DOES MONEY MOTIVATE PEOPLE?

Introduction
Does the money motivate people? This is the big question on human minds and for the answer it can be different from one to another. From my own opinion it can be positive and negative answers. In my opinion, yes money can motivate people in many ways such as encourage to work more harder to achieved more profits, to appreciate the value of money, make happiness in life, to buy or to get anything they wants and many more. All this is because of related to the Maslows Hierarchy Needs. In other side, money also can make people become greed; arrogant, self-fish, lost of self control, and sometimes this type of people would be disrespect others. Refer to Hadith below when the people was control by the money and power sometimes they forgot the basic part in our life.
Book 005, Number 2134:

Abu Sa'id al-Khudri reported Allah's Messenger (way peace be upon him) as saying: No sadaqa (zakat) is payable on less than five wasqs of (dates or grains), on less than five camelheads and on less than five uqiyas (of silver).

The primary reason why people have to work is because of money. Employers know this, and many companies reward outstanding employees with bonuses and cash rewards. People are motivated by different things. Some employees have financial goals, others have professional goals, and others have personal goals. The same incentives cannot work for all. This essay outlines some of the reasons why cash is not always a suitable motivator for excellent employees. Money makes the world go round, and nowhere is this truer than in the workplace. Employers know that money is one of the best motivators. However, are bonuses or cash awards always the best way to reward employees?

Everyone uses the money. We all want it, work for it and think about it. If you don't know what money is, you are not like most humans. However, the task of defining what money is where it comes from and what it is worth belongs to those who dedicate themselves to the discipline of economics. While the creation and growth of money seems somewhat intangible, money is the way we get the things we need and want. Here we look at the multifaceted characteristics of money.

What is the money? According to the Wikipedia money is any object or record that is generally accepted as a payment for goods and services and repayment of debt in given country or socio-economic context. Or in contact of human understanding, money is any value in a piece of paper or coin that can make you to buy anything. Before the development of a medium of exchange, people would barter to obtain the goods and services they needed. This is basically how it worked where two individuals each possessing a commodity the other wanted or needed would enter into an agreement to trade their goods. Most of the people don't spend much time wondering what money it is, but their major concern is how much they have, and how to get it more. Usually, the question

of what money IS arises only when money ceases to function properly. In economics understanding, the answer to the question what is the money? consists of the three (3) words are: Money is a "medium of exchange" That's all. Yet the conception of a "medium of exchange" ranks below only language (with its corollaries - speech and the written word) as the greatest intellectual discovery in history. Without language, the exchange of anything but the most rudimentary ideas is impossible. Without money, the production and exchange of anything but the most rudimentary goods and services is impossible. It is not difficult or time consuming, or inefficient, it is impossible! Exchange Animals don't exchange (or trade) amongst one another. They are self-sufficient, or they take from each other, or they exercise the prerogative of superior strength and/or cunning. There are some human beings who get along in a very similar fashion, but the overwhelming majority recognise the benefits of voluntary exchange. Strictly speaking, the use of the word "voluntary" in this context is redundant. The phrase "your money or your life" is not the precursor to an exchange, whether the person uttering it brandishes a gun or a government identity card. The first rule of any voluntary exchange is simplicity itself. If two people are willing to exchange, each must view the results of the exchange as being beneficial. If either of them is not of that view, the exchange will not take place. Direct and Indirect Exchange Direct exchange, or barter, is exactly that - my good or service for your good or service. The problem is that I might want what you have to offer, but you might not want what I offer in exchange. With no "medium" of exchange, there is no deal. Indirect exchange takes place when one party has a "medium" that is always acceptable, not for what it is, but for what can be done with it. If you offer me money, I will accept it, because I know that I can exchange it for what I want, whenever I want it.

Indirect exchange involves the use of MONEY in the "medium" of exchange. Money is the universal key, it fits all locks. And the world it has unlocked is the world we live in today. Money has made the division of labour possible. It has made specialisation possible. It has made the accumulation of wealth over periods which exceed a human lifetime possible. Perhaps most important of all, it has hugely advanced the potential for amicable interaction between people. To survive as such, and to prosper, a rational animal must exchange. He or she has language, to exchange ideas, and money, to exchange the fruits of ideas. From that foundation, everything else we see around us has been built. For the years, managers, psychologists, and academics have been interested in the theories about motivation. Why we get out of bed and go to work every morning? Why some of the people are willing to do a great job despite being faced with huge challenges on a daily basis? Why others can't do even the simplest thing without making any mistakes and why seemingly small things such as the removal of a water-cooler in the canteen can have hugely detrimental effects on work performance. A large body of the research has been written attempting to tackle on these issues. Some of which have gained considerable currency inside businesses as they try to get the most from their workforce. So in this discussion will discuss on a few of the more established and popular theories that can be a motivator.

Money as a Motivator
Theory of Human Motivation states that all workers are motivated primarily by the need for money; so if you want to get the most out of your workforce, you pay them more. This has particular effectiveness in areas where payment is directly linked to the accomplishment of objectives. This theory is prevalent in many businesses in the form of performance-related pay, incentives, bonuses and promotion schemes. While few would argue that it does not have some validity (indeed it is the driver behind most sales forces the world over), it is not an all-encompassing theory. It doesn't really address the sometimes complex reasons why people are motivated by money. It excludes people who are not driven primarily for money. It does not, for

example, apply to voluntary organisations. In addition, it may not work if meeting the financial objectives might threaten other entitlements, creature-comforts or rights, such as an employee's location, network of friends, employment conditions or current level of job satisfaction.

The Hierarchy of Needs

This theory is probably the best-known motivation theory. It was coined by Abraham Maslow during the 1940s and 1950s. In essence, it states that our motivations are dictated primarily by the circumstances we find ourselves in, and that certain 'lower' needs need to be satisfied before we are motivated towards 'higher'

accomplishments. Let's take an extreme case: if we were stranded in a high mountain range after a plane crash, all our energies would initially go into finding food, shelter, defence and possibly, medical assistance. Only after these needs were satisfied would we seek other objectives such as respect, friendship, care of others and sexual fulfilment. If all these goals were answered then we would be free to seek purer goals such as enlightenment, wisdom, great works and perpetual remembrance. Maslow divided these objectives into five distinct stages, starting at physiological needs and ending at self-actualisation needs. In practice, the theory has its application in ensuring that the workforce have sufficiently comfortable surroundings and working conditions in order for them to be free to do their best for their company.

SelfActualization

Esteem Needs

Social Needs

Safety Needs
Physiological Needs
Theory X and Theory Y
In 1960, Douglas McGregor advanced the idea that managers had a major part in motivating staff. He essentially divided managers into two categories Theory X managers who believe that their staff are lazy and will do as little as they can get away with; and Theory Y managers who believe that their people really want to do their best in their work. Theory X managers believe that staff will do things if they are given explicit instructions with no wiggle room, and plenty of stick if they don't do what they are supposed to do. Theory Y managers believe their people work their best when empowered to make appropriate decisions. Theory Y has begun to replace Theory X as the dominant management philosophy in many organisations (except your workplace, of course).

AAP Theory
This theory was developed by DC McClelland and DG Winter in 1969. Essentially it groups people's needs into three different categories the need for achievement, the need for affiliation and the need for power. Taking a less hierarchical approach than Maslow, it acknowledges that different strokes are required for different folks. Some people will have strong motivations in some or all of the categories, while others will have little or none. So, in order to get the most out of people you must make the goals and objectives fit with each individual's needs. Dont expect someone with high affiliation needs to be a great parking warden or sports referee!

Dual Factor Theory

Another theory to gain prominence at this time was Frederick Hertzberg's Dual Factor theory. He identified two separate groups of factors that had a strong bearing on motivation. He called the first group 'hygiene factors,' because they strongly influenced feelings of dissatisfaction amongst employees. Hygiene factors include working conditions, pay, and job security. According to Hertzberg, they don't motivate employees as such, but if they are not there, they can adversely affect job performance. He referred to the other group as 'motivation factors' because they had a role in positively influencing performance - such as achievement, career progression and learning. Hertzberg went on to state that you can forget about workforce motivation if you don't get the hygiene factors right first of all. Fixing the downstairs toilets is not normally a recipe for a 50% productivity improvement.

Equity Theory
John Stacy Adams posited another theory in 1965, looking at how motivation was affected by the degree of fairness within an organisation, particularly within a group of peers. Consider the situation where nine sales representatives are given a company Mercedes, but one of them is given a Toyota, even though that person believes he did just as good a job as his colleagues. How would that last sales representative feel? Now theres nothing wrong with a Toyota, but by comparing one's own circumstances to the treatment of others in a similar situation, very intense

feelings can be experienced. These feelings could lead to intense positive or negative motivations. It's completely relative, and could apply to a peer group of millionaires should they compare one another's yachts, or hair transplants. In practice, managers need to be careful in singling out an individual for special treatment within a group of peers because of the emotions this can engender.

Expectancy Theory
Victor Vroom in 1964 put forward the notion that people are driven by the likelihood of genuine success in achieving particular objectives. Three barriers need to be jumped by managers if they want to motivate their people to succeed. First of all, they need to connect the task to be performed to the likelihood of better results. Secondly they need to set expectations that there are positive benefits to the employee in achieving those results, and thirdly they need to ensure that these benefits are of value to the employee. For instance, there is no point asking your engineers to be happy about coming in a half-hour early in future if you can't properly explain how this will lead to eventual real benefits for the engineers themselves. Telling them that it will increase senior management's bonuses doesn't tend to work so well.

Conclusion
From the above explanations, I can conclude that the money can be a negative or positive motivator to the people. But it depends on how the ways they motivate their self. If they choose to be a good motivator, it can be a good people but if they choose to be a bad motivator, you will be a bad people.