This essay presents various models, concepts, principles, and theories pertaining to “motivation” and “leadership” demonstrated in present-day groups and organizations.
Personal preferences over the others are chosen from which action plans for self improvement are developed.Introduction As participant and member of workforce in society, there have always been elements of leadership and followership involved in each role I played in groups or organizations that I interacted in; and as a leader, I have been called many times to direct and to exert control over some people toward the achievement of group/team goals under my responsibility. Does this “goal” thing really make people busy in organizations? According to Thomas (1963), these “busy people” have two things in common—first, they are engaged in “earning their living … for their basic needs, like, food; … second, … each one … [is] contributing to the production of goods or services needed by other members of the community.” This is known as “economic activity” and the “collective harmonious efforts of the people … is called an economic system” (pp.
9-10).Organization Koontz, O’Donnell, and Weihrich (1980) write that people form groups “in a unified manner toward the achievement of common goals” (p. 626) and define organization as “all behavior of all participants in a group” (p. G-11).
Where an organization exists, people are found. Donnellon (1993) writes about “politics” and “power” in organizations where she defines “politics” as the “study of who gets what, when, and how.” Power “is the ability to produce change by mobilizing one or more people to take action,” and “[i]nfluence is the exercise of that ability” (pp. 113-114).
Donnellon (1993) provides six sources of power in an organization employed particularly by managers: position, resources, information, expertise, performance, and personal attraction; power are of two types: formal and informal; and there are two distinctions of power: “legitimate” and “illegitimate power” (pp. 122-125). Donnellon (1993) also writes about three strategies in influencing human behavior inside an organization: threat, exchange, and appeal (pp. 127-128).
To Donnellon (1993), mastering these powers “may prove dangerous” so that one must adopt an “antidote” for them—“clear thinking about the ethics of power.” Donnellon (1993) warns of the tendency of power becoming “an end in itself” instead of a “means to other ends”; however, she offers this valuable insight: “effective organizations need power and influential people.”Nature of people In order to appreciate the theories of “motivation,” an understanding of the “nature of people” is necessary. Koontz, et.
al. (1980) present Schein’s viewpoints: the “rational-economic man”—“people are primarily motivated by economic incentives”; the “social man”—“motives fall into … a hierarchy ranging from simple needs for survival … to … self-actualization”; the “self-actualizing man”—similar with “social man”; and the “complex man”—“people are complex and variable and have many motives which combine into a complex motive pattern” (pp. 612-613). McGregor’s Theory X (“average human beings have an inherent dislike of work and will avoid it if they can”); and Theory Y (“people will exercise self-direction and self-control in the service of objectives”) (pp.
614-615).Motivation Merriam-Webster define “motive” as a word derived from Latin “mov?re, to move.” Koontz, et. al.
(1980) write: “Human motives are based on needs … such as … water, air, food … self-esteem, status ….” Berelson and Steiner define motive as “an inner state that energizes, activates, or moves … [and] directs or channels behavior toward goals.” The “basic element of all human behavior [in business setting] is some kind of activity … physical or mental … [that] are goal-oriented [and] … people do things that lead them to accomplish something.” Motivators, on the other hand, “are those things which induce an individual to perform” (pp.
631-634).Koontz, et. al. (1980) provide various theories of “motivation” some are presented here: The “carrot and stick” (still practiced by many managers today—the “carrot” part is “money” … the “stick” part is in the form of “fear.
” Maslow’s “hierarchy of needs” (physiological needs, security or safety needs, affiliation or acceptance needs, esteem needs, need for actualization) (pp. 635-636).Herzberg’s motivator-hygiene approach to motivation—emphasizes a “two-factor explanation of motivation.” The “first group of needs are such things as company policy and administration, supervision, working conditions, interpersonal relations, [etc.
] ….” These variables, however, were found to be only “dissatisfiers” and “not” motivators. The second group, called ‘satisfiers’ … are all related to “job content.” They include the “factors of achievement, recognition … advancement, and growth in the job.
” They are “motivators”—their existence stimulates “feelings of satisfaction.” The “first group” is called “maintenance’ or “hygiene” factors; the second group is called “job content factors.” In contrast to Herzberg’s theory, Koontz, et. al.
(1980) stress the findings of other researchers who verified the work of Herzberg that “what motivates individuals was found to be largely a matter of personality” (pp. 638-639).Leadership The “essence of leadership is followership … it is the willingness of people to follow that makes a person a leader … people tend to follow those whom they perceive as providing means of achieving their own desires, wants, and needs”—this makes “leadership and motivation … closely interconnected.” Leadership is “the art or process of influencing people so that they will strive willingly toward the achievement of group goals … To lead is to guide, conduct, direct, and precede.
Leaders … place themselves before the group as they facilitate progress … and inspire the group to accomplish organizational goals” (Koontz, et. al., 1980, pp. 660-661).
The Trait Approach to Leadership is the “earliest study of leadership that introduced the ‘great man’ theory—[i.e.,] leaders are born and not made.” The Situational Approach to Leadership arose “after the disillusionment with the ‘great man’ [theory which led] to the study of situations and the belief that leaders are the product of given situations … This approach … supports the follower theory that people tend to follow those in whom they perceive” capable of helping in accomplishing “their own personal desires” (Koontz, et.
al., 1980, pp. 664-666).Fiedler’s Contingency Approach to Leadership is a “combination” of the “Trait Approach” and “Situational Approach.
” Fiedler’s theory implies that “leadership is any process in which the ability of a leader to exercise influence depends upon the group task situation and the degree to which the leader’s style, personality, and approach fit the group … people become leaders not only because of the attributes of their personality but also because of various situation factors and the interaction between the leaders and the situation.” Fiedler found three ‘critical dimensions’ of a “situation” that affect a leader’s most effective style which are: position power, task structure and leader-member relations. Fiedler advanced two major styles of leadership: task-oriented from which a “leader gains satisfaction from seeing tasks performed” and achieving good interpersonal relations and toward attaining a position of personal prominence. Fiedler’s theory is a correlation of “task directed” and “human relationships” within a matrix of “style of leadership” and “situation favorableness and unfavorableness.
” Fiedler found that “if the situation is highly favorable, a task-oriented leader is most suitable for the job; if a situation is moderately unfavorable or favorable, the human relations-oriented leader was found to be most effective.” Koontz, et. al. (1980) concludes that “the nature and style of the most effective leadership depend upon the situation … the major situation variables are likely to be the leader’s personality, the nature of leader-member relations … the task, and organizational climate of the enterprise” (pp.
667-670).Summary This essay presented two major subjects of management—motivation and leadership—along with associated theories, principles and concepts. The knowledge acquired reinforces my “frame of reference” for personal effectiveness in transacting with others in communities and/or organizations I interact in. Table 1 reflects the impact of these topics on me.
Table 1. The impact of acquired knowledge on “Motivation and Leadership.”1. What leadership model, style, or theory describes meFiedler’s contingency model focused on task orientation.
2. My most distinguishing leadership traitsHonesty/integrity.3. As a follower what leadership style do I preferEffective follower.
4. What motivational model/theory best describes how I influence othersI advocate Herzberg`s “two factor theory” and “reinforcement” perspectives.5. What plan of action to improve my leadership· Balance people and task orientation.
· To practice these “cultivated behaviors of leaders” written by Koontz, et. al. (1980): (a) awareness (b) empathy (c) objectivity (d) self-knowledge.· To develop and practice these abilities (as Koontz, et.
al. (1980) have written): (a) ability to comprehend the that human beings have differing motivating forces of varying times and in different situations (b) ability to inspire (c) ability to act (the style) in a way that will develop a climate for responding to and arousing motivations.6. What plan of action to improve my motivational skills· Team management.
· Appropriate utilization of intrinsic & extrinsic rewards system.7. Timeline to complete each self-improvement goalsSix (6) months.References Donnellon, Anne (1993).
Power, Politics, and Influence: the Savvy and Substance of Action inOrganizations. In Allan R. Cohen, The Portable MBA in Management (pp. 113-146).
New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Koontz, Harold, O’Donnell, Cyril & Weihrich, Heinz. (1980). Management (7th ed.
). Tokyo, Japan: McGraw-Hill.Thomas, S. Evelyn.
(1963) Teach yourself Economics (Rev. ed.). London: The English Universities Press Ltd.
