1

Name: Hemang Khakhar

Assignment Question:

To what extent is it true to say that process theories of

motivation are ,,8more cross-culturally applicable than
content theories? Discuss with reference to empirical
examples.



NDEX
Contents

lnLroducLlon 3
ConLenL Lheorles 4
Abraham Maslows hlerarchy of needs 4
Alderfers L8C Lheory 3
Perzbergs moLlvaLorhyglene Lheory (Perzebergs dual facLors Lheory) 6
rocess Lheorles of moLlvaLlon 7
Adams' LqulLy 1heory 7
vroom LxpecLancy 1heory 8
needsCoalSeLLlng 1heory 9
8elnforcemenL 1heory 10
LlmlLaLlons 10
Concluslon 10
3

ntroduction:
n rapidly changing global environment, organisations are facing multiple challenges in
maintaining and improving their profitability and overall growth. They not only have to
tackle external industry environment but also have to manage internal organizational
aspects. Consistently motivating employees to engage them in to the challenging
business activities and achieve the best possible output is one of the most crucial
internal challenges.
Motivating employees is very important for organisations aspiring to succeed and
maintain progress. However the process to motivate employees in not straightforward
due to the diversity in individual needs, culture, gender, nationality etc. (Helou & Viitala,
2007:01). Motivation is "the degree to which an individual wants and chooses to engage
in certain specified behaviour (Mitchell cited in Mullins, 2005:471). "The word
motivation is coined from the Latin word "movere, which means to move. Motivation is
defined as an internal drive that activates behaviour and gives it direction. ("Motivation
Theory, accessed 8
th
Oct 2010).
As it suggests in the definitions above, motivation is an inspiration or an internal human
drive that an individual gains to perform task or an activity willingly and full heartedly.
When this is viewed in context to organisations, it is an important aspect and a challenge
for the management to identify and implement methods to motivate employees to
achieve common desired business/corporate goals.
Motivation deals with human behaviour, which is the outcome of an individual culture.
ndividual needs have altered in recent years. Some cultures may find financial
compensation as a motivating factor, whereas other set of culture may find it a reason to
work lesser hours. As a result of a mix of nationalities, cultures and diversity of
individuals need; organisations having cross cultured work force; usually faces tough
challenges in applying motivating methods / process. (Helou & Viitala, 2007:01). What is
it that motivates a particular nationality or an individual belonging to a particular type of
culture? s it money, fame, fortune, altruism, philanthropy, intellect, the list is almost
endless in terms of why people do the things they do. ("Motivation lesson accessed 8
th

Oct 2010)

Dealing with cross cultured workforce makes selection of motivation methods/theories all
the more difficult. Nancy Adler (2002:31,174,181) has described two examples which
explains how different nationalities persuade a particular method of motivation. First
example is about a high tech firm in California which started a campaign by projecting
the firm as global "Dragon Slayers of the competition. This worked against the
sentimental values of Chinese workers because in Chinese culture, dragon is considered
as a symbol of good luck and obviously slaying good luck was not accepted. This
eventually forced management to pull back the campaign. Other example describes
when American managers working in Mexico, increased pay for the Mexican agricultural
employees, they started working lesser number of hours than being motivated as
desired.

"The term motivation theory is concerned with the processes that describe why and how
human behaviour is activated and directed ("Motivation Theory, accessed 8
th
Oct
2010). These theories are broadly classified in to two categories: "Content theories and
"Process theories. n this assignment, attempt is made to examine the extent to which
process theories are cross culturally more applicable than the content theories. n order
4

to reach conclusion, the paper will consider reviewing theoretical contexts of selected
process and content theories of motivation and examine them critically with the help of
empirical examples where possible.
Content tbeories:
Content theories are also known as need theories. These theories are mainly focusing on
the internal factors that activates and direct human behaviour. Before we analyse few
most popular content theories, it is vital to have a general understanding of this stream.
These theories are based on the needs of human / individuals. t also explains how
human needs and their priorities over time changes due to which at different stages of
life, human behaviour tend to focus on a particular need which motivates the most.
These theories suggest identifying and considering human need/s and try to fulfil them
in order to motivate them. f these needs are not satisfied, then it is quite unlikely to
drive human behaviour to achieve desired results. Most popular content theories are:
O Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs,
O Alderfer's ERG theory,
O Herzeberg's motivator-hygiene theory (Herzeberg's dual factors theory)
Trabam Maslows bierarcby of needs:
Maslow introduced five levels of basic needs through his theory of needs hierarchy.
Basic needs are categorized as physiological needs, safety and security needs, needs of
love / social need, needs for self-esteem and needs for self-actualization. These five
needs are placed in an order as shown in the following diagram and importance of order
considered from bottom to the top:


3

t is said through this theory that these levels of needs are to be satisfied for motivating
or in other words the motivation is driven by the existence of these unsatisfied five levels
of needs.
n order to test Maslows theory, USA data on motivation suggests that needs do not
immerge in a predictable hierarchy and also if one need is not satisfied and if frustrated,
individuals seek more fulfilment of the other need for compensating unsatisfied need. n
countries like Japan, Greece and Mexico, where uncertainty avoidance is high, security
aspects such as long term job security is perhaps better motivating than self-
actualisation. n collectivistic, feminine cultures of countries like Denmark, Netherland,
Sweden and collectivistic Pakistan Social needs would rank higher than self-esteem or
self-actualisation. t also depends on the countrys economic status and government
policies as to what is generally provided to most citizens will remain less important
motivator. n a country like the USA, physiological needs and security is met by many.
Hence other 3 factors are more attractive to US citizens, but that is not the case with
many countries like ndia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Japan etc. (Module Book: 314). Many
scholars have also argued on the order in which Maslow sighted these five human needs.
While according to Maslow, Self actualisation is the supreme human need, Gareth
Costello of Dublin, reland has criticised Maslows work especially to the aspect of having
a broader view of self-actualisation by stating that history is evident that during the time
of 1940s to 60s people were tired of reductionist, mechanistic messages and
physiological psychologists. They were looking for better meaning and purpose in their
lives and elevate their human values. Perhaps Maslow was the first to establish a theory
which considers putting human being in to psychology and person back to personality
and perhaps during that period the theory was more relevant. However the spectrum of
Maslows definition for self-actualisation itself is debatable. f he refers to it in the
context of supreme self-expression, when it concerns artistic creativity, it is suspected to
be often de-motivating factor. Great artists like van Gogh thrived artistically, without the
circumstances conducive to self-actualisation. "Self-actualisation implies an outwardness
and openness that contrasts with the introspection that can be a pre-requisite for great
artistic self-expression Similarly when scientist or politicians look at the world to find
something that can be of an importance to the universe, great artist / creative people
generally look inside themselves to find something significant to them. The universality
of their work is undoubtedly important but not primary unlike scientist and politicians.
Hence the self-actualisation cannot be considered as the supreme desire / need by all
humans. ("Personality Theories -ABRAHAM MASLOW 1908-1970, accessed 8
th
Oct 2010)
lderfers ERC tbeory:
Just like Maslows theory, ERG theory also considers a hierarchy of needs starting with E-
existence which assumes that every human has basic needs to exist. At second level, R-
relatedness is placed which deals with the need for social relationship and need to relate
with co-workers. At the top Alderfer places Growth which assumes that once E & R is
satisfied, growth is the most important need.
n both Maslows and Alderfers theory, human needs are assumed to follow hierarchy
which is debatable. Both fail to assume cultural context to the motivators. As suggested
by Tung (cited in Mead, 2005), consideration must also be given to the changing nature
of cultural contexts. For e.g. for the people of Republic of China, during the political
openness, external growth factors, money in particular was the most important
motivator. However during the times of political retrenchment, internal factors like
6

ideology and self-actualisation are holding higher order in hierarchy. ERG theory places
growth after existence and relatedness, which is not empirically, supported in the US
individualism. f growth comes after social relatedness, why do we see organisational
politics and attitude issues in most organisations? Hierarchy is not the only debate. t is
possible that at a given time, more than one desire / need is operating. f higher need is
not satisfied, desire for the lower desire becomes stronger.
When we consider these needs as motivators, wonder how soldiers are motivated to
sacrifice life for their countrys cause. s it money, is it growth, is the social relatedness,
is it self-actualization or is it mere psychological attachment / values towards the nation
"patriotism or none of them? Whatever is the motivational factor, it must then apply to
all cultures and all nationalities. Argument arises when we look at many countries unite
under associations like UN to fight for a needy country; where soldiers from different
cultures and countries are fighting for a nation which is not their own country. Even
patriotism is not an answer.
erzTergs motivator-bygiene tbeory {erzeTergs dual
factors tbeory]:
Through dual factor theory, Herzberg described `Hygiene factors and `Motivator factors
in the workplace which results in job satisfaction and motivation. Hygiene factors such as
(pay, working conditions, supervision interpersonal relationships, job security, status,
organisational policies etc.) must be in place for motivating factors (challenge,
recognition, room for achievement, growth, advancement and responsibility etc.) to
work.
Theory assumes that Hygiene factors can remove dissatisfaction but cannot create
satisfaction. Motivators can create satisfaction but cannot remove dissatisfaction. This
theory could not be supported empirically even in Herzebergs own country the USA. Job
enrichment often found demotivation for manual workers in different occupational
groups. n Japanese culture interpersonal relationship is considered to be a motivator
and not hygiene. n New Zealand middle managers and salaried class found supervision
and interpersonal relationship motivators and not just hygiene. Herzberg seems to be
also missing the cultural context, as in strong uncertainty avoidance culture, job rotation
will never be a motivator. Large power distance cultures are not inclined to job
enrichment, whereas masculine cultures do consider it as motivator. (Module Book: 315-
316)
Considering the arguments stated above, content theories in globalized context seem to
be having many limitations. Order of needs depends on an individuals frame of
reference which is found by many studies. Also frame of reference is mainly linked to an
individuals culture. Hence partially individuals need is well bound by culture. (OReilly
and Roberts, cited in Adler, 2002: 176). Economic and cultural systems are the
important aspects when we study motivation. Successful motivation method in one
economy or culture system may completely fail in the other. (Mead, 2005:120).
Furthermore values within and across cultures vary due to which it is not easy to find a
universal set of motivating needs or factors. Hence conclusive support is found to be
missing in content model. (Francesco and Gold, 2005).
7

rocess tbeories of motivation:
Another type of motivation theories are the Process theories. These theories provide an
opportunity to understand the thought process which influence behaviour. t is assumed
to be more flexible as compared to Content theories, when applied universally as they
focus on how each individual understands the work they do, and does not generalise. n
other words it focuses on how individuals need influence their behaviour. Process is how
employees work together as opposed to content which refers to the task or issues they
are working on. To simplify, take example of a meeting where the process is how people
conduct/ interact with each other during the meeting and the content is the decision or
the subject they discuss in the meeting.
There are various process theories, few chosen for evaluation in this paper are Adams
Equity Theory, The Vroom Expectancy Theory, the Needs-Goal-Setting Theory, and the
Reinforcement Theory of Motivation. Equity theory focuses on how individuals compare
with peers the balance in their input to output. Expectancy, instrumentality, and valence
are the key concepts explained in the expectancy theory. Goal setting theory suggests
that the individuals are motivated to reach set goals. t also requires that the set goals
should be specific. Reinforcement theory is concerned with controlling behaviour by
manipulating its consequences.
dams' Equity Tbeory:
This theory assumes that individuals are not only concerned with the absolute amount of
rewards received for their efforts, but also with the relationship of their reward amount
to what others / peers receive. ndividuals usually desire balance in the outcomes like
salary levels, increments, recognition, bonus, perks etc. based on the inputs such as
efforts, experience, education and competence, skill, personality etc. When people
perceive imbalance in the ratio of input to output compared to others, tension is created.
Such tension is assumed to motivate people to strive for achieving equality to the
perceived fairness.
While this theory does not consider differing individual perception of equity, it is not well
supported cross-culturally. Chinese culture is more tolerant to equity difference that the
US due to the cultures large power distance. Hence inequity may not prove to be a
powerful motivator for Chinese employees. (Fulop & Linstead, 1999). The basic flow in
this theory is to distinguish its application between equity cultures and equality cultures.
n equality cultures, output is equal regardless of input, due to which this theory fails to
get empirical support in equality cultures. (Chen, 1995)
8

room Expectancy Tbeory:

"Expectancy theory holds that people are motivated to behave in ways that produce
desired combinations of desired outcomes (Kreitner & Kinicki, 1999). llustration
diagrams above explains the theory, which argues that the employees tendency to act
in a way is driven by the strength of an expectation that the act will produce outcome
and the attractiveness of the outcome to an individual. (Robbins, 1993). Expectancy
theory states that motivation is a function which combines individuals perception that
the action will lead to performance and performance will award perceived desired result.
(Steers & Porter, 1983).
9

Vrooms theory assumes that the human behavior results from the conscious choice from
the alternatives which is systematically related to psychological processes, most
importantly perception, belief and attitude (Pinder, 1884). There are three mental
components behind stimulating human behavior which are Valance, nstrumentality and
Expectancy. This is why the theory is also known as VE theory (Vroom, 1964).
Organisations often face challenges in setting all three aspects right while motivating
employees. Take example of modern HR tools or modern Performance evaluation system
such as Score Card, KPs and tools like 360 degree performance rating. All of them are
set to motivate employees to work in a particular direction to achieve the common
business goals. Achievements of individuals are then rated with benchmark thresholds to
decide their rewards. However in cross cultured organisations, lot depends on how
individual under the influence of their cultural artefacts pursue instrumentality and
valance of the reward. n the country like UAE, where UAE nationals are given utmost
preference and considerations by the management of most Banking organisations, which
is primarily driven from the local population oriented government policies; performing at
work to get rewarded for the UAE nationals is not considered necessary. Whether they
perform or not they will get if not desired, at least an average growth and fixed perks,
which are given to them by perceived law. Also organisations are constantly subjected to
regulatory pressure of maintaining local workforce of more than 40% at any time in
Banking. This makes difficult for any Bank in the country to lay off UAE nationals
considering re-recruitment cost and getting the right local candidates in replacement.
Although this theory is considered to be more flexible in terms of its application; beyond
the US context its universal acceptance is not well supported.
eeds-Coal-Setting Tbeory:
Number of studies has shown that people are motivated when they have a specific goal
in their life or workplace. Edwin Locke and Gary Latham describes (cited in Daft,
2006:708) that specific, challenging goals increase motivation. Their theory refers to
four components i.e. Goal specificity, Goal difficulty, acceptance and feedback. Goal
specificity refers to how concrete and clear is the goal. For e.g. Sell everyday goods
worth $ 1000 or meet 10 customers every day. Ambiguous or non- specific goals for e.g.
keep in touch with clients or increase sales.
Specific goals provide better motivation as compared to ambiguous goals. Also difficult
goals are better motivator than easy goals, as employees pursue opportunity to stretch
their ability for achieving difficult goals. Third component is buying or acceptance of the
goal by employees. f the goal is well accepted, motivation will be high as compared to
weak acceptance. Last component is feedback which refers to the information provided
by managers to the team members about how well they are doing in the direction of
achieving the goal. However self-feedback where individual monitors own progress is
found to be even stronger motivator. (Daft, 2006:708).
CC Bank in ndia, during the year 2004, ran a powerful goal setting motivator
campaign, where sales force was given a target to cross the competitors (HDFC) record
high sales of mortgage loans by the end of the quarter in Central Mumbai region. Daily
achievement was displayed on a large board in their sales office versus the target. With
the same number of sales members, the team achieved more than expected sales
numbers which allowed team members to take away high incentives and additional
bonus. My current employer Bank CBD has similar example where the Bank was the last
entrant to Mortgage sales in Dubai in the mid-2007. During 1 year period i.e. by mid of
2008, the Bank became 2
nd
largest mortgage lending Bank in the region. All due to
10

incentivised goal setting month on month for the out sourced sales team. This theory
seems to be one of the most powerful motivator.
Example referred by Nancy Adler (2002:31,174,181) in context with goal setting theory,
does not support in cross cultural workforce, especially when the goal is anti-cultural.
First example where the specific goal setting campaign "Dragon Slayers of the
competition worked against the sentimental values of Chinese workers. Hence the theory
fails to consider cultural perceptions of the goal.

n slamic countries, conventional interest earning products are not well accepted due to
religious aspects. Hence financial organisations will have to be careful in setting goals to
increase interest revenue for the Muslim team members, as it may not turn to be a
motivator. t can be safely assumed that the goal setting theory fails to assume the
extension of cultural and religious values of the goal. Partially we can relate acceptance
component of the theory to the above argument.
Reinforcement Tbeory:
"Reinforcement is defined as anything that causes a certain behavior to be repeated or
to be inhibited this theory simply looks at the behavior and its consequences. t uses
reward and punishment for changing or modifying behavior of employees. This theory is
also known as Carrot and stick theory where carrot refers to the reward and stick refers
to the punishment. There are two aspects linked to this theory i.e. Positive reinforcement
and negative reinforcement. Frances Flood, CEO of Gentner Communications,
manufacturers of high-end audio conferencing equipment, based in Salt Lake City,
offered engineers share of profit if they manage to introduce new product earlier than
scheduled time. This motivator actually slashed product development time by 30%.
Company and employees benefited with positive reinforcement. Other aspect is
avoidance learning, which is sometimes known as negative reinforcement. Employees
learn to do the right thing by avoiding unpleasant situations. t is important for the
manager or supervisor to stop criticising or reprimanding once the incorrect behavior is
stopped. This will motivate employee avoiding undesired / negative behavior. (Daft,
2006:708). As explained in the example of UAE Banks, would wonder how UAE
nationals will assume this process theory. Acceptance of the theory is not universal.
Limitations:
Motivation is a subject that deals with human psychology. Many scholars have done
extensive research on nternational organisational behaviour and cultural aspects of
motivation. Due to the limitation of permitted word count and the constraint of time, this
paper refers to the limited scholarly articles and research material specifically around the
subject. t does not cover all theoretical aspects around the subject, especially in the
area of psychology, leadership, strategy and organisation structures. This paper has
considered only the most reputed theories and has left many process and content
theories and their extensions due to the word count limitation. Hence the conclusion may
be considered not only the outcome of theories covered in this paper but from the
overall studies done by the author in this subject.
Conclusion:
Most well-known motivation theories are written by the North Americans, in the US and
with American data. Hence it mainly relates to western cultures, especially American
cultures. We derived above that many of these American origin theories does not get
11

empirical support in their own country as well, how can they be applied universally. f
we look at Hofstedes commentary on content theories like one of Maslows, he pointed
out that the US culture is highly individualistic, self-centred and need theories are the
natural consequence of such culture. (Fulop & Linstead, 1999). Process theories like
Vrooms Expectancy theory and Adams equity theories are more flexible beyond US
context as the consideration is given to individuals psychological aspects as opposed to
generalisation observed in need theories. Although with limitations, process theories are
comparatively and cross-culturally more effective than content theories, this paper
concludes that motivation theories whether content or process does not travel very well
across the globe. Motivation in any organisation in any country must considered a
customised application of available theories based on the individual cultural mix,
organisational culture, structure of organisation, nature of business, geographical
location, local regulations, economic status of the country, political situation etc.etc.