Employee Motivation Literature Review
In any discipline, the importance of getting people to do what you want is a key leadership skill. This is especially so in my discipline, education. According to Gorozidis and Pappaioannou (2014), self-determination theory (SDT) identifies three types of motivation that can affect people’s behavior—intrinsic, or inner motivation; extrinsic, or outside motivation; and the absence of motivation, or amotivation. The most effective of these is intrinsic motivation, in which the individual engages in the activity simply because he enjoys it rather than because he is being externally pressured or rewarded to do it (Gorozidis & Pappaioannou, 2014). Thus, teachers have a greater likelihood of influencing students to do what they want if they employ intrinsic motivators rather than extrinsic motivators or no motivators at all. Nohria, Groysberg, and Lee (2008) identify the four drives that underlie motivation, i.e., the four basic intrinsic motivators: the drive to acquire, the drive to bond, the drive to comprehend, and the drive to defend. Each of these drives is an inherent component of the human personality, so they are always relevant and generally effective intrinsic motivators. The drive to acquire is insatiable and comparative; we never stop wanting more, and we want to know that we have as much or more than others (Nohria, Groysberg, & Lee, 2008). This drive to acquire can be applied not only to corporate employees who want raises, bonuses, and corner offices, but also to students who want achievement, good grades, and scholarships, as well as the future rewards of a good job and a high income, so this intrinsic motivation is mainly fueled by the desire for external things. The drive to bond is largely overlooked in motivational literature, and yet it is a basic and very powerful human drive. Employees want to bond with their coworkers, and students want to bond with other students. Bonding gives people a feeling of belonging. Nohria, Groysberg, and Lee (2008) state, “The drive to bond, when met, is associated with strong positive emotions like love and caring and, when not, with negative ones like loneliness and anomie” (p. 2). This drive is equally as significant among students as among workers and can be leveraged to promote greater motivation to do what the teacher wants done. Moreover, the authors emphasize that this drive is the most influential one in terms of employee commitment, so it can be assumed that it is also the most influential for students as well. The drive to comprehend is the most obvious motivator for students. Nohria, Groysberg, and Lee (2008) explain that people “want very much to make sense of the world around us,” which gives rise to theories that help us understand events and figure out how to respond reasonably to them. Encountering things that seem to make no sense is frustrating, but being able to figure out the answers invigorates us (Nohria, Groysberg, & Lee, 2008). We want to be challenged to grow and learn, but tasks that are boring or dead-ended demoralize us (Nohria, Groysberg, & Lee, 2008). The drive to defend leads to a desire to “create institutions that promote justice, that have clear goals and intentions, and that allow people to express their ideas and opinions,” which creates an environment in which people feel secure and confident (Nohria, Groysberg, & Lee, 2008). This is the ideal environment in which students can learn, because feeling threatened is distracting but feeling safe allows them to focus intently on what they are learning. Motivation in education is a pivotal topic, because regardless of how impressive a school’s or a teacher’s credentials and resources are, if students are not motivated to learn, those credentials and resources can provide little value. In my personal experience as a teacher, I have found that students are most motivated to learn when they find the subject enjoyable, when they feel...
References: Claywell, L., Pennington, K., & Spade, C. (2014). An exploration of the influence of Ignatian values on faculty role expectations. Jesuit Higher Education, 3(1), 1-8. Retrieved on May 26, 2015 from: http://www.jesuithighereducation.org/index.php/jhe/article/viewFile/75/pdf
Gorozidis, G., & Papaioannou, A.G. (2014). Teachers’ motivation to participate in training and to implement innovations. Teaching and Teacher Education, 39, 1-11. Retrieved on May 26, 2015 from: http://www.selfdeterminationtheory.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/2014_GorozidisPapaioannou.pdf
Kitching, C.J. (2013). Challenges and change for future leadership: the laicisation of leadership in Australian Jesuit schools. ACU Leadership Conference 2013. Research Online. Retrieved on May 26, 2015 from: http://researchonline.nd.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1073&context=edu_conference&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fscholar.google.com%2Fscholar%3Fq%3D%2522jesuit%2Bvalues%2522%2BAND%2Beducation%2BAND%2Bmotivator%26hl%3Den%26as_sdt%3D0%252C14%26as_ylo%3D2011#search=%22jesuit%20values%20education%20motivator%22
Nohria, N., Groysberg, B., & Lee, L.-E. (2008). Employee motivation: A powerful new model. Harvard Business Review, (July-Aug), 1-8.
Please join StudyMode to read the full document