The dictionary definition of a leader is that of one who leads or goes first. Clearly the leader does not always go first but a separate definition would develop out of the idea of one who leads, ie., one who motivates. Thus it is very difficult to separate out theories and concepts of Leadership and Motivation. The leader to fulfil their role has to know how to motivate people and must seek ways to do this so as to maintain their role as leader. There are many theories of motivation so the leader has quite a scope for their own style of leadership. My research has found that many of these have developed since the end of the Second World War as peoples attitudes to leadership, motivation and management have developed and changed to a more intelligent level.
People exist according to Maslow in an hierarchy of needs, going from Physiological needs through Safety, Social, Esteem to Self Actualization. As each need is satisfied the person moves up a level. Thus people can be motivated by basic needs, but also by the 'spirit' and 'noble cause'. The best example of this is warfare and the partial change of motivation from pay to glory, and a belief in ideas. Indeed the use of propaganda this century has become important in motivating armies, in the sense that your side has more moral worth than the others, though this of course can be true. Some leaders would consider that it is necessary to use pain or threat of pain to motivate, but others consider that this only motivates no one but the dullest and most idle of people. Promises of food, excitement, companionship, involvement and the appreciation of other benefits are better motivators. Slight changes, the 'butterfly's wing', produces nearly negligible changes in management motivation but can gradual produce slow positive change. The industrialist and entrepreneur who is motivated by money does use this as part of the 'carrot and stick' motivation technique. After the Second World War people were more sophisticated and needed new methods and ideas in motivation.
Herzberg recognised that jobs had to be enriched with motivational factors. He sought to separate man from the animal who's "needs ...[were] to avoid pain and his need as a human [were] to grow psychologically". McGregor in Human Styles of Enterprise (1960) divided human management into two groups. His X theory people need authoritarian management, they were people who hate work, are lazy, incapable of taking responsibility. His Y theory people need management by participation, who are self motivated and might be more like the majority of people. Their other wants are being satisfied. They are capable of exercising self-direction and self-control if committed to an objective, the achievement of which gives them an ego reward. McGregor believed that people would accept and seek responsibility, have high potential and have this potential only partially utilised. Maslow criticised this in that he thought that even Y people needed guidance. I found it interesting to apply the X/Y theory to my non-teaching work place and found that we had an X boss and Y colleagues.
Thornely and Lees make several good points in their book, which also has an overview of the other theorists. They believe that individuals must be treated in different ways, 'different strokes for different folks'. Just because one person looks like another does not mean that they will behave in the same way or be motivated in the same way. It is recognised that one volunteer is worth two pressed men and the key to good leadership is having good manners, especially if they are of a different sex, race, background, mental or physical capabilities.
Elizabeth Moss Kanter believed that empowerment was a key motivation factor and suggests that management should be opened up to promotion from the ranks of the powerless, like women and clerical workers. She wanted to see a decentralized authority, made up of autonomous work groups which would produced motivation from the results.
Victor Vroom thought that people asked three questions to motivate themselves. 1. Can I do what I am being asked to do? 2. Would I be rewarded for doing it? 3. Do I want the reward on offer?
John Adair believed in action centred leadership. Whereby the leader inspires others by their own enthusiasm, commitment and the ability to communicate enthusiasm to people. There was a need to establish teams and team-work, with the need to accomplish a common task, and the team being a sum of the groups individual needs. His views are developed in 'Effective Leadership' (1993). Here he identifies three different approaches to leadership, the interlocking concepts of Task, Group and the Individual. He is critical of the ideas of inbred leadership qualities, though he feels that it would be wrong to dismiss this altogether. The idea that there is no such thing as a born leader depends on the situation. This situationist approach, summed up, is where it is always the situation which determines who emerges as the leader and what 'style of leadership' they have to adopt. It is too easy in making value judgements, have hidden assumptions which can creep into the situation. He accepts that some leaders require certain innate characteristics, eg., the Military leader requires courage, the Sales leader needs to be a good salesman. People differ in intelligence, scholarship, dependability in exercising responsibilities, activity and social participation and in socio-economic status. The leader must have personality and character. He quotes Harold Macmillian, "that a man who trusts nobody is apt to be the kind of man that nobody trusts". His leader must have integrity, a wholeness and a moral sense.
Tom Peters is one of the most recognised and applauded 'gurus' of motivation and leadership. To English ears his views sound patronising, but to Americans they are probably not so. He produced theories which included 45 rules which included the notable concept of making the front-line people 'company heroes', whereby the leader applauds the front line people encouraging involvement, quality, core values and leadership by personal example.
Should you want to develop the above for your own use please do so. Thornely and Leeds are especially useful.
Adair J. (1993), Effective Leadership, how to develop leadership skills, London, How to books.
Thornely N. and Lees D. (1993), Leadership, the Art of Motivation, London, Random House, Century Business.
Referring page:Employment