Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION
he financial stability of every company depends upon the successful
T
Project motivation is a key aspect to a success-
ful project, yet few studies exist that shed light management of resources dedicated to completing projects within a
on this important subject. This article reviews predetermined budget. Although the total number of project manage-
the current literature and theoretical aspects of ment professionals (PMPs) currently registered with the Project
motivation and provides an analysis of the data. Management Institute (PMI) is 202,514 (PMI, 2006), certified project man-
A survey was conducted by soliciting project agers are still in high demand because of the training they receive to manage
managers to tell how they perceive their ability projects. For example, the success of a project hinges on the ability of a proj-
to influence motivation. In total, 115 certified ect manager to ensure timely delivery, adhere to budget constraints, and
project managers responded to the survey. A manage scope and quality specifications. A project manager may have the
discussion and suggestions for future research necessary skills to guide a project team through various project stages and
follow the data. project life cycles, but team motivationsomething far less tangibleis an
essential element of a successful project.
KEYWORDS: project motivation; project PMIs A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK
management professional; certified project Guide) (PMI, 2004) emphasizes that the interpersonal skills needed to moti-
manager vate a project team are a project managers most important asset. Whether a
project team is highly motivated to attain a projects goal can make the dif-
ference between a smooth project progress and one that is bogged down
with complications. The idea of a motivated project team may seem to be a
common-sense matter but can be difficult for project managers to easily
understand because definitions of motivation vary among researchers. For
example, Huszczos (2004) view of motivation is centered on expectations
and reinforcements, whereas other researchers have explained motivation
as a level of energy employees bring to work (Ellemers, De Gilder, & Haslam,
2004; Welbourne, Andrews, & Andrews, 2005). The various explanations of
motivation have left psychologists, managers, coworkersand most people in
generalstruggling to understand what motivates people (Schwalbe, 2004).
The ability of a project manager to work with a team and achieve goals is
critical to the success of an organization. Successful project management is
more than simply working within predefined project management con-
structs and techniques; yet, understanding how motivation works from the
project managers perspective remains unclear. This research includes a lit-
erature review of motivation in project settings that may increase or
decrease team motivation. The results of the current research explore cur-
rently held perceptions by project managers to formulate successful tech-
niques that can help create a motivated team.
Extrinsic Intrinsic
Amotivation
Motivation Motivation
Figure 1: This Gagne and Deci (2005) model illustrates the continuum from amotivation to intrinsic motivation (p. 336).
stages to integrate a regulation. SDT also has to have production capability individual. A manager can, however,
should not be understood as a theory (PC maintenance). In other words, help an employee stay in the zone or
of stages where one level has to be satis- mere maximization of employee moti- even aid to elevate it a bit. Another
fied before the next one can be attained vation will bring negative conse- insight Welbourne et al. received from
(e.g., Maslows Hierarchy of Needs quences because laws of nature teach the managers who participated in their
[1954], reviewed later on). Rather, SDT us that what goes up must come down. study was that simple interventions
proposes that extrinsic motivation can Welbourne et al. (2005) explored and an increase of communication
come very close to intrinsic motivation this theory by studying employee moti- with the employee can make tremen-
when external factors are internalized vation as a level of energy that has to be dous differences in employee energy.
(Gagne & Deci, 2005). optimized in order to be most effective. Practical advice that can help managers
Another interesting finding con- Just as overtraining in the athletic world understand and work with employee
cerning intrinsic motivation is the will lead to injury, burnout, or other motivation better will be examined
spillover effect. Frey (1997) explained negative side effects, so will overmoti- next. Specifically, we will examine areas
that in closed groups such as tempo- vation take its toll over time. Welbourne researchers and management theorists
rary project teams, but also families, et al. (2005) specifically stated that too have identified as especially applicable
intrinsic motivation can be affected by much motivation or energy can lead to to team motivation.
others in the group. If one persons detriments in long-term performance,
intrinsic motivation is alienated or as is poignantly captured in the Autonomy
crowded-out, then the lower motiva- Japanese phenomenon of karo-jisatsu Being capable of and allowed to man-
tion of that person may spill over to (death through overwork) (p. 56). age themselves is one of the most
other project members and thereby Welbourne et al. (2005) also found that important needs and requirements of
lower the overall motivation level of the although the concept of more is not the knowledge worker according to
whole project team. always better seems to be common Drucker (1999). When participants were
sense, well-established motivation the- given autonomous control (operator
Optimizing Energy ories have deemphasized that aspect of control) in the Wall, Corbett, Martin,
Deming (1988) explained that every motivation. Gagne and Deci (2005) and Clegg (1990) study, increased per-
process in an organization is subject to reported in their meta-review that formance, increased intrinsic job satis-
variation. He stressed that instead of motivational concepts have been faction, and decreased job pressure
trying to maximize production, morale, proven to be both additive and subtrac- were reported. The finding that autono-
or other aspects of organizations, man- tive but did not point to any research my creates greater employee satis-
agers should strive to optimize accord- that suggests an optimization of emp- faction is also congruent with studies
ing to natural variation of the processes. loyee energy. on the goal-setting theory, which found
Covey (1990) advocated a similar The evidence from the Welbourne that self-set goals are more desirable
approach, less focused on manufactur- et al. (2005) study shows that there is an (Ambrose & Kulik, 1999). According to
ing but created for human beings, that optimum zone of employee energy or Bakke (2005), decisions that are made
he called P/PC balance. He explained motivation that should not be sur- at the top are basically lost chances to
that for anything to be productive (P) it passed, and that it is unique for each delegate responsibility. Luecke (2004)
competition. A study by Deckop and motivation level of the individual. Contrary to the researchers expec-
Cirka (2000) found that when a merit- Depending on what kind of project tations, these three factors stayed con-
pay program was introduced in a non- type the team operates in (weak or sistently significant, no matter which
profit organization, decreased feelings strong project matrix), the influence of ethnic group, cultural group, gender, or
of autonomy and intrinsic motivation the organization can be more or less level in an organization individuals
were reported. Reward structures and constraining. Traditional motivation belonged to. These findings go along
reinforcement systems are therefore theories have mostly concerned them- with Ambrose and Kuliks (1999) meta-
areas that can influence employee selves with motivation of employees in review, which also reported that no
motivation, both positively and nega- a larger organization. The following consistent patterns of cultural differ-
tively. Project managers will have to section examines motivation of indi- ences or similarities can be found by
judge which approach is most appro- viduals from the perspective of the reviewing motivation research in the
priate depending on the makeup of the overarching organization and its gener- 1990s. Sirota et al. (2005) reported that
stakeholders who are involved in a al impact on employees. correlation coefficients for equity were
project. consistently in the .50s to .60s, achieve-
Organizational Perspective on ment in the .40s, and camaraderie in
Summary of Project Managers Motivation the .30s to .40s (all beyond the 0.00001
Perspective According to Drucker (1999), managers level of significance). However, these
To recap, project managers can influ- have to understand that the vast major- studies did not focus primarily on
ence team motivation through the use ity of workers in the 21st century are motivation in teams, but also included
of power and the application of various knowledge workers who have funda- traditional, hierarchical management
leadership styles. The aim for intrinsic mentally different needs than manual structures, and satisfaction with employ-
motivation will be most beneficial workers. Drucker sees the enhance- ees day-to-day work routines.
because the team member will be con- ment of knowledge workers productiv-
nected to the cause or goal of the proj- ity and motivation as the most impor- Project Team Motivation vs.
ect, instead of the reward that is tant challenge of the 21st century. Both Organizational Motivation
attached to it. In addition, a project Drucker (1999) and Deming (1988) What distinguishes management of
manager should attempt to influence believed that one of the core elements projects from general management is
motivation in a way that optimizes it knowledge workers must have is pride that it revolves around a temporary
instead of trying to maximize motiva- of workmanship. It is a challenge for team under the guidance of a tempo-
tion. Direct applications that can be managers to help employees develop rary leader, the project manager. The
used to influence motivation are allow- such a feeling, especially because preceding literature review highlights
ing autonomy, giving feedback, and knowledge work is usually detached that motivation can be equally influ-
offering rewards. Although these areas from products that are produced by a enced by the project manager and the
give general directions for how a project company. overall organization. The question
manager can influence motivation, they The extensive study done by Sirota resulting from this duality of forces
do not point to specific techniques that et al. (2005) found three factors that are onto the individual team members is:
aim at the development of intrinsic strongly associated with employees Can a project manager influence team
motivation of team members in project overall satisfaction with their organiza- motivation positively despite overall
settings. Research question two (R2) will tion: equity (r 0.59), achievement (r organizational influences? In other
therefore investigate which techniques 0.43), and camaraderie (r 0.36). words, can a project manager encour-
project managers find particularly suc- Equity in this study refers to physiolog- age high intrinsic team motivation
cessful to develop high levels of intrin- ical, economic, and psychological fair- even if the overall organization creates
sic team motivation in project settings. ness. Achievement stands for pride in a culture of low motivation (R3)?
The discussion of motivation of ones accomplishments, recognition, Another factor that makes project
project teams would be incomplete and doing things that matter, and management different from general
without the consideration of the organ- camaraderie refers to a cooperative management is that it goes through var-
ization in which the project team oper- work environment that makes an ious project stages, namely: initiating,
ates. According to PMI (2004), projects organization not just a business entity, planning, executing, monitoring and
operate in hybrid situations where but also a community. The correlation control, and closing (Project Manage-
team members belong to a team and an data was derived from several studies, ment Institute, 2004). Because project
overarching organization at the same which included a wide demographic management and team development
time. Both put demands on the team and surveyed employees in North revolve around stages, different approa-
member, and both can influence the America and Europe. ches may have to be taken depending
Director 21
Team
of PMO Years
Member
7% 11%
8% 14
Program
Years
Manager
22%
10%
1120
PM 37% Years
29%
PMP 38%
510
Years
38%
work in environments that handle project teams consisting of less than 10 that gives the project manager little
large-scale projects (see Figure 2). The members (N 81). legitimate authority (functional orga-
largest concentration of respondents nization or a weak matrix). Only 25
(N 46) had more than 10 years of Motivation, Type of Organization, respondents reported that they worked
experience in project management, and Project Stages in an environment with strong legiti-
and 44 had worked as project managers Research Question 1 (R1) explores mate authority (strong matrix or proj-
for 510 years. Only 25 respondents had which factors most commonly provoke ect organization). The remainder (N
14 years of experience in project man- low levels of team motivation in project 22) worked in a balanced matrix envi-
agement. Over a third of the respon- settings. To measure the organizational ronment where the project manager
dents (N 39) managed projects worth authority, the project managers were splits authority with the functional
more than $1 million (U.S.). Only 22 asked to select the structure type of the manager. Table 1 illustrates which fac-
reported that their project was worth organization where they last managed tors project managers indicated they
less than $100,000 (U.S.). The majority a project (Schwalbe, 2004, p. 47). A perceive to have the greatest impact
(N 54) indicated projects ranging surprising number (N 68) reported lowering motivation, arranged by type
from $100,000 to $600,000 (U.S.) with that they worked in an environment of organization.
Type of Organization
Factors Lowering Team Weak Balanced Strong
Motivation in Projects Functional Matrix Matrix Matrix Project
Missing top management support 18 26 12 8 10
Personal conflicts between team members 11 19 7 4 7
Inequity in reward system 6 18 5 4 4
Schedule conflicts 5 11 11 1 4
Time overruns 3 7 4 3 2
Note. Respondents were allowed to pick more than one factor.
Figure 4 shows 79% of the project sense of ownership through a shared expectations, successful project man-
managers believed that it is the project vision is critical to developing a highly agers need to follow through with a
managers responsibility to stir team motivated project team. The following sense of trust that the team has made
motivation at the beginning of a proj- statements are examples of this theme effective decisions. One project manag-
ect. During the intermediate phase, this in context: er found it important to give [the team]
number declines to 44%, moving the responsibility and trust. Accept errors
Engaging the project team in the
responsibility to both the project man- decision making as much as realisti-
and give them the chance to fix it.
ager and the individual team member. cally possible. Setting their expecta- Motivation can be equally influ-
Toward the end of the project, slightly tions properly right from day one enced by the project manager and the
more than half (58%) of the respon- and ensure transparency/accounta- social milieu of an organization. While
dents expressed that the responsibility bility in all activities. other layers of an organization such as
lies with the project manager. Each team member was a stake- support from management and client-
holder in the success of the project. generated scope changes contribute to
Motivation, Member Participation, They were there from kickoff to the overall culture of a work environ-
closure.
and Team Culture ment, factors that help to form a sense
Team members were involved in
Research Question 2 (R2) explores of team culture include organizational
all stages of planning and execu-
motivation techniques that project strategy, project purpose, objectives,
tion. They understood the integra-
managers have found to be successful. tion of all components and the
and commitment to project goal. These
In this section of the questionnaire, effect their role had on the success factors have the potential to under-
respondents were asked to describe of the whole project. mine the best laid plans. In spite of
what promotes team motivation. The these potential obstacles, the majority
answers were compiled and analyzed The qualitative analysis highlights (63%) of project managers indicated
using a content analysis. Categories that intrinsic factors such as communi- that it is possible to motivate a team
were developed using keyword fre- cation, involvement, and trust appear even if the overall culture has a negative
quencies. In turn, the categories were to be successful techniques to create a effect on employee motivation (R3).
reexamined in the context of the com- highly motivated project team. For This number may provoke the thought
ments. Interestingly, the comments example, the last theme that emerged that the other 38% simply do not know
appeared to center on issues pertaining in this category was trust and how proj- how to motivate a team, but Table 3
to communication. For example, the ect members can convey it. A majority illustrates that a majority of project
keyword communication, along with (59%) of the participating project man- managers (63%) believe that it is possi-
project team, appeared in statements agers agreed that letting team members ble to maintain positive team motiva-
that referred to clear communication develop their own ways to produce tion despite the overall organizational
with stakeholders. More specifically, deliverables is a good way to create a environment, even if they found team
the comments stressed that a project motivated team. The implication seems motivation to be difficult on their last
manager needs to be a good communi- to be that if team members participate project. It is interesting to note that
cator, both formally and informally. In in the development of goals and 67% of project managers thought it
multiple-choice questions, an over-
whelming number (93%) of respon- It was easy to motivate
dents agreed that providing positive, the team
constructive feedback is a successful
Disagree Neutral Agree Total
motivation technique. Engaging team
members in personal conversations Disagree 7 5 11 23
Project managers can
was also seen as a strong motivational motivate their team 6% 4% 10% 20%
technique by a majority of respondents despite the overall Neutral 2 7 12 21
(77%). organizational culture 2% 6% 10% 18%
The keyword participation was also
associated with team communication. Agree 15 11 44 70
In the multiple-choice questions, most 13% 10% 38% 61%
of the project managers (90%) believed Total 24 23 67 114
that having team members participate N 114 21% 20% 59% 100%
in the creation of the work-breakdown
Table 3: Motivation difficulty in last project and opinion about the project managers ability to moti-
structure is a strong technique for
vate the team.
motivation. This seems to imply that a
of a good match of skills to tasks. A proj- team motivation can be heavily influ- Covey, S. R. (1990). The seven habits of
ect manager has to be careful in assign- enced by the project manager, especial- highly effective people: Restoring the
ing tasks to members. Expectations ly during early stages in the project. It character ethic. New York: Simon and
have to be clearly communicated, and appears that project managers have the Schuster.
project members should be chosen ability to create a subculture within an Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R. M.
wisely so that project tasks fit the overarching organization in which (1989). Self-determination in a work
desires of individual team members. team dynamics can lead to higher lev- organization. Journal of Applied
Lewis (2003) pointed in the right direc- els of motivation than in the encom- Psychology, 74(4), 580590.
tion for general managers when he said passing organization. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M.
that it is important for a manager to find To achieve a project environment (1999). A meta-analytic review of
out what motivates people in their pri- where the majority of the members experiments examining the effects of
vate lives. Understanding what the indi- involved are motivated about the proj- extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motiva-
vidual desires of team members are will ect, project managers have to be sensi- tion. Psychological Bulletin, 125(6),
give any project manager a leg up in tive during the early stages of a project. 627668.
motivating a project team from an Clear communication at the beginning Deckop, J. R., & Cirka C. C. (2000). The
intrinsic point of view. of projects appears to be the key in the risk and reward of a double-edged
development of high motivation sword: Effects of a merit pay program
Timing Is Essential
throughout the whole project. At the on intrinsic motivation. Nonprofit and
A project manager guides the team
beginning of a project, the project Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 29(3),
through various stages throughout a
manager should strive for top manage- 400418.
project life cycle, and the results of this
ment support, establish clear scope
study show that attention to motivation Deming, W. E. (1988). Out of the crisis:
requirements with the client and/or
techniques appears to be mostly called Quality, productivity, and competitive
sponsor, and involve team members as
for at the beginning of a project. The position. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
early as possible to ensure project buy-
more a project progresses, the more University Press.
in from the most important stakehold-
project managers believe that team Drucker, P. F. (1999). Management
ers in a project.
motivation is a shared responsibility of challenges for the 21st century (1st ed.).
The results of this study merely
the team member and the project man- New York: HarperBusiness.
highlight trends in current opinions and
ager. The importance of early involve-
should not be interpreted in other ways. Dunn, S. C. (2001). Motivation by proj-
ment of stakeholders was highlighted
By asking current professionals in the ect and functional managers in matrix
in the analysis of project stages and
field about their opinion, the foregoing organizations. Engineering
their relation to team motivation. The
trends could be identified. However, the Management Journal, 13(2), 39.
majority of respondents agreed that
current research should not be inter- Ellemers, N., De Gilder, D., & Haslam,
team motivation is high at the begin-
preted as a representative sample of the S. A. (2004). Motivating individuals
ning of a project (88%) and that it is the
overall population of project managers and groups at work: A social identity
responsibility of the project manager to
worldwide. The sample chosen for the perspective on leadership and group
introduce a high level of team motiva-
questionnaire was a sample of conven- performance. Academy of Management
tion during the start of the project
ience due to the busy schedule of proj- Review, 29(3), 459478.
(79%). To create a sense of ownership
ect management professionals. The Frey, B. S. (1997). Not just for the
and to attempt to instill intrinsic moti-
trends expressed in the current research money: An economic theory of personal
vation in the team, a project manager
should be followed up with case studies motivation. Cheltenham, UK: Edward
should focus most of his or her moti-
or ethnographic analyses to create a Elgar.
vating efforts on the beginning of the
more thorough picture of the project
project. Gagne, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-
managers perspective.
determination theory and work moti-
Key Findings and Research
vation. Journal of Organizational
Limitations References Behavior, 26(4), 331362.
The goal of this study was to explore the Ambrose, M. L., & Kulik, C. T. (1999).
project managers perspective on team Old friends, new faces: Motivation Huszczo, G. E. (2004). Tools for team
motivation by exploring successful research in the 1990s. Journal of leadership: Delivering the X-factor in
motivation techniques and determin- Management, 25(3), 231292. team excellence (1st ed.). Palo Alto, CA:
ing important factors that decrease Bakke, D. (2005). Joy at work: A revolu- Davies-Black Pub.
team motivation. Taken together, the tionary approach to fun on the job Latham, G. P., & Locke, E. A. (1991).
findings of this study emphasize that (1st ed.). Seattle, WA: PVG. Self-regulation through goal setting.