Motivation in Groups

Motivation in Groups

Introduction: The Motivation to study Motivation

Organizations can be seen as pools of humans, whose collective output represents the organization's output delivering the organizational goal(s). Therefore, there exists a continuous search for ways and means to attract, develop, retain and motivate talent for continuous improvement in performance. In this context, the study of motivation assumes great importance, and at individual level represents the most widely researched human behaviour.

As a large part of organizational functioning is in groups, the identification and nurturing of group motivation are crucial. This paper attempts to review the available literature on group motivation and attempts to propose a few hypotheses which could help improve the present understanding of group motivational behaviours.

Literature review

Being a well addressed topic in the past, literature covers a wide horizon of motivation, however, majority of it is focused

on individual human beings. Abundant research shows that the behaviour of people is different as individuals and in groups. Modern organizations can no longer afford to depend on individual brilliance, and highly competitive environment calls for building of teams in organizations which represent the wide variety of knowledge, skills and abilities which can steer it to success.

The most widely discussed and critiqued human behaviour theory has been the one propounded by Sigmund Freud (1856-1939). He stated that the unconscious is the source of our motivation. He vehemently claimed that the unconscious was a vast majority of the mind compared to preconscious and conscious, and sex was the primary motivator, albeit largely unconsciously, for human actions. A large number of theorists since Freud have challenged and suggested alternative models of human motivational behaviour. The most prominent amongst them are discussed below.

Alfred Adler (1870-1937) propounded that the aggression drive or desire to strive for perfection in individuals is a strong motivator for them to achieve envisioned objectives. He perceived motivation as a force to move towards the future, which suggests that our future goals, ideals and purposes can be influential motivators (this phenomenon is called teleology).

Abraham Maslow (1908-1970) borrowed the idea of self actualisation from the famous book "The Organism" (Kurt Goldstein, 1934). While working with monkeys he noticed that some needs take precedence over others which led to his famous hierarchy of needs, in the order - the physiological needs, the safety and security needs, the love and belonging needs, the esteem needs, (these four are called the deficit needs), and finally, the self-actualization needs. The five types of needs are represented in a table below:

S. No. Class of need Example

1 Physiological needs Oxygen, food, water, rest, sleep, sex etc.

2 Safety and security needs Safe environment, circumstances, stability etc.

3 Love and belonging needs Friends, spouse, children, et al.

4 Esteem needs Respect from others, and self-respect.

5 Self-actualization needs To be all that you can be.

Maslow talks about the levels of needs in terms of homeostasis, a temperature measuring device in furnaces, which switches the need on and off as and when the need arises or is satisfied. Further, he calls these needs as 'instinctoid' (instinct like), with the first four being survival needs classifying the first four levels of needs as deficit needs (D needs) and, the last level differently as growth motivation, being needs (B-needs), and self-actualization. In the last phase of his life, he propounded the transpersonal psychology as the fourth force (the earlier three forces being: first - Freudian, second - Behaviorism, and third - his own humanism) in psychology which investigated meditation, higher levels of consciousness etc. The last level of need, in short, represents a continuous desire to be all that you can be.

Donald Snygg (1904-1967) and Arthur W. Combs (1912-1999) argued that all behaviour is determined by the phenomenal field, in other words the subjective reality. Unfortunately, their theory is outshined by those propounded by Carl Rogers (1902-1987), and that of George Kelley (1905-1967) propounding constructive alternativism, though neither is very different. These theories stress the basic need of all individuals to preserve and enhance the phenomenal self. Rogers, simplistically, held that there is an inner desire in all people to develop their potential to the fullest, which suggests that given gradually rising opportunities, people are likely to lay effort and improve their abilities to meet the needs of the situation. He propounded that this desire arises from an individual's need for positive self-regard.

Carl Jung (1875-1961), a contemporary of Freud, differed from him in several ways. He had studied, amongst other religions, Buddhism and Hinduism deeply, from where his thoughts reflected largely and provides insights into human behaviour which other authors have built on. Otto Rank (1884-1939) shared interests close to but not similar with Jung and Freud. He proposed a rather simple model of categorization of humans into adapted, neurotic and productive types, being respectively, in simple words, will suppressors, will arguers, and will fulfillers. The development of will suppressors and arguers into will fulfillers poses a challenge for psychologists even today. Techniques of motivation to achieve this are frantically required, as a large chunk of the workforce, and many believe a majority, is represented by them.

Simultaneously, Karen Horney (1885-1952) suggested the neurotic model of human behaviour which continues to be held in awe to this day, however, several critiques discard it as stretching simple principles too far and deep. She suggested that an individual's need for affection and approval drive the person to please others and be liked by them. Similar other wide needs were classified by her into three broad coping strategies - Compliance, Aggression, and Withdrawal (which experts in large numbers value as fundamental behaviour description model even today). Perhaps, research can reveal methods to clearly identify the dominant environmental characteristics for different individuals which elicit these behaviours in them. Such knowledge can support design of motivational methods for adoption by organizations for their employee teams.

Gordon Allport (1897-1967)