Motivation can be defined in different ways; in this case we will focus on those that are connected to a place of work (Forey, 2004), like Google organization. Motivation is derived from the word motive which according to Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary, refers to the longing to act. Therefore, motivation refers to the action of making an individual to act on a situation. A person has the choice of getting motivated or not. It is not possible for someone to force another to become motivated. However, there are factors that trigger one to be unmotivated towards their work; among them are life events and attitude (Forey, 2004).
At the workplace, a motivated person tends to attain personal and organizational goals with ease because they have an inner force that drives them to achieve and accomplishes their goals (Forey, 2004). In most cases, a more motivated employee can be gauged by their organizational commitment as well as their attachments with the organization. Managers are in a position to provide their staffs with incentives to help them achieve their personal and organizational goals.
Theories of Motivation
It has taken long for the scientists to begin studying and trying to explain motivation at the place of work. There has evolved the need to answer these questions:
What causes people to act the way they do?
Why are some lazy and others hardworking?
Why do employees portray different levels of commitment and fulfillment at their workplaces?
What is the manager’s role in enhancing the performance of his workers?
As a result, many theories have cropped up with an aim of describing motivation. The theories that have been accepted by the society include Adams Equity theory, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Herzberg’s two-factor theory.
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory
According to Maslow, every person need should be warranted. In his theory, he clearly represents the needs in a pyramid. Everyone has to start from the bottom of the pyramid moving up. Only after accomplishing the needs of the first level can one move to the next level (Lam and Lambermont, 2010). At the core are the most basic physiological needs. An individual cannot survive without food, water, shelter, clothing, and sleep. The next level is security in terms of the persons surrounding’s. A person and their family need to feel secure in their environment this symbolizes stability. Financial security is also paramount: it could come from a good job position, insurance, and retirement package.
The third level is an affiliation, which is the need to connect with others. Google organization employees need to feel loved at their place of work, which makes them feel like part of the organization. The next level outlines esteem on how an individual views himself. It affects how one relates with others. Self-actualization is the final level; it is achieved after meeting all the other needs and being the best individual one can be. According to Maslow self-actualization is a gradual process. Evidently, there is a need for motivation in order for a person to reach self-actualization (Quigley and Tymon, 2006).
Hertzberg’s Two – Factor Theory
In the 1950s, Frederick Herzberg developed the two-factor theory of motivation which is Motivator factors and Hygiene factors. The motivator factor leads to the advanced likelihood of success. The reason being that motivator factor creates employees satisfaction hence motivating them to work harder (Ashkanasy and Daus, 2002). Reinforcement rewards and career progression are some of the examples. The strength of the motivating factor depends on employee’s satisfaction and also organizations success. Alternatively, degraded hygiene factors such as rewards generate to the weakness of this theory. Employees needed to feel motivated and supported to facilitate organization growth and success in Google organization.
Adams Equity Theory
Adams Equity Theory basically speaks about striking the balance of how people define a situation and fairness. Adams, the theory’s author, argues that workers use work inputs as a judge of their work situation and equality. It is paramount for the employers to always ensure equality in the workplace so as the workers feel wanted. When workers feel satisfied it will reflect on their performance in the organization (Ashkanasy and Daus, 2002). However, if workers in Google organization feel that they put in so much effort and receive lesser rewards it will result in demotivation, negative attitude, and resignation.
To sum everything up, it is paramount to know how to handle motivation as an employer within the organization. A manager needs to put his worker’s interests at heart, this way they will feel recognized. Everyone is different thus it is very hard for a theory to identify what motivates a specific person (Twenge and Campbell, 2008). What a person needs are the motivational tools as opposed to direct motivation by someone else as discussed above. For an organization to have a fully motivated team, managers need to apply the above suggestions.
Ashkanasy, N.M. and Daus, C.S., 2002. Emotion in the Workplace: The New Challenge for Managers. The Academy of Management Executive, 16(1), pp.76-86.
Forey, G., 2004. Workplace texts: Do they mean the same for Teachers and Business people?. English for Specific Purposes, 23(4), pp.447-469.
Lam, A. and Lambermont-Ford, J.P., 2010. Knowledge Sharing in Organizational Contexts: A Motivation-Based Perspective. Journal of knowledge management, 14(1), pp.51-66.
Quigley, N.R. and Tymon Jr, W.G., 2006. Toward an Integrated Model of Intrinsic Motivation and Career Self-management. Career development international, 11(6), pp.522-543.
Twenge, J.M. and Campbell, S.M., 2008. Generational Differences in Psychological Traits and Their Impact on the Workplace. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23(8), pp.862-877.