Motivation: Building Performance through People

How do I motivate my people to reach higher levels of performance?” Although a common question, the answer is complicated. In fact, no topic in the field of organizational behavior and leadership has garnered more research attention.(1)

Part of the complexity is due to the idiosyncratic nature of the issue. Motivation is a personal internal decision, and even the best among us is unable to make someone be motivated.(2) However, we can affect motivation. We do so by creating conditions, contexts, and cultures that promote motivation and enable it to flourish. We can structure work situations, responsibilities, and challenges to release the full potential of our people.

In many ways, it all comes down to one main factor: knowing your people. Leaders who know their people — understanding their unique needs, grasping their career aspirations, and recognizing the scope of their abilities, talents, interests, strengths, and weaknesses — are poised to positively affect motivation and subsequent performance. It’s an exciting adventure, and we begin by weaving in a bit of theory.

NEED THEORY AND APPLICATIONS

Although need theory is one of the earliest views of motivation, applications of this model still resonate for contemporary leaders. In this section, we examine basic theoretical foundations and share practical ideas and approaches.

Conceptually, need theory posits that it is our needs (and the pursuit of these needs) that drive motivation. Classic need theory stipulates that our needs are arranged in a predictable hierarchy of importance that includes basic physiological needs, safety and security needs, social needs, self-esteem needs, and self-actualization needs — drives for personal realization and opportunities to maximize one’s potential.(3)

The model includes some critical assumptions; two themes are key. The first theme is the basic tenet that our energies and drive are directed toward the need (or set of needs) that are most dominant at the present time — a logical and understandable perspective.

The second theme is the belief that appealing to gratified needs will be ineffective in motivating behavior. As such, if one feels that they have a sufficient level of a particular need (the sense of gratification), offering additional levels in return for desired behavior is generally ineffective. This is particularly important for lower-order needs (physiological, safety, and security), which are finite in nature. For example, offering enhanced and expanded insurance programs has little impact if the individual is content and satisfied (gratified) with their current insurance options.

In contrast, higher-order needs (such as relatedness, social, growth, self-esteem, and self-actualization) are infinite in nature. In theory, securing some level of these needs generally prompts the desire for more. For example, taking on new and challenging roles often prompts the need for further growth, driving us to advance and assume more avenues for stretching and progressing. This realization is especially important for high-achievers such as those within your clinical realm.

This original hierarchical paradigm has been modified through the years. Many authors prefer E-R-G theory, a refined model that postulates that individuals are motivated to meet three categories of successive needs: 1) existence (including physiological and safety needs), 2) relatedness (social needs), and 3) growth (self-esteem and self-actualization needs).(4)

In a further nuance, leaders must recognize that an individual’s focus on specific or predominant needs will shift as circumstances change over time.(5) For example, a newly graduated physician with significant educational debt may be primarily motivated by salary and building connections with her new colleagues.

Fast forward 10 years, and that same physician may now be financially stable, established in her practice, and more focused on expanding her leadership skills (growth-related variables). Fast forward another 10 years, and that same physician may be focused on helping at-risk patients through a community clinic and parceling out more time for family and travel.

As you can see, our incentive and reward structures must change as different needs become predominate if we hope to keep our motivational efforts on point.

As the commentary above suggests, individually oriented motivational approaches are important for helping people reach their higher-level needs, especially their growth needs. Consequently, it is useful for leaders to stay attuned to the shifting maze of employee needs, to talk with their people and, most important, listen to them. Asking questions to determine your employees’ career goals may help uncover their key needs, thereby providing a more accurate focus for your motivational efforts.

REFERENCES

1. Lathan GP. Work Motivation: History, Theory, Research, and Practice (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage;2012. Locke EA, Latham GP. What Should We Do About Motivation Theory? Six Recommendations for the Twenty-First Century. Academy of Management Review. 2004;29(3):388-403. Steers RM, Mowday RT, Shapiro DL. The Future of Work Motivation Theory. Academy of Management Review. 2004;29(3):379-387.

2. Stoner CR, Stoner JS. Building Leaders: Paving the Path for Emerging Leaders. New York: Routledge;2013. LePine, JA, LePine MA, Jackson CL. Challenge and Hindrance Stress: Relationships with Exhaustion, Motivation to Learn and Learning Performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2004;98:883-891.

3. Maslow AH. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper and Row;1954.

4. Alderfer CP. (1969). An Empirical Test of a New Theory of Human Needs. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 1969;4(2):142-175.

5. Hackman JR, Oldman GR. Work Design (vol. 72). Reading MA: Addison-Wesley;1980.

Excerpted from Inspired Physician Leadership: Creating Influence and Impact, 2nd Edition by Charles R. Stoner, DBA, and Jason S. Stoner, PhD.