THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT OF LEADERSHIP STYLE PREFERENCE. By ERIC DOWNING A DISSERTATION IN PRACTICE

Transcription

1

2

3 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT OF LEADERSHIP STYLE PREFERENCE By ERIC DOWNING A DISSERTATION IN PRACTICE Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Creighton University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education in Interdisciplinary Leadership Omaha, NE December 10, 2015

4 Copyright 2015, Eric Downing This document is copyrighted material. Under copyright law, no part of this document may be reproduced without the expressed permission of the author

5 iii Abstract The role inherent motivation plays in determining the leadership style preference of an individual was studied to identify a methodology to improve an organizational development practitioner s ability to align leadership training with employee preferences in the for-profit business environment. A quantitative methodology was selected to analyze the relationship between individual inherent motivation and leadership style preference using two separate surveys, the Motivation Sources Inventory (Barbuto & Scholl, 1998), which focused on identifying the participants inherent individual motivational characteristics, and the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) (Bass, 1985) and the Servant Leadership Scale (Liden, Wayne, Zhao, & Henderson, 2008), which identified individual leadership style preference. Data was collected from 80 participants. A comprehensive review of the relevant literature pertaining to motivation and leadership was compiled. Four hypotheses were tested to examine the relationships among intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and Transformational Leadership, Transactional Leadership, Charismatic Leadership, and Servant Leadership. Significant correlations were identified between individuals with an intrinsic motivation and a preference for Transformational Leadership, Charismatic Leadership, and Servant Leadership, and individuals with an extrinsic motivational characteristic and a preference for Transactional Leadership. The findings suggest a proposed solution that allows organizational development practitioners to make more informed decisions about the types of leadership training and development to be offered to various organizational employees. The organizational leader s role in employing the proposed solution s methodology to implement the solution in the organization and best practices associated

6 iv with incorporating the proposed solution as a mechanism for change in the organization are detailed. Keywords: Intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, transformational leadership, transactional leadership, charismatic leadership, servant leadership

7 v Dedication I would like to dedicate this work to my wife, Tina Downing, and my daughter, Christina Reese, who continually support me through all my endeavors. Their unwavering belief that I could do this made it all the more possible.

8 vi Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge several people for helping me complete this dissertation. Many friends, colleagues, and industry contacts aided me by providing continuous encouragement as well as challenging my perceptions of how the topic might be framed and the actual study constructed. I would like to first thank Dr. Moss Breen for the important role she played as an advisor throughout my Creighton experience. Her guidance and collaboration enriched the entire learning experience. Our deep and thoughtful conversations about the difference between the practical applications of leadership in the for-profit business environment versus the study of leadership in the academic environment were interesting and vital components of the process that led me to study this topic. My committee, Dr. Moss Breen and Dr. Georges, also deserve a high degree of acknowledgment for the professional and practical way they guided me through this dissertation. Their directional guidance about alternative methods of examining leadership subscales literally made the continuation of this dissertation possible. A number of the professors and faculty at Creighton University were inspirational and guided me through the courses that ultimately led to my specific focus on leadership. Among these great teachers, one in particular, Rob Koonce, stood out above all others. Rob often went above and beyond to check in on me periodically and provided inspiration and motivation during the long dissertation process. For this, I will be forever grateful.

9 vii Table of Contents Abstract... iii Dedication... v Acknowledgements... vi Table of Contents... vii List of Tables... x CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION... 1 Background of the Problem... 1 Introduction and Statement of the Problem... 1 Purpose of the Study... 2 Research Questions... 3 Significance of the Study... 4 Aim of the Study... 6 Methodology Overview... 6 Definitions of Relevant Terms... 7 Limitations, Delimitations, and Personal Biases Limitations...10 Delimitations...11 Personal Biases...12 Leader s Role and Responsibility in Relation to the Problem Summary CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction Literature about the Professional Practice Field Motivation Extrinsic Motivation...23 Intrinsic Motivation...26 Interrelationship of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation...27 Operant Conditioning...29 McClelland s Three-Needs Theory...32

10 viii Maslow s Hierarchy of Needs...33 The Role of Self-determination in Motivation...35 Herzberg s Two-Factor Theory...40 Goal-Setting Theory...43 Expectancy Theory of Motivation...48 Alderfer s Need Theory (EFG)...51 Temporal Motivation Theory...52 Identifying Motivational Sources...53 Leadership...55 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY Introduction Purpose Statement Baseline Assessment Information Research Questions and Hypotheses Measures Description of Participants Instrumentation Variables in the Study Data Collection Procedures Data Analysis Assumptions Ethical Considerations Summary CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS AND THE EVIDENCE-BASED SOLUTION Introduction Scale Reliabilities for this Study Analysis of Hypotheses Summary of the Findings Analysis and Synthesis of Findings Proposed Solution

11 ix Support for the Solution from Data Collected Existing Support Structure and Resources Potential Barriers and Obstacles to the Proposed Solution Financial/Budget Issues Related to Proposed Solution Change Theory Internal/External Issues Related to Proposed Solution Summary CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction Purpose of the Study Implementation of Solution Processes and Considerations Roles and Responsibilities of Key Players in Implementation Leader s Role in Implementing the Proposed Solution Evaluation and Timeline for Implementation and Assessment Convincing Others to Support the Proposed Solution Critical Pieces Needed for Implementation and Assessment Internal and External Implications for the Organization Implications and Considerations for Leaders Facing Implementation of Proposed Solution Evaluation Cycle of the Proposed Solution Summary of the Study Implications for Action/Recommendations for Further Research Summary References Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D

12 x List of Tables Table 1 Correlations between Motivational Characteristic and MLQ Subscales Table 2 Correlations between Motivational Characteristic and MSI Subscale Table 3 Correlations between Motivational Characteristic and SLS Subscales Table 4 Correlation and Significance between Motivational Characteristic and Leadership Style...106

13 Running head: THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 1 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION Background of the Problem Organizational development professionals in the for-profit business sector are often tasked with allocating valuable corporate leadership development resources without having adequate insight into employee characteristics that can influence their preference for a specific leadership style. Identifying the inherent motivational characteristics of a diverse population of corporate employees and comparing their leadership characteristics preferences can help organizational development professionals more efficiently allocate training and development resources to leadership-style training programs more closely aligned with their workforce s indicated leadership preferences. Although much academic research explores how specific leadership style may affect the motivational characteristics of an employee, very little research has been conducted on how an employee s inherent motivational characteristics may affect their preference to be led by a specific leadership style. Employees have a wide range of receptivity and preference for different leadership styles. Organizational development professionals want to improve their capacity to provide a wide range of leadership training that will appeal to a broad group of employees varied leadership style preferences in order to create an optimal leader/follower match (O Leonard & Loew, 2012). Introduction and Statement of the Problem Organizational development professionals are forced to make major funding decisions about leadership development and leadership training without the benefit of insight into the leadership-style preferences of their employees. In the absence of

14 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 2 adequate directional information, many of these professionals are choosing trainers and training programs purely based on direct marketing interaction and proposed pricing rather than choosing trainers and programs that offer subject matter that is most suited to the inherent training preferences of their employees. The professionals are often uninformed about the availability and use of tools that can help them assess the inherent motivational characteristics of their employees and can assist them in choosing development and training alternatives that may allow them to use their limited financial resources in a more productive manner. Several validated tools exist to measure an individual s inherent motivation (Barbuto & Scholl, 1998) and identify an individual s leadership style preferences. Very little research has been done examining how an organizational development professional might use the insights associated with these tools to make more informed resource allocation decisions. The insights into individual inherent motivational factors that may be identified through the Motivation Sources Inventory (Barbuto & Scholl, 1998) and the ability to use the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) (Bass, 1985) to determine an individual employee s leadership style preference can provide a mechanism to improve training outcomes while maximizing the utilization of financial resources. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this quantitative study was to examine the relationship between individual inherent motivational characteristics and employee leadership style preferences as a mechanism for more effective organizational training decisions in the for-profit workplace.

15 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 3 Research Questions This study of the relationship between individual inherent motivation and leadership style preference was conducted to answer the question, How does an individual s motivation influence their preference for a leadership style? In the for-profit business environment, this question is often asked and seldom adequately answered. Examining the relationship between inherent motivation and leadership style preference among employees may provide additional insights that will allow organizational professionals to make better training and development decisions. Previous academic research has produced validated measures of both motivation and leadership; for example, the Motivation Sources Inventory (Barbuto & Scholl, 1998) provides validated measures to identify five sources of motivation: intrinsic process, instrumental, self-concept-external, self-concept-internal, and goal internalization motivation. Several validated measures that identify specific leadership styles have also been developed in separate academic research studies; for example, the MLQ-short form (Bass, 1985) provides validated measures of leaders laissez-faire, transactional, charismatic, and transformational behaviors, and the Servant Leadership Scale (Liden et al., 2008), a 28-item seven-dimension servant leadership survey, identifies Servant Leadership behavior.. The broader question of how inherent motivation influences individual preference for leadership style produces a number of hypotheses to be considered in an analysis of the subject. This Dissertation in Practice presents a quantitative study based on the following hypotheses:

16 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 4 Hypothesis #1: Employees sources of motivation will influence their preference for leadership style. Hypothesis #1A: An individual with a predominantly intrinsic motivation characteristic will prefer a leader who is higher in transformational leadership qualities. Hypothesis #2: Employees sources of motivation will influence their preference for leadership style. Hypothesis #2A: An individual with a predominately extrinsic motivation characteristic will prefer a leader who is higher in transactional leadership qualities. Hypothesis #3: Employees sources of motivation will influence their preference for leadership style. Hypothesis #3A: An individual with a predominately intrinsic motivation characteristic will prefer a leader who is higher in charismatic leadership qualities. Hypothesis #4: Employees sources of motivation will influence their preference for leadership style. Hypothesis #4A: An individual with a predominately intrinsic motivation characteristic will prefer a leader who is higher in servant leadership qualities. Significance of the Study In the for-profit corporate environment, companies are spending an everincreasing portion of their annual budget on leadership development. The 2012 Bersin

17 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 5 and Associates Leadership Development Factbook (O Leonard & Loew, 2012) reported that companies in the United States have increased leadership development spending by 14 % over 2011 levels, and it was estimated at $13.6 billion for the full fiscal year of 2012 (the most recent year full figures are available). Historically, leadership development spending has been allocated among first-level leaders, mid-level leaders, and senior leaders, but for-profit corporations have continuously looked for more informed methods of determining where to allocate development resources. O Leonard and Loew (2012) also pointed out that organizational development professionals are beginning to redistribute their allocation of leadership development funds away from the traditional first-, mid-, and senior-level commitments and are looking for tools and assessments that will allow them to allocate the majority of those funds only towards high potential strategies and employees. Although the authors did not specifically define high potential strategies, they did point out that most employers need better information and tools for assessment to make more informed decisions about where to allocate limited corporate development training resources. An in-depth examination of how inherent motivation affects an individual employee s preference for a specific leadership style is relatively unaddressed in current academic research. The topics of motivation and leadership have been thoroughly examined in scholarly research, and much has been written about how a specific leader or leadership style might influence the motivation of an individual being led (Zhang & Bartol, 2010). Examining the relationship between inherent motivation and leadership style preference may also provide a foundation for future research in this area.

18 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 6 By studying how motivation influences one s preference to be led by a specific leadership style, a number of conclusions may be drawn that could empower organizational development professionals to make more informed decisions when engaging third-party resources to provide leadership training. Better budgetary decisions could result in improved budgetary efficiency and allow more leadership training to be conducted with the available resources. With a greater insight into employees leadership preferences, organizational development professionals may be empowered to consider providing training in previously overlooked leadership styles. Access to leadership training in a broader spectrum of leadership styles will likely result in improved organizational morale by providing employees with training that is more aligned to their individual preferences. Aim of the Study The aim of this quantitative academic research was to create an evidence-based matrix that will allow organizational development professionals to make more informed decisions about where to allocate corporate resources for leadership training. Methodology Overview A quantitative methodology was selected for this study. The data were collected using two separate surveys, and each survey was comprised of validated measures taken from earlier scholarly research that was conducted to identify inherent individual motivational characteristics or individual leadership style preferences. The first survey was comprised entirely of validated statements taken from Barbuto and Scholl s (1998) Motivation Sources Inventory, which was selected due to its validated ability to identify five distinct sources of motivation: intrinsic process,

19 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 7 instrumental, self-concept-external, self-concept-internal, and goal internalization. The questionnaire was administered in a Likert scale questionnaire format, and a second Likert scale questionnaire that identified the ordered preferences for the validated leadership style characteristics of laissez-faire, transactional, charismatic, and transformational leadership qualities was also administered (Bass, 1985). Characteristics of servant leadership behavior were also identified by administering the Servant Leadership Scale survey (Liden et al., 2008). All of the questions on the leadership survey were presented exactly as they were validated and were clearly identified in two separate sections on the same questionnaire. Each survey participant completed both questionnaires in a manner that afforded each participant total anonymity. Correlational analysis was subsequently conducted to test the relationships between individual motivational style and preference for a specific leadership style. Definitions of Relevant Terms A number of the terms and phrases included in this Dissertation in Practice can have multiple meanings depending upon the context in which they are used. The context associated with this dissertation deals primarily with subject matter associated with inherent motivation and leadership styles and therefore reflects the meaning or definition most closely aligned with those subjects. The following terms were used operationally within this study. Affiliation: The act of connecting or associating with a person or organization Conditioning: A form of learning involving the formation, strengthening, or weakening of an association between a stimulus and a response

20 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 8 External Regulation: Behaving to gain a reward or avoid some negative contingency Extrinsic: Not part of the essential nature of someone or something; coming or operating from outside Fixation: An obsessive interest in or feeling about someone or something For-profit Workplace: A workplace that uses its surplus revenues to further achieve its purpose or mission, rather than distributing its surplus income to the organization's directors (or equivalents) as profit or dividends Inherent Motivation: The reason or reasons one has for acting or behaving in a particular way; existing in someone or something as a permanent and inseparable element, quality, or attribute Internal Regulation: The ability to monitor and control our own behavior, emotions, or thoughts, altering them in accordance with the demands of the situation Intrinsic: Belonging to the essential nature of a thing; occurring as a natural part of something Leadership Style Preference: Leadership style preference is a form of cross-situational behavioral consistency. It refers to the manner in which a leader interacts with his or her subordinates and the employee s desire to be led by a particular style of leadership behaviors. Locus of Causality: A theory developed by researcher Julian B. Rotter (1954). The theory refers to individual perceptions of causality or how and why things happen in a person's life.

21 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 9 MLQ: An instrument that evaluates three different leadership styles: Transformational, Transactional, and Passive-Avoidant. It allows individuals to measure how they perceive themselves with regard to specific leadership behaviors. MSI: An instrument designed by Barbuto and Scholl in 1998 to measure the motivational concepts contained within the meta-theory of motivation Organizational Development Professionals: People who implement and oversee programs that increase efficiency, strengthen employee knowledge and abilities, improve leadership, and maintain the overall health of a company. They work with top management in diagnosing problems and setting company goals; then they create training programs to meet those goals, often incorporating behavioral science to enhance employee satisfaction and productivity. They also help personnel adjust to new procedures during times of change. Picoeconomics: A term to describe the different implications of an experimental discovery that there is a tendency for people to have a stronger preference for more immediate payoffs relative to later payoffs, and the tendency increases the closer to the present both payoffs are. Given two similar rewards, humans show a preference for one that arrives sooner rather than later. Humans are said to discount the value of the later reward by a factor that increases with the length of the delay. Reward Contingencies: A motivation-based system that is used to reward those that meet their identified goals Rewards: Specific environmental stimuli, tangible or intangible, that have the property of eliciting desired responses

22 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 10 Self-Actualization: The achievement of one's full potential through creativity, independence, spontaneity, and a grasp of the real world Self-Determination: A theory about the motivations of individuals developed by Deci and Ryan (1985). Humans are motivated by external forces (rewards/punishment, judgment from others) and internal forces (interest in the subject, morals, desire). Self-efficacy: A person's belief in his or her ability to complete a future task or solve a future problem Trait: A person's enduring characteristics or dispositions that give rise to their behaviors or behavior patterns Valence: The degree of attraction or aversion that an individual feels toward a specific object or event Validated Measure: A direct or indirect assessment method that demonstrates or support the truth or value of something Limitations, Delimitations, and Personal Biases Limitations The primary objective of this Dissertation in Practice was to create a matrix that could be used by organizational development professionals to make more informed decisions about where to allocate organizational leadership training resources. This study was limited to an examination of leadership styles identified by the MLQ (Bass, 1985). The validated research questionnaire only covered the transformational, transactional, authentic, and charismatic leadership styles. The servant leadership style was also examined through the inclusion of the Servant Leadership Scale (Liden et al., 2008), a 28-item, seven-dimension servant leadership questionnaire that was included as a

23 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 11 supplement to the MLQ (Bass, 1985) in order to identify individuals with a leadership preference for servant leadership qualities. Another limitation associated with this research is that it is designed to focus exclusively on the domestic, for-profit business sector of the United States. Other corporate structures such as not-for-profit, government entities, or those based outside of the United States may allocate training resources differently than organizational development professionals in the United States s for-profit sector. The limited scope of this research study will not provide directional information to organizational professionals in organizations other than for-profit entities because the organizational development professionals in those organizational structures may have different objectives and budget considerations than those in the for-profit business sector. Although the population that was surveyed for this research was diversified with regard to age, educational background, and socioeconomic status, all of the individuals who were surveyed had self-selected to work in the financial services industry. Therefore, it was possible that many of the individuals were motivated in the same way and did not represent a completely diversified population that may have been more representative of the for-profit business population at large (Barrick, Mount & Gupta, 2003). Delimitations The researcher chose to focus on the for-profit U.S. economy s business sector because of personal career experience in that environment. Although it may be possible to gain greater insights into the relationship between inherent motivation and leadership style preference by examining additional segments of the economy, the researcher narrowed the research scope and focus and addressed only the segment of the economy

24 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 12 that included the financial industry. The researcher also made an active decision not to examine the motivational and leadership relationship of employees who work in the notfor-profit, academic, or public government sectors of the economy. This research study only examined the relationship between motivation and leadership preference from a quantitative standpoint; qualitative research methods were not used. The researcher made a proactive decision to only examine what relationships may exist between inherent motivation and leadership style preference (quantitative research) instead of also examining why those relationships may be present (qualitative research). Personal Biases In an effort to minimize the effect that personal biases may have had on the research, the researcher endeavored to recognize where those biases may have resided and to guard against letting them interfere with the unbiased conclusions that were intended in this Dissertation in Practice. Clearly identifying those biases before beginning the research and recognizing the impact that they may have had on the research perspective helped minimize their potential impact. Recognizing these biases also shaped the design of the research and assisted in minimizing opportunities for personal biases to interfere with the clarity of the data gathered. The researcher s entire professional career has been in the for-profit organizational structure; therefore, there may be a tendency to see things solely from that perspective. Furthermore, there may be other best practices and different motivational profiles that work better than those the researcher is familiar with in the for-profit sector. It was necessary to remain unbiased and clear about the inclusion and identification of all

25 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 13 motivational characteristics to ensure that personal familiarity and comfort with the motivational characteristics common to the financial industry did not unduly influence the research findings. The financial industry is a business environment that is well known for focusing on only one or two specific types of leadership. Over the years, this industry has primarily promoted leaders that come from a specific leadership style background and tend to direct resources towards training programs that reinforce their specific styles of leadership. Vigilance was needed to ensure that each leadership style identified by the research was equally integrated into the possible resource allocation choices of the matrix that was created as a result of this research. Moreover, as a current organizational development leader in the for-profit business sector, the researcher had to ensure that previous negative experiences with leadership development budget allocation decisions unduly influenced any researchbased recommendations. It was important to be sure that each of the leadership styles identified for potential inclusion in the resource allocation matrix was objectively represented. Previous experiences where resource allocations to certain leadership style training programs had been unproductive were not allowed to negatively influence the perceived future benefit that may be derived from engaging in training specific to that style. Recognizing that personal bias exists and acknowledging that proactive steps must be taken to minimize any impact that bias may exert on the research was a crucial first step towards mitigating that potential impact. Bias was mitigated in many ways: using validated measures to collect research data, thoroughly and objectively conducting

26 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 14 the literature review, presenting opposing views and findings, and writing objective/testable hypotheses all contributed to the active mitigation of bias in research. Leader s Role and Responsibility in Relation to the Problem One of the primary challenges facing the senior leadership of any organization is how to most effectively allocate precious training and development resources in order to achieve the best possible return on investment and develop the organization s future leaders. Without validated information that can provide directional guidance, senior leaders are often inclined to continue investing in the organization s traditional style of leadership training. Often, these senior leadership allocation decisions are made without considering alternate methods and tools that will increase the probability of achieving the desired results with the same finite financial resources. Although there are many areas in the average organization where decisions regarding leadership development and the allocation of resources associated with it might be made, sustained focus at the senior leadership level is often required to ensure adequate resource prioritization. If important leadership training resource allocations are made at lower levels of the organization, lower-level managers often decide to repurpose leadership training allocations to other areas of managerial interest. Leadership development is often a key component of the long-term, strategic development vision of the organization; therefore, it is appropriate that the most senior leadership in the organization has a full understanding of the importance of leadership development and the best practices associated with evaluating leadership training alternatives and aligning those alternatives with the organizational individuals who may benefit most from the style of training chosen.

27 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 15 It is important to apply sound leadership theories and practices in deciding the type of leadership development that an organization should engage in as they develop their future leaders. By being more aware of the role that inherent motivation plays in determining what leadership styles will be preferred in the organization, organizational leaders can more effectively group individuals together to focus on specific styles of leadership training and also enjoy a more robust and beneficial training outcome. Summary Making sound financial decisions about the allocation of organizational leadership training resources is challenging. Often, these decisions are made without adequate insight into the proper alignment of organizational development leadership training and the inherent style preferences of the employee. Examining inherent motivation can be a tool for senior leaders making such decisions. By conducting a quantitative study that examines the relationship between individual inherent motivation and employee leadership style preference, these corporate allocation decisions can be made more effectively. Companies in the for-profit business sector are annually allocating billions of dollars for leadership development training (O Leonard & Loew, 2012). A quantitative analysis of the correlations between identified inherent motivation and the statistical alignment of that individual s leadership style preference can serve as a directional tool to guide organizational leader s development training decisions. This could be accomplished by combining the capability of the (a) Motivation Sources Inventory (Barbuto & Scholl, 1998) to identify the inherent motivational characteristics of an

28 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 16 individual with the (b) Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire s (Bass, 1985) capability to identify preferred leadership styles.

29 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 17 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE Introduction Extensive academic research has been conducted over many years on the theoretical aspects of the connection between motivational origin and leadership style. In order to fully understand how inherent motivation influences an individual s preference for a specific leadership style in the for-profit business sector, one must not only fully understand motivation and leadership theory in the broader sense but also examine the role that inherent motivation plays in the leader-follower relationship. Literature about the Professional Practice Field Peer-reviewed academic literature and research has been published about the origins of individual inherent motivation and the subject of leadership characteristics as a component of a specific leadership style. Before either a corporate organizational development manager or a human resources manager can make a fully informed decision about which types of leadership training should be included in the organizational development plan, they must have a thorough understanding of the role that an employee s core motivation plays in a decision to either embrace or reject the characteristics of a specific leadership style. Organizational development managers must also have a comprehensive understanding of the organizational culture and the roles that motivation and leadership play in the culture. The structure of the organizational culture is based on a set of common beliefs and values that are shared by members of the organization, and these values have a great deal of influence on the behavior of the individuals in the organization (Kark & Van Dijk, 2007). In order to understand the importance of these relationships, the organizational

30 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 18 development manager must be able to identify and categorize both organizational employee motivational characteristics and specific characteristics that are associated with a wide variety of leadership styles. Much of the currently available literature seeks to categorize specific employee motivational characteristics and examine how organizational leaders attempt to influence those motivational drivers. Most of the motivational theories in modern academic research are based on the concept of rational motivation, and the definition of the building blocks of rational motivation is often focused on discerning the origins of an individual s desire to take a specific action. Various researchers have put forth contrasting motivational states that fall into two main categories: (a) motivations that are based on psychological conditions and exist independently from the activity of reflection and (b) purely reason-generated motivations (Barry, 2007). These present-day motivational theories have evolved over a long period of time and are in sharp contrast to the 16th century writings of David Hume, who postulated individuals lacked a true sense of self and were guided primarily by a bundle of senses to which the individual reacted. Hume s theories stood in stark contrast to the rational motivation theory that all rational motivation originates from individuals practical reasoning capabilities (Radcliffe, 2008). Rational motivational theorists rely on the principle that an individual s beliefs and actions and the impetus to engage in a specific behavior are based primarily on reason. A key element of the foundation of this theoretical construct is that reasons are not causes, and the notion of rational motivation rests upon the causal connection

31 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 19 between the reason that an individual might take an action and the justification for doing so (Aronovitch, 1979). There has been far less research on identifying which employees might be more receptive to a specific leadership style because of the individuals underlying core motivations within the organization. Often, an examination of motivation is framed from the perspective of examining the impact of a supervisor s or leader s behavior and how this affects the motivational state of a subordinate rather than examining the willingness of a subordinate to be led by a specific leadership style based on their existing motivational state. In order to draw conclusions about which employee core motivations might cause them to be more receptive to a specific leadership style, one must first identify the specific motivators that are prevalent among individual employees. Those characteristics must then be ordered in such a way that allows the researcher to identify employees with the same motivational characteristics as having a group preference for a specific leadership style. Motivation Academic literature offers a wide range of theories to define individual motivation and can be classified into several categories. Some academic research has attempted to use psychological theories and models to explain motivational behavior (Weiner, 1972). Other research has examined content-based theories or process-based theories of motivation to provide insight into what motivates individuals versus how individuals are motivated. Psychological theories fall into one of two categories: (a) natural motivational theories that focus on desires, needs, and drives or (b) rational based

32 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 20 theories that focus on an individual s desire for rationality such as meaningfulness or self-identity (Perrin, 1923). Employee motivation can be defined through many theories and can be identified or categorized in a number of useful ways. One aspect of employee motivation that remains constant is that the challenges associated with intervening to influence human performance will likely always be an uncertain process (Perry, Mesch, & Paarlberg, 2006). This uncertainty has led to a wide array of varying theories and constructs in an attempt to adequately define and assess the origins of an individual employee s potential motivations. The term motivation is defined by Atkinson (1964) as the contemporary (immediate) influence on direction, vigor, and persistence of action (p. 2). Vroom (1964) defined motivation as a process governing choice made by persons among alternative forms of voluntary activity (p. 6). Both of these definitions identify factors that energize individuals and help them channel and sustain their behavior over time (Steers, Mowday, & Shapiro, 2004). For the purpose of identifying motivational characteristics that could be used to identify a greater receptivity for embracing a specific leadership style, it is critical to recognize common characteristics that are inherent in the motivational profile of the individual employee when examining methods of categorizing employee motivation. By identifying and categorizing the actual human drives that underlie core employee motivations, researchers are able to take individual traits or the presence of specific employee states and place them in useful categories to better explain and predict the behavior of groups of individual employees. Researchers have identified four primary

33 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 21 motivational drives that are hardwired into the human brain: (a) the drive to acquire, (b) the drive to bond, (c) the drive to comprehend, and (d) the drive to defend (Nohria, Groysberg, & Lee, 2008). An individual s motivational behavior is affected by one s desire to satisfy these base emotions and may be influenced by a combination of these drives. Some of these drives can be satisfied by the potential attainment of external rewards, and others are more likely satisfied by the perceived improvement of an individual s self-concept. An individual s drive to acquire primarily focuses on acquiring items that are difficult to obtain in order to secure one s personal sense of well-being. This drive applies to tangible items, like money, clothing, and food, but it also applies to experiences and social interactions that result in an appreciable increase in social status. An equally strong inherent drive among individuals is the desire to bond or affiliate with others. This drive to bond with others results in positive emotions when the drive is met and negative emotions when an individual is unable to satisfy their drive to bond. The drive to comprehend satisfies an individual s desire to have things make sense in their world. The drive to comprehend can be defined as an individual s desire to have the competency required to make a meaningful contribution to the organization. The drive to defend is based on the basic fight-or-flight response inherent in humankind. When an individual is able to fully satisfy their drive to defend they can achieve feelings of security and confidence, and a failure to achieve this desired state produces negative emotions such as fear and resentment (Nohria et al., 2008).

34 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 22 Researchers have sought to define and identify characteristics that can be categorized as motivators for individual employees within organizational behavior literature by examining intrinsic and extrinsic distinctions (Amabile, Hill, Hennessey, & Tighe, 1994). The terms intrinsic and extrinsic are prevalent in the discussion of organizational behavior, but the distinction between the two terms is sometimes ambiguous (Broedling, 1977). The terms intrinsic and extrinsic are used to distinguish a trait, an individual personality characteristic on which people differ, from a state, a changeable psychological state (Broedling, 1977). Researchers generally identify characteristics as traits when examining relevant material in literature that deals with measures of work orientation, achievement motivation, required levels of personal needs satisfaction, job orientation inventories, and job attitude scales. The identification of a motivational state falls into two functional categories: (a) a state as a function of a situation and (b) a state as a function of an interaction between the situation and a trait. Many factors can influence the motivation of an individual as a function of their situation. Types of rewards, work-content structure, exposure to specific leadership styles, as well as reward contingencies all influence an individual employee s motivation with regard to function of situation. State as a function of an interaction between a situation and trait is influenced by combining a test design with work values or the content of specific tasks with work values (Broedling, 1977). Researchers often place all characteristics of motivation into just two broad categories, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, and seek to determine how best to influence a specific employee s motivation by identifying each pertinent individual variable and determining whether this

35 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 23 motivational aspect has the potential to be manipulated or influenced by external factors (extrinsic) or internal factors (intrinsic). One of the primary methods of attempting to categorize motivational sources for an individual in the workplace is identifying the origin of a person s primary motivational drives as internal or the result of external stimuli. Academic researchers have identified these two models as intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation, and over several decades, hundreds of academic publications have explored the dichotomy of intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation (Vallerand, 1997). The defining characteristic of intrinsic motivation is as an activity performed for itself in order for the individual performing the activity to derive satisfaction that is inherent in the activity. The characteristics of extrinsic motivation encompass a wide variety of actions and behaviors in which the impetus for action extends beyond those benefits that can be derived from the performance of the activity itself (Deci & Ryan, 1985). A number of models have been created to identify and categorize the various behaviors and origins of stimuli that compel individuals to behave or take action in a specific way. Kasser and Ryan (1996) defined a motivational model that identifies three main motivational goals as extrinsic, and they contrasted them with four motivational goals that are characteristic of intrinsic motivational behavior. Extrinsic Motivation Extrinsic motivation is a framework in which an activity is engaged in for the purpose of attaining some separable outcome (Ryan & Deci, 2000). The extrinsic model focuses on individuals engaging in behaviors that are incentivized by amassing external benefits that enhance either power or position. These external reward contingencies or

36 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 24 perceived benefits can take many forms. The rewards can be broken down into a topology of reward contingencies that include (a) task-noncontingent rewards, (b) taskcontingent rewards, and (c) performance-contingent rewards. Task-noncontingent rewards are given for something other than engaging in a specific target activity. Taskcontingent rewards, on the other hand, are those that are allocated or bestowed for directly completing a specific target activity. Finally, an individual that is motivated by achieving a specific standard of excellence or surpassing a specified hurdle in order to receive the reward commensurate with that activity would fall into the performancecontingent reward category of motivation (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999). Certain types of rewards satiate an individual s desire for specific reinforcement in various aspects of the ego or self-perception. The focus on financial success and attaining material wealth as an indicator of achievement is an obvious external motivation. The desire to be famous, well known, and admired as a characteristic of social recognition is a common external driver. Engaging in specific behavior or activities that may improve one s image or ability to look attractive in terms of body, clothing, and fashion also relies on the acknowledgment and observation of external third parties (Kasser & Ryan, 1996). The Organismic Integration Theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) details an extrinsic goal model that describes an individual s focus on the attainment of contingent external approval and specific rewards. This model identifies an individual goal of achieving financial success (money) and social recognition (fame) as well as a focus on creating an appealing appearance (image) for the individual. These goals require an outside third party to judge whether an individual is worthy of praise and identification for attaining or

37 THE ROLE OF INHERENT MOTIVATION AS A DETERMINANT 25 achieving them. These extrinsic goals do not provide inherent individual satisfaction and rely on outside admiration or acknowledgment to influence personal perception of selfworth (Kasser & Ryan, 1996). Not all forms of extrinsic motivation have the same level of reliance on external stimulus. Some behaviors are engaged in only to satisfy the attainment of a specific reward that is contingent upon completing a specific task. Other behaviors are focused on a higher level of self-determination and autonomy in which the individual is still motivated by external rewards, but the attainment of those external rewards is primarily focused on creating a more developed perception of individual self-worth. The broader category of extrinsic motivation can be broken down into four subcategories External Regulation, Introjection, Identification, and Integration as identified in the Organismic Integration Theory s taxonomy of human motivation (Ryan & Deci, 2000). External regulation relies solely on extrinsic rewards or punishments in a perceived locus of causality that is derived primarily from external influences. Actions are engaged in to obtain an externally imposed reward contingency or to satisfy an external demand. External regulation is a key type of motivation that is associated with early operant conditioning theorists, and in early studies, it was the type of extrinsic motivation that was contrasted and compared with early intrinsic motivation research. The perceived locus of causality associated with this subcategory is purely external (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Introjection is characterized by associated processes that focus on approval from self or others in a high level of ego involvement. Individuals motivated by interjected regulation often feel pressure to perform specific actions in order to avoid guilt or