday, rest breaks, and method of payment” (Luthans 2002, p. 17) were tested with the same result: productivity rose, even when conditions went back to the original stage.

In the bank wiring room study the researchers “tried to leave the environmental conditions unchanged´” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 9), for example by using the normal supervisors. The results were contradictory to the earlier studies, especially due to the occurrence of a informal group norm which was lower than the norm implemented by management. Whoever exceeded this norm received social pressures like name-calling, and therefore reduced his or her output back to group standard.

The workers stated that they preferred to work in the test room because of the small group, the type of supervision, earnings, novelty of the situation, interest in the experiment, and attention received (Luthans 2002, p. 18).

The last three items are associated with the Hawthorne effect. A lot of scientists assume that “increases in the relay room productivity can be attributed solely to the

17

fact that the participants in the study were given special attention and that they were enjoying a novel, interesting experience” (Luthans 2002, p. 18), while neglecting the other items.

4.1.4 Extrinsic versus Intrinsic Motivation

Motives can be caused by needs, as mentioned above, but “also by two separate but interrelated sets of sources” (Luthans 2002, p. 257). On the one hand there are extrinsic motives. These are “tangible and visible to others… distributed by other people… usually contingency based” (Luthans 2002, p. 257). In an organisation this includes financial, material or social rewards.

Intrinsic motives on the other hand are characterised by being “internally generated”, and “include feelings of responsibility, achievement, accomplishment, … feelings of being challenged” (Luthans 2002, p. 258), for example the feeling that one´s work is meaningful.

The cognitive evaluation theory suggests that both are closely related (Luthans 2002, p. 258). When extrinsic motivators are chosen well, they can help to strengthen intrinsic motivation, while they also can, if chosen poorly, diminish it. For example, when an author who enjoys writing (intrinsic motivation) is subjected to pressure, like a deadline, he is likely to stop enjoying the writing. Also money (extrinsic motivator) can become the key motivator for an author, reducing intrinsic motivation.

4.1.5 Maslow

Maslow is one advocate of the neohuman relations approach, which is closely related to McGregor´s theory Y. He assumes that “a person´s motivational needs could be arranged in a hierarchical manner… (and) that once a given level of need is satisfied, it no longer serves to motivate” (Luthans 2002, p. 260). Therefore the needs of the next level become the person´s main motivators.

18

Figure 4: Maslow´s hierarchy of needs

(source: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1650/htmlmaslow.html)

Physiological needs equal the primary needs discussed earlier. For example, if a person is starving the first aim will be to get food. But once that person´s stomach is filled, more food will not be motivating.

Safety or security needs include psychical and emotional safety. This can be provided by health insurance, pensions and seniority plans (Luthans 2002, p. 261). Love or social needs “correspond to the affection and affiliation needs” (Luthans 2002, p. 261) and means having friends or to belong to a group. Esteem needs, including “both self-esteem and esteem from others” belong to the “higher needs of humans” (Luthans 2002, p. 261). It corresponds to the needs for achievement, power and status (see 4.1.7). This can be provided by promotions or status symbols like a bigger office.

Finally, the needs for self-actualisation are “the person´s motivation to transform perception of self into reality” (Luthans 2002, p. 261). Once this level is obtained people become “self-fulfilled and have realized all their potential” (Luthans 2002, p. 261). An example for this would be a manager who takes a sabbatical (a year off work) to realize his dream about sailing around the world. This is related to intrinsic motivation.

19

The problem of this theory is its assumption of a hierarchical order. In reality, most people try to attempt self-actualization before other needs have been satisfied.

4.1.6 Alderfer

Alderfer tried to overcome these problems. He reduced the five categories to three: “existence (E), relatedness (R) and growth (G)” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 56), with E including Maslow´s physiological and part of his safety needs, R describing parts of safety needs, all social needs and parts of esteem needs, while G relates to parts of esteem needs and all self-actualisation needs.

There are two main differences to Maslow´s theory. Firstly, “he assumes that all needs are active at the same time” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 57), which suggests “more of a continuum of needs than hierarchical levels” (Luthans 2002, p. 265). Secondly, if a person cannot satisfy a higher order need, that “person will regress back to seeking more fulfilment of lower order needs” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 57). This means if one fails to get a promotion at work (esteem), he or she will concentrate more on friends and family (social) to make up for the failure.

20

4.1.7 Herzberg

Herzberg applied Maslow´s model to an industry setting. With the critical incident technique he identified “incidents associated … with satisfaction and dissatisfaction at work” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 57).

He found two major categories: Firstly, most factors associated with positive feelings “concerned the content of the work itself” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 57), for example “achievement, recognition, work itself, responsibility, advancement” (Luthans 2002, p. 263). These factors equal higher order needs. Secondly, most negative feelings were connected with the work environment or context (Petzall et al 1991, p. 58) like “status, salary, interpersonal relationships, supervision, company policy” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 58), which equal lower order needs.

Herzberg called the “satisfiers motivators, and …the dissatisfiers hygiene factors” (Luthans 2002, p. 263). Hygiene expresses that these factors are useful to prevent dissatisfaction, like hygiene can prevent diseases. But just as hygiene itself cannot heal diseases, hygiene factors alone cannot lead to motivation.

Figure 6: Herzberg´s two factor theory (source: adapted from Lecture Notes)

As Figure 6 illustrates, with the provision of hygiene factors dissatisfaction can become less (to the right), but only a neutral level (0), no satisfaction, can be achieved. However, ”if the hygiene factors are unsatisfactory… people will become dissatisfied” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 58).

Motivators can lead to satisfaction, but with a lack of motivators “people will simply not be dissatisfied” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 58).

For example, when a skiing class is held in a snowstorm, it will lead to dissatisfaction. On the other hand, only good weather will not lead to satisfaction. Satisfaction will occur when a student has the feeling that he learns a lot.

21

This theory resulted in a focus on motivators, whereas before “management had generally concentrated on the hygiene factors” (Luthans 2002, p. 264).

4.1.8 McClelland

McClelland identifies three major needs: need for achievement (n Ach), need for power (n Pow), and need for affiliation (n Aff) (Luthans 2002, p. 252, Petzall et al 1991, p. 60).

The need for achievement, McClellands main focus, “represents a desire to excel in competition with others and in one´s own internalised standards” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 60). “There seems to be a causal relationship between N.Ach. scores… and entrepreneurial success” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 61). While it naturally only occurs in ca. 10 % of the population McClelland states that “it can be improved or increased… through appropriate training programmes” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 60).

McClelland identified several major characteristics of high achievers: They are intrinsically motivated. This means, for example, a sales person who is motivated by the satisfaction of selling a lot, without regard to pay-rises. They like “to set their own goals” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 61), and select their goals with care. Low achievers “take either a high or low risk, and high achievers take a moderate risk” (Luthans 2002, p. 254), that will challenge their abilities but is achievable. Selling 100 cars a day is unrealistic, none is very low, while 3 is possible. They have a “need for immediate feedback” (Luthans 2002, p. 254), like seeing the success of selling a car. Therefore they choose professions like sales and marketing. Finally, they show a “preoccupation with the task” (Luthans 2002, p. 254), which does not allow them to leave anything half-finished.

The need for power means “the need to manipulate others or the drive for being in charge of others” (Luthans 2002, p. 253). This is useful for managers of bigger firms.

The need for affiliation is “the degree to which people seek approval from others, conform to their wishes, and avoid conflicts” (Luthans 2002, p. 256). This is related to Maslow´s social need, and has been observed in the Hawthorne studies.

22

4.2 Process (Cognitive) Motivation Theories

While need or content theories attempt to identify what motivates people, process theories concentrate on “the interplay between different factors in the motivation process” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 64). Progress theories are also called cognitive, because they assume that “people engage in forms of conscious behaviour at work” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 64).

4.2.1 Expectancy Theory (VIE)

Vroom´s model involves four variables shown in figure 7:

Figure 7: Expectancy theory

(source: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1650/htmlexpectancy.html )

Expectancy is the “belief about the likelihood … of a particular action… being followed by a particular outcome” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 65) or performance, and is an action-outcome relation. For example, when taking part in a training program this would be the expectancy of the action of learning hard being followed by the outcome of a good grade. This determines the effort put into the action. A second factor is “the instrumentality of the first-level outcome in obtaining a desired second-level outcome” (Luthans 2002, p. 266), and is an “outcome-outcome relation” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 65). This would be a promotion being caused by the good mark in the training.

Thirdly, valence means “the strength of an individual´s preference for a particular outcome” (Luthans 2002, p. 266), like how important the promotion is for the

23

person. The product of all three variables is called force. It “determines whether a person will perform a particular act” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 65).

This model is related to Herzberg´s theory, but while Herzberg only assumes one level of outcomes, Vroom´s model has two.

In addition to this, this model can be related to the findings of the Hawthorne Studies concerning the existence of a internal group norm.

Figure 8: Paths A and B (source: Lecture Notes)

When a worker makes a high effort, he expects high performance. From this he expects further outcomes, which can be either positive (high pay) or negative (group obstracism). The valence then decides his behaviour: if pay is more important, group behaviour will be ignored. If group acceptance is more important, the person will change to path B, the ´path of the heroes´, to achieve acceptance by the heroes, people that do not want to work hard and try to lower others´ performance.

24

4.2.2 Equity Theory

The main assumption is that “a major input into job performance and satisfaction is the degree of equity (or inequity) that people perceive in their work situation” (Luthans 2002, p. 271), and therefore is based on persons´ subjective feelings. It is based on the following calculation:

Figure 9: Equity theory

(source: adapted from Petzall et al 1991, p. 68)

A perception of inequity occurs when “a person perceives that the ratio of his or her outcomes to inputs and the ration of a relevant other´s outcomes to inputs are unequal” (Luthans 2002, p. 271). This leads to an attempt to restore equality, for example by trying to “alter inputs or outcomes, … leave the field, act on the other, or change the other” (Luthans 2002, p 272). This will also occur when the person feels in advantage.

For example, when a worker feels underpaid he or she might either reduce effort or try to sabotage the other´s inputs. When feeling overpaid, that person might raise his or her inputs. This can be used as a motivational force, which was one basic suggestion of Taylor.

4.2.3 Goal Setting Theory

The main idea is that “people strive to attain goals in order to satisfy their emotions and desires” (Luthans 2002, p. 519). According to Locke, goal setting is “the managerial technique with the most direct managerial applications” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 68), because goals can be changed more easily than values or motives, because “need and value are … along with the person´s knowledge and premises, what determine goals” (Luthans 2002, p. 520).

25

Figure 10: Goal setting theory

(source: adapted from Luthans 2002 p. 519 and lecture notes)

“Goals provide a direction to our behaviour and guide our thoughts and actions to one outcome rather than another” (Lecure Notes). This is why “employees will perform better if they are assigned a specific amount of work to be accomplished” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 68). Goals should be specific, challenging but attainable, and owned and accepted (Luthans 2002, pp. 520-522). This means, for example, that for a sales person a good goal would be his own decision to sell 3 cars a day.

Locke claims that actually Taylorism is the forerunner of the goal setting theory.

4.3 Reinforcement Motivation Theories

Whereas content and process theories try to explain the reasons behind people´s behaviour, the reinforcement theories examine “the effects of the environment on the individual” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 73) by using behaviourist ideas, assuming “that individuals are conditioned to react in particular ways to stimuli from their environment, rather than being driven by internal forces” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 73).

4.3.1 Skinner´s Operant Conditioning

Operant conditioning assumes “that behaviour is conditioned or learnt as the results of the consequences flowing from it” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 73). When a child burns its hand on a candle, it will not attempt to touch the fire again. This represents the behaviourist stimulus-response model.

26

There are different forms of consequences.

(source: adapted from Luthans 2002 p. 545)

Positive reinforcers increase “behaviour by the presentation of a desirable consequence“ (Luthans 2002, p. 545) and therefore the probability that the action is repeated. A pay increase for a productive worker reinforces hard work. Negative reinforcers also increase the probability of repetition, but do so “by the threat of the use of an undesirable consequence or the termination …of an undesirable consequence” (Luthans 2002, p. 545). A student that is not bothered by the teacher due to looking understanding gets negatively reinforced. Punishment is “anything that weakens behaviour and tends to decrease its subsequent frequency” (Luthans 2002, p. 546). This can either be the application of a negative consequence like termination, or the withdrawal of something positive, like a day off.

Extinction, on the other hand, “involves the withholding of any reinforcement, positive or negative” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 74). All other consequences include attention, which can lead to reinforcement because they are “defined and operationalized by (their) effects on behavior” (Luthans 2002, p. 546). This means that if one does not perceive something as punishment he can get reinforced by the attention. Ignorance is more likely to eliminate undesired behaviour.

The major critique is that it is proven that humans are not only influenced by external inputs, leading to the newer behaviouristic stimulus-organism-responsemodel. In addition to this the theory ignores the existence of intrinsic motivation and seems to be “little more than variations on the views of Frederick Taylor” (Petzall et al 1991, p. 76).

27

5. Leadership and Communication

Communication is defined by the following process:

Figure 12: The communication process (source: Lecture Notes)

An example is a normal chat: Person A (sender) talks to person B (receiver), by encoding his thoughts (message) into language, using speech as a media to transport his message to B, who understands the language (decode). His response might be a verbal answer or a nod, giving A feedback that the message was understood. The contents of the message “play a very minor role in your impact” (McGarvey 1990, p. 1). Other factors like “tone of voice, … nonverbal elements such as dress, grooming, boy language” (McGarvey 1990, p. 1) are far more influencing.

“Clear communication… is designed to reduce uncertainty … (so that) necessary understanding can occur” (Chartier 1976, p. 149). This understanding, or en- and decoding, can be improved by various factors, like having a clear picture of one´s message, having a positive attitude to the sender, knowing one´s communication skills and the receiver´s psychological “frame of reference” as well as the “communication context” (Chartier 1976, pp150-151). Furthermore it can be improved by making “the message relevant” to the listener, using simple terms and defining them before usage, having a good structure, repeating and emphasising essential issues, relating “new ideas to old ideas”, using all available channels like body language, speech, eye contact etc., providing feedback, minimising noise, which is any disturbance, and adapting the pace to the “listening person´s rate of comprehension” (Chartier 1976,p p .151-155).

28

6. Leadership and Feedback

Feedback helps us “to see ourselves as others see us” (Hanson 1975, p. 147), and adapt our behaviour. It is closely related to goal setting and the communication process and can be given verbally or nonverbally.

Constructive feedback should be a direct expression of feelings, like saying “I like you”, be a non-evaluative description of behaviour not an interpretation. It should be specific to help the receiver improve, while giving him the freedom of choice whether he wants to change. It should happen immediately and can be more effective if the occasion discussed was group shared, and if feedback is solicited. Finally feedback should have a motivation to help, not to hurt, and therefore should only aim at modifiable behaviour.

7. The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

The basic assumption is that “people behave as they believe they are expected to” (Lecture Notes). One example is the flower girl Eliza Doolittle in Shaw´s ´Pygmalion`, who is turned into a duchess by Professor Henry Higgins. She states “the difference between a lady and a flower girl is not how she behaves but how she´s treated” (Livingston 1988, p. 121).

The self-fulfilling prophecy is related to the reciprocal process of human interaction.

Figure 13: “Reciprocal process of human interaction” (adapted from Lecture Notes)

As illustrated behaviour is influenced by feelings. When A meets B he might find him sympathetic. This influences A´s behaviour and he is friendly to B. This influences B´s feelings towards A, whom he will probably find sympathetic, too. This results in

29

B displaying a friendly behaviour, which reinforces A´s assumption that B is nice. Due to this circular movement this approach is related to the reinforcement theory. This is and example of a positive self-fulfilling prophecy or a pygmalion effect. A negative self-fulfilling prophecy would be when A finds B unsympathetic, in the end leading to A getting reinforced. This circle can either be broken by self-disclosure or feedback.

A positive self-fulfilling prophecy can be divided into two effects: the pygmalion and the galatea effect. Pygmalion was a greek sculptor who carved the statue of Galatea, the perfect woman, who came to life because he believed in it so strongly (Livingston 1988, p. 121). A Pygmalion effect therefore means that someone else´s expectations can influence our behaviour.

Rosenthal´s four factor theory examines how the pygmalion effect works. During his experiments on the influence of “a teacher´s expectation for a pupil´s intellectual competence” (Livingston 1988, p. 123) on the pupil´s performance he found four influencing factors:

The climate in which teacher communicates with his pupils which can include “warmth communicated in both verbal and nonverbal channels”

(http://books.nap.edu/books/POD270/html/6.html#pagetop). This is important, because often a “message… is communicated unintentionally, without conscious action on their part” (Livingston 1988, p. 124) - the teachers did not notice that they treated those pupils differently.

Feedback should be constructive and of high quality. Teachers tended “to give more differentiated feedback to high expectancy students” (http://books.nap.edu/books/POD270/html/6.html#pagetop). The amount of input shows a “tendency to teach more material and more difficult material to high expectancy students” (http://books.nap.edu/books/POD270/html/6.html#pagetop). Output describes the tendency “to spend more time with high expectancy students and provide them with greater opportunities for responding”

(http://books.nap.edu/books/POD270/html/6.html#pagetop). This is influenced by the teacher´s expectations as well as by his or her own self-confidence (Lecture Notes). “Superior managers have greater confidence … in their own ability to develop

30

the talent of their subordinates” (Livingston 1988, p. 126). Another example for this factor is “Sweeney´s Miracle”, where Sweeney managed to teach computer skills to a janitor because he strongly believed in his teaching abilities. This is also related to the Galatea effect.

“The Galatea effect is the power of one´s self-belief or expectations about oneself that will influence our future performance” (lecture notes), and can be seen as one part of the pygmalion effect.

For example if pupils strongly believe in their abilities, this will give them greater selfconfidence and therefore influence their behaviour (galatea effect), for example during oral exams, becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. It also influences what others think of them, and therefore initiates a pygmalion effect.

8. Conclusion

This essay has examined some major theories of leadership and motivation. It can be concluded that these theories offer some good suggestions for managers, how to motivate and lead people. It seems that some approaches, like the self-fulfilling prophecy, can be really powerful instruments to improve management.

However, it became clear that most of them have either not been truly verified by scientific empirical studies, or have even been falsified, like Skinner’s operant conditioning. But according to Bortz (1999) a theory consists of several hypotheses that have been empirically verified in themselves, which is often not the case here. Petzall et al state that a lot of research has been conducted, but still “we know almost nothing on the subject” (Petzall et al (1991), p. 143). Therefore a conclusion would be that more independent research is necessary.

In addition to this it has been seen that these theories cannot fully explain all aspects of human behaviour by themselves, but often only cover aspects. It seems that a combination of all theories might come closer to a real grand theory of motivation and leadership.

31

9. References

Bortz, Jürgen 1999 Statistik für Sozialwissenschaftler (which translates into “statistics for social scientists”), Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

Chartier, Myron R. 1976 Clarity of Expression in Interpersonal Communication In: The 1976 Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators, pp. 149-156 Hanson, Philip G. 1975 Giving Feedback : An Interpersonal Skill In: The 1975 Annual Handbook for Group Facilitators, pp. 147-154 Howat, Gary 2002, lecture notes http://books.nap.edu/books/POD270/html/6.html#pagetop accessed on 18.05.2002, 6 p.m.

http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/1650/htmlobtoc02.html accessed on 13.05.2002, 4 p.m

Livingston, J. 1988 Pygmalion in Management, Harvard Business Review, September, pp. 121-130

Luthans, F. 2002 Organisational Behaviour McGraw-Hill, Tokyo. McGarvey, Robert 1990 Speaking Up In: USAir Magazine November 1990, pp. 106-

108

Petzall, S., Selvarajah, C. & Willis, Q. 1991 Management: A Behavioural Approach Longman Cheshire, Melbourne

32