It is easy to understand why machines, edifices, trade name names and fiscal assets are resources of a concern. What is less understood or realised is possibly the most important resource of any concern is the people it employs ( Stimpson, 2002 ) . The employees are the greatest future plus for concern companies no affair how technologically advanced equipment it owns or how efficient it is ( Robbins & A ; Judge, 2007 ) . Katz and Kahn ( 1978, cited in Steers & A ; Porter, 1991, p.3 ) . have posited that administrations have three behavioural demands: ( 1 ) people must be attracted non merely to fall in the administration but besides to stay in it ; ( 2 ) people must execute the undertakings for which they are hired, and must make so in a reliable mode ; and ( 3 ) people must travel beyond this reliable function public presentation and engage in some signifier of originative, self-generated, and advanced behaviour at work. Hence as the universe adopts engineering at a faster rate with more sophisticated applications and as merchandises tend towards greater similarity ; there is a turning consciousness that a concern may distinguish itself and its trade names by making a quality, focused and good motivated work force ( Stimpson, 2002 ) .
Abraham Maslow ( 1954, cited in Fincham & A ; Rhodes, 2005, p.193 ) outlined what is possibly the most influential motivational theory of all. A utile starting point would be the work of Maslow and his theory of single development and motive, published originally in 1943. Maslow ‘s basic proposition is that people are desiring existences, they ever want more, and what they want depends on what they already have ( Mullins, 2007 ) . He contends that adult male has five basic classs of demands, which are ranked and satisfied in order of importance ( Arnolds & A ; Boshoff, 2002 ) .
At the lowest degree of the hierarchy are the physiological or survival demands. These are the demands for nutrient, air, slumber, etc. Normally in the concern and industrial universe, the satisfaction of these demands is taken for granted. However, Maslow reminds us that these demands have a enormous authority, and have the power to draw the person back to a strong form of physiological demands fulfilling behaviour if these needs all of a sudden become prevailing ( Tannehill, 1970 ) .
Assuming the basic physiological demands are met, and in most instances this is so, the following degree of demands Maslow calls safety or security demands ( Tannehill, 1970 ) . These include freedom from hurting or menace of physical onslaught, protection from danger or want, and the demand for predictability and methodicalness
( Mullins, 2007 ) .
Once the security demands are satisfied, the following degree of demands to come into predomination are the societal demands ( Tannehill, 1970 ) . Originally Maslow referred to this demand as the demand for belongingness and love. Social needs include the demand for emotional love, friendly relationship, and fond relationships with people in general, but particularly a partner, kids, and friends ( Steers & A ; Porter, 1991 ) .
The following degree up the hierarchy is identified as the regard needs. These include both self-respect and the regard of others. Self-respect involves the desire for assurance, strength, independency and freedom, and accomplishment. Esteem of others involves repute or prestigiousness, position, acknowledgment, attending and grasp ( Mullins, 2007 ) .
And eventually, Maslow says, the highest demand in the hierarchy is the demand for self-actualisation. In a briefly stated manner, it is the demand to go all that one is capable of going, to make one ‘s full potency in one ‘s ain footings. The desire of an person to accomplish his full potency may take any one of many different signifiers, the demand for all work forces is the same, how they satisfy the demand varies from single to single ( Tannehill, 1970 ) .
In drumhead, Maslow sees the motivational demands of adult male arranged in a hierarchy, and as one set of demands is satisfied the desire to fulfill the following degree of demands up the hierarchy arises. The desire to go on to fulfill these demands, despite defeats and dissatisfactions, Maslow feels is an intrinsic portion of the human being ( Tannehill, 1970 ) .
Similarly the ERG theory, developed by Yale psychologist Clayton Alderfer, is another historically of import need theory of motive. In many respects, ERG theory extends and refines Maslow ‘s demands hierarchy construct, although there are besides several of import differences between the two. The E, R, and G stand for three basic demand classs: being, relatedness, and growing ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2003 ) .
Being demands include nutritionary and material demands. At work, working conditions and pay would fall into this group.
Relatedness demands are met through relationships with household and friends and at work with co-workers and supervisors.
Growth needs reflect a desire for personal psychological developments ( Fincham & A ; Rhodes, 2005 ) .
Like Maslow, Alderfer excessively suggests that single advancement through the hierarchy from being demands to relatedness demands to growing demands as the lower-level needs become satisfied ( Mullins, 2007 ) . For illustration, Existence needs – those necessary for basic human endurance – approximately correspond to the physiological and security demands of Maslow ‘s hierarchy. Relatedness needs, those affecting the demand to associate to others, are similar to Maslow ‘s belongingness and esteem demands. Finally, growing demands are correspondent to Maslow ‘s demands for self-esteem and self-actualisation
( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2003 ) .
However, Alderfer ‘s theory differs in a figure of of import respects from Maslow ‘s. While Maslow proposed a patterned advance up a hierarchy ; Alderfer did non believe that one degree of demands had to be satisfied before the following degree demand would emerge ( Steers & A ; Porter, 1991 ) . Likewise in contrast to Maslow ‘s attack, ERG theory suggests that more than one sort of demand, for illustration, relatedness and growing demands may actuate a individual at the same clip. A more of import difference from Maslow ‘s hierarchy is that ERG theory includes a satisfaction-progression constituent and a frustration- arrested development constituent. The satisfaction-progression construct suggests that after fulfilling one class of demands, a individual progresses to the following degree. On this point, the demand hierarchy and ERG theory agree. The demand hierarchy nevertheless assumes the person remains at the following degree until the demands at that degree are satisfied. In contrast, the frustration-regression constituent of ERG theory suggests that a individual who is frustrated by seeking to fulfill a higher degree of demands finally will regress to the predating degree ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2003 ) . For illustration, the fulfillment of growing demands is hard, frustration arrested development occurs, doing us to concentrate on carry throughing our relatedness demands. Having our growing needs frustrated hence makes them less instead than more of import. From above we can see that Maslow was prepared to accept that in some limited fortunes a few single differences occur and unsated needs become less of import. But for Alderfer this was a usage ( Fincham & A ; Rhodes, 2005 ) .
The two theories besides differ in the importance of satisfied demands. Maslow argued that when one time a demand is satisfied, it becomes less of import to the single whereas research based on Alderfer ‘s thoughts has found that relatedness or growing demands really go more of import when satisfied ( Wanous and Zwany 1997, as cited in Fincham & A ; Rhodes, 2005, p. 199 ) . Unlike Maslow ‘s theory, the consequences of Alderfer ‘s work suggest that lower – degree demands do non hold to be satisfied before a higher degree need emerges as a motivation influence. The ERG theory provinces that an person is motivated to fulfill one or more basic sets of demands. Therefore if a individual ‘s demands are blocked than one must pay attending on fulfilling demands at other degrees. For illustration, if a subsidiary ‘s growing demands are blocked because the occupation does non supply sufficient chance for personal development so the director should seek and supply greater chances for the subsidiary to fulfill being and relatedness demands
( Mullins, 2007 ) .
Although Maslow ‘s theory is intuitively appealing, assorted unfavorable judgments have been levelled at it ( DeCenzo & A ; Robbins, 1988 and Steers & A ; Porter, 1991 as cited in Arnolds & A ; Boshoff, 2002, p.699 ) . One of the most of import of these defects is that it is a wide theory of human development instead than a description of work motive ( Landy, 1985 cited in Arnolds & A ; Boshoff, 2002, p.699 ) . Similarly harmonizing to Ivancevich & A ; Matteson ( 1999, cited in Arnolds & A ; Boshoff, 2002, p.699 ) Alderfer ‘s ERG theory has non stimulated a great trade of research. However, the ERG theory is regarded as a more valid version of the demand hierarchy ( Robbins, 1998, cited in Arnold & A ; Boshoff, 2002, p.699 ) and has elicited more support from modern-day research workers every bit far as motive in the work state of affairs is concerned ( Luthans, 1998, cited in Arnold & A ; Boshoff, 2002, p.699 ) .
Even though Maslow ‘s demand theory lacks empirical support, it continues to be a really popular theory of motive. It has been widely adopted by administrations and is often used as the foundation for organizational development plans such as participative direction, occupation enrichment, and quality of work – life undertakings. Harmonizing to his theory, organisations must utilize broad scope of factors to actuate behaviour since persons will be at different degrees of the demand hierarchy ( Steers & A ; Porter, 1991 ) .
The greatest value of demand theories lies in the practical deductions they have for direction. In peculiar, the theories are of import insofar as they suggest specific things that directors can make to assist their subsidiaries. With this in head, it is worthwhile to see what administrations and directors may make to assist fulfill their employees ‘ demands ( Greenberg & A ; Baron, 2003 ) .
Possibly one of the most of import lessons to be learned from the information reviewed here is that if directors genuinely want to better public presentation and work attitudes, they must take an active function in pull offing motivational procedures at work. Pull offing motive is witting, knowing behaviour. Any effort by directors to better the motivational degrees of their subsidiaries should be prefaced by a ego – scrutiny on the portion of the directors. Before directors attempt to cover with others, they should hold a clear image of their ain function in the organizational environment. Directors should be sensitive to fluctuations in employees ‘ demands, abilities, and traits as greater consciousness of such fluctuations allows directors to use expeditiously the varied endowments among their subsidiaries and to honor good public presentations with things most desirable to the employees ( Steers & A ; Porter, 1991 )
A farther factor to see is the nature of the undertakings which employees are asked to execute. Before supplying the employees with occupations that offer greater challenge, diverseness and chances for personal demand and satisfaction ; directors may get down by seting themselves in the topographic point of their subsidiaries and inquiring themselves what they would acquire out of making such a occupation. Research has shown that increasing function lucidity on a occupation by and large increases the likeliness of bettering undertaking public presentation. In a broader sense, directors could give increased attending to the quality of the overall work environment. Greater attempts could be made to measure worker attitudes on a continual footing. Finally, if employee motivational degrees and accordingly public presentations are to be increased so it is of import that employees involve themselves in concerted ventures aimed at bettering end product ( Steers & A ; Porter, 1991 ) .
Hence in context with the above two theories, directors may supply employees with a wage that allows them to afford equal life conditions, sufficient chances to rest [ e.g. java interruptions ] and to prosecute in physical activity such as fittingness and exercising installations. Administrations can besides offer employees with life and wellness insurance programs and promote engagement in societal events such as office field daies or parties. Monetary awards even little 1s, in acknowledgment of employees ‘ suggestions for betterment helps advance their regard and at that place by motive degrees
( Greenberg & A ; Baron, 2003 ) . Besides in order to promote the employees towards self realization, directors may offer disputing work that stretches the person as it will give a sense of accomplishment. Opportunities to develop and use new accomplishments may besides be offered as it would increase possible ( Stimpson, 2002 ) .
In drumhead, we do non hold to actuate an person to be motivated, that comes built in as a portion of being a human being. Peoples ‘s behaviour does non ever make sense to those detecting them, even when looked at in footings good to the person ( Tannehill, 1970 ) . Therefore, despite the many conceptual similarities among the two theories, the two theories portion an built-in failing i.e. they do an equal occupation of depicting the factors that motivate behaviour, but they tell us really small about the existent procedure of motive ( Moorhead & A ; Griffin, 2004 ) . Hence there is no grounds to province which theory would indue us with best consequences. Directors may use theories which harmonizing to them, would outdo suit their organizational civilization.