Over the past 70 years, theories of motivation have been a heavily discussed topic due to the complexity of human nature around which the subject is primarily concerned. An early theory offered to managers was Maslow’s Hierarchy which focused on intrinsic psychological desires, individuals are said to be driven towards achieving self-actualisation (Maslow 1943). This theory supports the question statement as the nine innate needs are valued by individuals and it is the goal of fulfilling these which has an impact upon our actions. Only recently has an alternate view been offered with Maslow’s hierarchy being viewed as too self-orientated. This discussion surrounds the validity of a prosocial stimulus offered by Grant as a desire to have a positive impact on others and if this is an isolated motivational factor (Grant, 2007). A use of research papers will explore whether or not Maslow’s hierarchy is applicable in a real world context and identify any limitations that this theory offers. Primarily whether or not self-actualisation is the motivational end goal in the workplace or if individuals actively concern themselves with the achievement of others. The findings do hint that a prosocial stimulus exists but that for the majority, the levels of this are controlled by their own intrinsic enthusiasm in achieving the valued psychological rewards depicted by Maslow making this the key determinant of motivation.
Prosocial motivation focuses on the advancement of others rather than the individual. Thus prosocial motivation differs from altruism due to the benefit of others not leading to expense for the individual. There is nothing lost or gained. As a result of its definition, motivation of this sort would cause disagreement with the statement of a job only being motivating if it leads to rewards that the individual values as there is an assumption that there are no individual rewards. An experiment conducted by Grant involving 45 fundraising callers tasked with obtaining funds for an American university scholarship programme produced results which support the theory of prosocial motivation. After being divided into two groups one set of callers were given just 15 minutes to contact past participants in scholarship programmes and to hear about the positive affect of the programme on people’s lives. Those who were made aware of the impact of their work saw a fivefold increase in funds raised in the following month (Grant 2008a). This particular study shows support for prosocial motivation as the control group who are continuing to work for intrinsic reward display no increased motivation. The experimental group, on the other hand, were seemingly motivated by the highlighted benefit that their work had on members of the programme and were thus driven to expend effort for future beneficiaries. This provides basis for an alternate view that a job will be more motivating if it leads to rewards that others value even if the individual performing the job receives no further benefit from their inputs.
However, criticism of the previous study arises from the immeasurable psychological benefit to the individual callers from hearing about the impact of their work with it likely contributing to satisfying important psychological needs such as autonomy depicted in Maslow’s hierarchy (Sheldon, Arndt, & Houser-Marko, 2003). Therefore, there was a subconscious egoism to the prosocial activity which has led to the coining of the term pseudo altruistic. This describes acts that benefit others in addition to the individual.
Further suggestion of a prosocial stimulus causing impetus for employees comes from Maslow’s amendment to his hierarchy in 1969. As aforementioned, the original hierarchy of needs thought up by Maslow was criticised for focusing too much on the needs of the individual and not taking into consideration the desire of humans to help others. It was this criticism which caused Maslow to amend his hierarchy and include a further dimension known as self-transcendence (Maslow 1969). Self-transcendence is defined as a characteristic by which humans focus on something other than themselves (Frankl 1966). Studies based around the effect of self-transcendence upon motivation in jobs are limited due to the difficulty of measuring such a phenomenon. However, attention has been placed on the nursing profession due to the nature of a nurses work in which time is dedicated to helping others. Fitzgerald and Van Hooft (2000) held a focus group in an attempt to identify what nurses view ‘love’ to mean in their work with the summarising quote being
“the willingness and commitment of the nurse to want the good of the other before self, without reciprocity.”
These findings suggest that a nurse’s work is directed by an intrinsic want for the wellbeing of others and it is this which motivates them to carry out their job. Whilst fulfilment of this seemingly has no benefit to the nurse there is still a need to achieve it. This implies that prosocial motivation is present with healthcare workers and challenges rewards valued by the individual being the root cause for personal incentive. On the other hand, this is an isolated study and cannot be seen as representative for all individuals in jobs. In addition, the influence of intrinsic motivation was not studied which does not rule out the nurse’s work having some individual psychological benefit.
The noted criticism is supported by findings that reveal the effect of intrinsic motivation on supposed prosocial behaviour. Although there are numerous case studies of humans expending effort to benefit others there are very few in which the actions do not provide a reward for the individual performing them, usually achieving one of the nine needs from Maslow’s hierarchy. Examples include gaining confidence from standing up for a friend or going out of the way for a loved one leading to greater intimate relationships. In this particular study the focus was on the extent to which intrinsic motivation strengthened prosocial motivation and consequently the persistence of 58 paid municipal firefighters. Persistence was measured by the amount of overtime hours applied for and both prosocial and intrinsic motivation were measured through questionnaires using 7-point Likert type scales (Grant 2008b). The results showed that the greatest amount of overtime was taken by firefighters who rated themselves highly on intrinsic and prosocial initiatives suggesting that levels of prosocial motivation are influenced by intrinsic motives. This challenges the validity of prosocial motivation being an isolated factor and supports the statement that there must be some value to the individual if a job is going to be motivating. Although the firefighters line of work does imply a prosocial tendency this would not be enough to provide them with enough drive to perform their work unless there was a progression up the hierarchy towards self-actualization.
To test the impact that Maslow’s theory of hierarchy has on motivation it would be most fitting to identify differences within importance placed on needs within an employee hierarchy. A difference between higher and lower levels of the hierarchy would not only prove that focus changes as job progression occurs but most importantly that all the individuals within the hierarchy are motivated by needs that have not yet been achieved. Thus the drive for the satisfaction of these needs comes from the values placed upon them. Porter (1963) tested this thesis through a questionnaire which 1916 managers replied to from a range of industries and levels of management, the questionnaire asked managers to rank 13 items which were representative of the 5 psychological levels. A table of results shows that self-actualisation and autonomy were identified as being important by those in higher echelons of management with lower level managers focusing on the needs found lower down in the hierarchy (Porter 1963). The findings show that at the beginning of managerial careers the focus is on affiliation and esteem with a sense of belongingness and reputation being essential if progression up the managerial hierarchy is going to occur. Therefore, managers at this level are motivated by achieving these lower level needs because success in doing so will lead to long and prosperous careers. In contrast those who are higher up the corporate ladder will no longer view satisfied needs as being important and the motivational drive for these managers comes from the higher level needs that were deemed out of reach earlier on in their careers. This experiment supports the ideas of Maslow and consequently the question statement with motivation in managerial jobs coming from the psychological rewards that are deemed to be important by the individual.