motivation models theories in diverse situations

Mar 17th, 2015
Price: $10 USD

Question description

We review several motivation models this week and consider different ways in which various theories work best in diverse situations.

1. In what ways does your own personality affect the ways in which you are motivated under different circumstances? 2. What does the most current research indicate about which of these theories works best under a variety of workplace situations? 3. Please provide an anecdote from your own experience to illustrate your points.

200-300 words
APA Formatted
Original work as I CHECK EVER paper

EXAMPLE FROM INSTRUCTOR......"When considering theory and practice, a useful concept is the wheel of theory. This concept was developed by Walter Wallace (1969) and it is a circular image that can be conceptualized as a clockwise arrangement with theory at the twelve o’ clock position and data at the six o’clock position. However, before describing the workings of the wheel of theory it is necessary to define terms. Theory is a relationship between concepts that can be operationalized into observable variables whose relationships can be tested; the purpose of theory is to explain and predict (Wacker, 1998). Data is simply observations or particulars. Since theory describes relationships between variables, this description can be tested on new observations (i.e., new particulars). If the theory in use doesn’t fit these new particulars, it is necessary to build a new theory. Again moving clockwise, the space between twelve o’ clock and six o’ clock is the application of theory to data (or theory testing), while the position from six o’ clock to twelve o’ clock is theory building or the construction of theory based on new observations. Since a particular motivation theory may not necessarily fit the situation’s particulars a new (working) theory may be needed. Thus, the individual may need to find and apply complementary motivational theories or apply elements of complementary theories.

At a macro-level, goal setting theory (Locke & Latham, 2006) describes the motivation process that I use. Early in my life I determined that I wanted three things. I wanted to be well-educated, well-traveled, and well-off. In general all goals have been achieved. I earned a Ph.D. from a rigorous university program, I have lived, worked, and traveled in more than 40 countries, and while I do not intend to do so, I could retire today. At a micro-level, setting and achieving goals is important to me as well. These goals include such things as annually publishing a certain number of articles, earning a certain amount of money, etc. However, as described by Daniel Pink (2009) autonomy, mastery, and purpose are needed for internal motivation and this scheme is particularly fitting to motivate creative knowledge work such as the that work I do as a scholar, researcher, and consultant.

While much of my work life is not routine, a goodly part of it is and internal motivation as found through goal setting, and external motivations (attaining rewards and avoiding punishments) come into play. Finally, Vroom’s (1964) expectancy theory plays a role in my motivational calculus. Vroom’s theory is based on the idea that one is motivated if he or she values the end state, has the ability to achieve the end, and will receive the desired reward. I can give two examples of my use of Vroom’s expectancy theory. If I do not have the ability to conduct a particular sort of consulting, no matter how lucrative, I will not pursue the work. When my home institution stopped valuing my grant writing and grant management expertise, I stopped writing grants.

In conclusion, motivation for knowledge intensive and creative work is well served by measures that spur internal motivation such as those described by Pink (2009). Routine work can be motivated by seeking external rewards and avoiding punishments, but goal setting theory (Locke & Latham, 2006) finds internal motives for routine work too. Finally, Vroom’s (1964) expectancy theory provides an understanding of the reasons that effort may or may not be applied.


Locke, E. A. & Latham, G. P. (2006). New directions in goal setting. Current Directions in

Psychological Science, 15(5), 265-268.

Pink, D. (2009). Dan Pink on motivation. TED Talks. Retrieved from

Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation, New York, NY: Wiley.

Wacker, J. G. (1998). A definition of theory: research guidelines for different theory-building

research methods in operations management. Journal of Operations Management,

16(1), 361-385.

Wallace, W. L. (1969). Overview of contemporary sociological theory. Chicago, IL:

Aldine Publishing Company."

Tutor Answer

(Top Tutor) Daniel C.
School: UC Berkeley

Studypool has helped 1,244,100 students

Review from our student for this Answer

Mar 18th, 2015
"Top quality work from this guy! I'll be back!"
Ask your homework questions. Receive quality answers!

Type your question here (or upload an image)

1821 tutors are online

Brown University

1271 Tutors

California Institute of Technology

2131 Tutors

Carnegie Mellon University

982 Tutors

Columbia University

1256 Tutors

Dartmouth University

2113 Tutors

Emory University

2279 Tutors

Harvard University

599 Tutors

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

2319 Tutors

New York University

1645 Tutors

Notre Dam University

1911 Tutors

Oklahoma University

2122 Tutors

Pennsylvania State University

932 Tutors

Princeton University

1211 Tutors

Stanford University

983 Tutors

University of California

1282 Tutors

Oxford University

123 Tutors

Yale University

2325 Tutors