Welcome, guest. You are not logged in.
Log in or join for free!
Stay logged in
Forgot login details?

Stay logged in

For free!
Get started!

Text page



based on douglas mcgregor model of motivation


Although each of us are unique in terms of our characteristics, features, mentalities, behaviors, and decision making processes, yet on a large scale those random & independent characteristics show some distinctive similarities in their behavioral patterns. Whenever people are treated as a group related directly or indirectly to the activities of a certain industry or organisation, the group shows some surprising behavioral characteristics.

It has been observed that in spite of the micro differences among the members of the group still exist, but on a macro scale the group acts as an individuals having some distinct flavors in the group behavior, we would term it as "Organisational Behavior". Historically these models were conceived and developed principally by Mechanical Engineers as a part of Industrial Engineering.

Over the time various propositions were presented which would have to be included in any theory of human motivation that could lay claim to being definitive. These conclusions may be briefly summarized as follows:

(1). The integrated wholeness of the organism must be one of the foundation stones of motivation theory.

(2). The hunger drive (or any other physiological drive) was rejected as a centering point or model for a definitive theory of motivation. Any drive that is somatically based and localizable was shown to be atypical rather than typical in human motivation.

(3). Such a theory should stress and center itself upon ultimate or basic goals rather than partial or superficial ones, upon ends rather than means to these ends. Such a stress would imply a more central place for unconscious than for conscious motivations.

(4). There are usually available various cultural paths to the same goal. Therefore conscious, specific, local-cultural desires are not as fundamental in motivation theory as the more basic, unconscious goals.

(5). Any motivated behavior, either preparatory or consummatory, must be understood to be a channel through which many basic needs may be simultaneously expressed or satisfied. Typically an act has more than one motivation.

(6). Practically all organismic states are to be understood as motivated and as motivating.

(7). Human needs arrange themselves in hierarchies of pre-potency. That is to say, the appearance of one need usually rests on the prior satisfaction of another, more pre-potent need. Man is a perpetually wanting animal. Also no need or drive can be treated as if it were isolated or discrete; every drive is related to the state of satisfaction or dissatisfaction of other drives.

(8). Lists of drives will get us nowhere for various theoretical and practical reasons. Furthermore any classification of motivations [p. 371] must deal with the problem of levels of specificity or generalization the motives to be classified.

(9). Classifications of motivations must be based upon goals rather than upon instigating drives or motivated behavior.

(10). Motivation theory should be human-centered rather than animal centered.

(11). The situation or the field in which the organism reacts must be taken into account but the field alone can rarely serve as an exclusive explanation for behavior. Furthermore the field itself must be interpreted in terms of the organism. Field theory cannot be a substitute for motivation theory.

(12). Not only the integration of the organism must be taken into account, but also the possibility of isolated, specific, partial or segmental reactions. It has since become necessary to add to these another affirmation.

(13). Motivation theory is not synonymous with behavior theory. The motivations are only one class of determinants of behavior. While behavior is almost always motivated, it is also almost always biologically, culturally and situationally determined as well.

This page:

Help/FAQ | Terms | Imprint
Home People Pictures Videos Sites Blogs Chat