College aantekeningen
Summary Lecture notes Motivation, Power and Leadership
- Vak
- Instelling
A detailed summary of all the lectures of Motivation, Power and Leadership of .
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 40 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 40 pagina's
In winkelwagen
In winkelwagen
6 beoordelingen
Door: zulemaevery • 3 weken geleden
Door: steflenselink • 10 maanden geleden
Door: Rugina • 1 jaar geleden
Door: bassjeroen • 1 jaar geleden
Door: bibianberkhout • 1 jaar geleden
Door: marieketheeuwes • 2 jaar geleden
Verkoper
Volgen
Charlottevtn
Ontvangen beoordelingen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Lecture notes - Motivation, Power and LeadershipLecture 1 – Motivation
Why do people need management? And do people want management?
Literature:
- Gagne, M, & Deci, E. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331-362
- Parks, C. D., Joireman, J., & Van Lange, P. A. M. (2013). Cooperation, trust, and antagonism:
How public goods are promoted. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(3), 119-165.
- Van Vugt, M., Hogan, R., & Kaiser, R. B. (2008). Leadership, followership, and evolution –
Some lessons from the past. American Psychologist, 63(3), 182-196
- Edelson, M. G., Polania, R., Ruff, C. C., Fehr, E., & Hare, T. A. (2018). Computational and
neurobiological foundations of leadership decisions. Science, 361(6401), eaat0036.
Why → motivation, power and leadership are important in your daily life, but also in organizational
structures, in order to understand and help organizations. And also in current situations and societal
issues, motivation power and leadership play a big role, for example with corona. Are you able to
give up some personal preferences in order to serve the big ‘problem’? Taking a vaccine is also
related to motivation, and also to power. Or how does a country respond when there is a new
leader? In this course we will mainly focus on the motivation and leadership part in organizations.
How to manage people, at work and beyond
→ this is the key question during the lectures. But, when we want to know how to manage people,
the first question is: Why do we need to manage people? Examples from the class:
- Communication: to have one central person to communicate with
- To provide structure
- Depends on the task: the more complex, the more management is needed
- People need to be motivated, especially when intrinsic motivation is lacking
But a better question: do people want ‘management’? And: do people want to manage other
people? → keep those questions in mind during the lectures
The ‘problem’
Why do we need management? → Humans are group-living animals and, therefore, have to cope
with many coordination and motivation challenges.
- Coordination challenges (Schelling, 1960): people may have to coordinate their actions to
attain particular goals. E.g.: when you are in a sports team, you need to decide who washes
the outfits every week in order to be able to play. You have to coordinate this. Or when you
work on a group assignment: you have to coordinate who does what, and how do you
communicate? You need to work together for this.
- Motivation challenges: people may have to be motivated to attain particular goals. Not all
tasks are intrinsically motivated, some things are just boring, and people need motivation in
order to do them. There is a distinction between two types of motivational challenges:
1. In the attainment of goals: this focusses on individual motives, so how to obtain
a goal as an individual. How do you get motivated? We are using the Self-
determination theory (Gagné & Deci, 2005) as a framework to explain the
different types of motivation, but also different outcomes.
2. In social interactions: you do not only encounter your own motivation in life, but
also others, and therefore you need to deal with social motives. As a theoretical
framework, we will go into the Interdependence Theory (Parks, Joireman, & Van
Lange, 2013)
,Motivation challenges in the attainment of goals (individual motives)
There are many theories about motivation, and they usually make a distinction between extrinsic and
intrinsic interests as sources of (work) motivation. But there is also the possibility that there is no
interest at all. No interest ≠ Extrinsic interest ≠ Intrinsic interest. In that case there is no motivation to
do a certain thing or act in a certain type of behavior.
There is a distinction between types of interest, between ‘sources’ of (work) motivation:
- Intrinsic interest: you enjoy doing something
- Extrinsic interest: this can be because you want to avoid punishment, or it helps you in a later
stage. So you are not motivated right now, but there is another reason you do it. This can be
outside of you, or something in the future for example.
However, this distinction is rather simplistic. Because it implies that it is rather intrinsic OR extrinsic.
This is when they came up with the self-determination theory.
Self-Determination theory (Gagné & Deci, 2005) → why would
people strive to attain a particular goal? They distinguish
different types of motivation:
- Amotivation: absence of any intention
- Extrinsic motivation: there are various types of
extrinsic motivation on a controlled- to autonomous
continuum. The more to the right is a more
autonomous form of motivation; more free. To the left
you have the more controlled forms of motivation →
o External regulation: contingent / depended on
punishment or reward → e.g. you can earn money to do something.
o Introjected regulation: contingent on self-worth and ego-involvement → if you have
low self esteem, you want to do certain things to feel more worthy. So it is
something inside you that is taking over, something that can give you a boost to your
ego for example. You need to do something to keep your self esteem e.g. But it is on
a more controlled scale, as something inside you is pressuring you to do something.
o Identified regulation: contingent on congruence with a (general) goal or value → the
behavior and value attached to that behavior is closely related to values or goals a
person already have. E.g.: nurses doing a task, e.g. bathing a patient, they do this
because they care about taking care of people. So they don’t enjoy the task itself, but
it is related to their value/goal overall
o Integrated regulation: contingent on instrumental importance for one’s identity:
behavior itself defines who you are as a person. It allies with other values/goals of
your life. So nurse’s example: you not only want to take care of patients, but of
people in general. So you do it because caring for people is who you are.
▪ The last three forms, so introjected regulation, identified regulation and
integrated regulation are forms of internalizing motivation, meaning that it is
not external anymore → internalization. So these are the internalized forms
of extrinsic motivation, but they still differ on a controlled to autonomous
scale on how controlled they are.
▪ These are not different stages you can go through: they are independent
forms of motivation. So it is not that you go through all these phases before
you get to intrinsic motivation.
▪ There can be multiple forms of motivation, but there is always one primary
source: e.g. more integrated, or more introjected.
- Intrinsic motivation = interest and enjoyment. The behavior itself is joyful, you get joy from
the behavior.
,Example: swimmer that swim 200 km in 3 days. What was his motivation? Was it intrinsic? → no, it is
not fun to swim 200 km. So he was extrinsic motivation. What was his primary source of motive?
Probably to feel worthy (survivors’ guilt), so introjected regulation. He feels bad that he got better
while others don’t, so he does this to feel better. But there is no real ‘right’ answer here. His quote:
‘at the age of nineteen I became ill and I was lucky enough to recover from cancer, but I feel the pain
of the people who do not have that happiness, so I try to do something back’.
Can something be both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation? → the teacher thinks probably not. In
order to feel intrinsically motivated, there are three needs to need to be fulfilled. So Intrinsic
motivation and internalization require fulfillment of the personal need for:
- Autonomy (or agency): ‘I feel free to do this’ → when you are being watched, your feelings
of autonomy can become lower. The same for when you are being rewarded for something:
this could make someone feel that he/she is not free to do it, but that something is done for
a reward (and therefore reduce feelings of autonomy, which reduces intrinsic motivation)
- Competence (or self-efficacy): ‘I feel I can do this’ → if you can do it, you feel more of an
autonomous form of motivation.
- Relatedness (or belongingness): ‘I feel connected to others by doing this’ → it makes you an
insider of the group e.g.
So as a manager, you need to create an environment in which people feel that they are autonomous,
that they feel competence to do something, and that they are related to others.
Motivation challenges in social interactions
Self interest ≠ collective interest → social dilemma: which interest to pursue?
- Maintaining scarce resources: for collective interests it is not good to cut trees for example,
but for self-interest for the people that live there, it is a good thing. This is a social dilemma.
- Providing public goods: E.g. donating blood: it is not pleasant, so for self interest you don’t
do this, but you do this to help the collective interest.
- Or a simple example: when you take up more than 1 seat in a train: it is out of self interest
(space), but not in collective interest. These are all ‘social dilemma’s’.
What makes them ‘dilemmas’? Two defining features of social dilemmas (Dawes, 1980)
1. For each individual it is more beneficial to further their self-interest (defect) than to further
the collective interest (cooperate)
2. All individuals are worse off if no one furthers the collective interest
‘Individual rationality leads to collective irrationality’ – Kollock, 1998, p.183
Various factors have been identified that promote or hinder
cooperation in social dilemmas and several theories provide an
integrative framework. The article of Parks et al put together this
integrative framework →
Interdependence theory (Parks et al., 2013) → the red square is the
interdependence theory. This theory was already established before
the article.
There are certain features of a situation, features of a decision, but
also evolutionary motives, cultural influences, and individual
differences. These things tap into the red part, which has an impact
on whether people cooperate or not.
, This interdependence theory is often modelled by a simple 2x2 games. A very easy way to
model these social interactions in which you have to encounter a social dilemma, is by
using 2x2 games. You have 2 options: you cooperate, or you decide to defect (not
cooperate). Your interaction partners also has these options, which makes it a 2x2 game,
and it creates 4 possible outcomes. ‘You’ could be you personally, but also the group you
represent. Your interaction partner could be one person (e.g. colleague, neighbor,
opponent) or multiple persons (e.g. your group, organization, sports-team).
Example: 2x2 games, with rewards depending on the choices that are made → prisoners
dilemma. So suppose that there is 200 euros to divide. If you both cooperate you both get
100 euros, if you both defect you both lose 100 euros, etc. (see image)
- Greed motive – ‘free riding’, social loafing: defect is always more
effective for yourself. E.g. group assignment: the larger the group, the
bigger the changes that someone will ‘free ride’, aka not invest.
- Fear motive: sucker effect. Here you are more focused on the other
person. You expect the other to defect / to exploit you, and what will
happen when you follow the fear motive, is that you will also defect,
as the loss is less than when you don’t defect.
So, both the greed motive and the fear motive cause you to defect. So coming from an individual
perspective, chances are that you will defect. But this is not in collective interest, as cooperating is in
the best collective interest. So this is the basic, also called the ‘given matrix’ of objective outcomes.
But in reality, there are many more factors that will change this matrix: effective matrix of subjective
outcomes.
Why would people go beyond direct self-interest? → How do we
move people to go from the self-interest to the collective interest?
It can be done by transformation of motivation. The given matrix
can change in an effective matrix, which models the subjective
value that people attach to different outcomes. Example:
transformation of motivation can come depending on your social
values: if you have a prosocial value orientation (you care for
equality e.g.) the subjective value change: you want to cooperate
because you care for other people. This changes the matrix: there is
no dilemma anymore. This is one factor that can have an impact on the transformation of
motivation. Important to remember: the effective matrix (so the subjective outcomes) more closely
resemble people’s behavior. So, they are strongly related to the intention. Another factors that can
impact the matrix according to the article:
- You expect to interact with the other again → what you do now also depends on the others:
if everyone cooperated in the first round, it is not okay anymore to defect in the second
round: the trust will become very low than. So you will probably choose cooperation
- You are reluctant to hurt the other → you don’t want to hurt the other person, so this will
probably cause you to cooperate as well.
- You are competing with the other → this will probably cause you to defect: it hinders
cooperation. Because winning is what matters most.
So to conclude: there are situational and personal factors that have an effect on the decision in this
interdependence theory.
From a collective perspective, the pursuit of self-interest can hinder the collective outcome. But even
people who peruse their own interest gain by the collective outcome. So sometimes it is also very
important for them that the collective outcome is very good. So self-interest is something different
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
√ Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, Bancontact of creditcard voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper Charlottevtn. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €4,99. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 79223 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen