M. N. ISAIAH ET AL.
Maslow’s concept of motivation as reported by Owen (1995)
puts human needs in a hierarchical order. According to this
theory, human needs are stratified and when the lower needs
are met the desire to fulfill the next level becomes high. The
lower level or physiological needs should be satisfied before
advancing to the next or higher level needs. So, in order for
teachers to be satisfied and perform their job perfectly, first and
foremost their physiological needs must be met. A teacher
should first have his/her basic needs of food, clothing and shel-
ter met, before he/she can be expected to perform his/her duties
effectively. The next level of needs—safety needs, which de-
scribes the teachers’ feeling of physical and psychological
safety and security. Safety also in financial matters, could affect
teachers’ motivation and performance. Those who feel insecure
in any way may be pre-occupied with this goal than being fo-
cused on the job.
Social affiliation or belonging needs describes the desire to
be accepted and belong to a particular group. Men and women
are social beings and as such have needs to be part of a social
group, formal or informal, and so are teachers. This means that
if teachers feel isolated from others, their satisfaction level will
be negatively affected. Esteem needs refer to recognition and
pride. The National Commission on Education (Botswana, 1993)
indicated that teachers have low status, and their motivation and
morale were also considered low, indicating low self-esteem.
Finally, the progression leads to the need to realise one’s full
potential, which is termed self-actualization. Only a small pro-
portion of the population achieves this level. This theory was
not intended as an explanation of motivation in the workplace;
however, many managerial theorist have enthusiastically adopted
it. The theory suggests that employees will always tend to want
more from their employers. When they have satisfied the sub-
sistence needs, they strive to fulfill security needs. When jobs
are secure they will seek ways of satisfying social needs and if
successful will seek the means to the ultimate end self actuali-
zation. In such cases, being given autonomy at work before
other basic needs are met cannot motivate teachers. If teachers
are to perform, then their lower level needs must first be satis-
fied.
Despite the fact that there are some similarities, Herzberg’s
(1968) theory unlike Maslow’s (1970), does not regard motiva-
tion as a single dimension that can be described by a hierarchy
of needs. He grouped needs into two groups: the first group
deals with hygiene/maintenance factors and motivators. The
hygiene/maintenance factors were seen as dissatisfiers as their
absence causes dissatisfaction. This included salary, security,
working conditions, fringe benefits, policies of education and
administration, and interpersonal relationships. According to
Herzberg’s theory, satisfying these factors will remove dissat-
isfaction but would not motivate the employees (Mondy, Shar-
plin, & Premeaux, 1991). Hygiene factors were seen to produce
an acceptable working environment but their absence was be-
lieved to cause job dissatisfaction.
The second group of needs is the motivators or satisfiers.
These factors are intrinsic to the job. They are related to the job
content and include meaningful and challenging work, recogni-
tion for accomplishment, feeling of achievements, increased
responsibility, and opportunity for growth and advancement
and the job itself. According to Herzberg’s theory, the absence
of hygiene factors results in dissatisfaction. Similarly, the pre-
sence of motivating factors cause job satisfaction and their
absence create job dissatisfaction (Owens, 1995).
The credibility of Herzberg’s two-factor theory has been a
matter of debate. Regardless of the debate, the theory has a
great impact on management. It is acknowledged for attracting
attention to the job content, which is important in the under-
standing of job satisfaction and motivation. However, critics of
this theory argue that it is method bound (Owens, 1995). A
person may be dissatisfied with part of the job yet found it ac-
ceptable to continue in the profession and Herzberg’s theory
assumes that a direct relationship exists between job dissatis-
faction and productivity.
What the process theories have in common is an emphasis on
the cognitive process in determining employee’s level of moti-
vation. These theories, which include equity, goal setting and
expectancy attempt to explain job satisfaction through the
processes that occur in the generation of satisfaction, and by
implication, job dissatisfaction.
The equity theory assumes that one important cognitive
process involves people looking around and observing what
effort other people are putting into their work and what rewards
follow them. This social comparison process is driven by indi-
viduals concern for fairness and equity. Research had shown
that this theory is one of the most useful frameworks for under-
standing work motivation.
The expectancy theory was popularised by Vroom (1964).
He defined the theory as the approach to motivation that at-
tempts to explain behaviour in terms of an individual’s goals,
choices and the expectations of achieving the objectives (Mondy,
Sharplin, & Premeax, 1991). The theory has become commonly
acceptable for explaining how individuals make decisions re-
garding various behavioural alternatives. It assumes that be-
haviour results from conscious choices among alternatives
whose purposes it is, to make pleasure and minimise pain. Ac-
cording to Scholl (2002) the theory suggests that the relation-
ship between people’s behaviour at work and their goals was
not as simple as was first imagined. Scholl (2002) indicated that
an employee’s performance is based on individual factors such
as personality, skills, knowledge, experiences and abilities.
Motivation is defined as the psychological force that ener-
gizes, directs and sustains behaviour in a work environment. It
is behaviourally specific, that is, it is more appropriate to think
in terms of an individual’s motivation to excel in a particular
job requirement or even to carry a specific behaviour than it is
to think about an individuals’ overall motivation. It must be
noted that in life people are not always motivated in every
situation. While individual dispositional variables may affect an
individual’s motivation level at any particular time, motivation
itself is not a dispositional variable.
Expectancy theory is therefore used to help understand how
individuals make decisions concerning various behavioural pa-
tterns. According to Davies and Newstrom (1985), expectancy
theory offers the following propositions that when deciding
among behavioural options, individuals select the option with
the greatest motivation force. The motivational force for be-
haviour, action, or task is a function of three distinct percep-
tions: Expectancy, instrumentality and valence.
The researcher’s understanding of these theories will assist in
the acknowledgement of the perceptions and attitudes of teach-
ers towards their teaching job and provides the researcher the
foundation on which to speculate and predict possible solutions
to the problems of teachers’ dissatisfaction. Aspects of several
theories, for example, content theories including Maslow’s,
(1954) hierarchy of needs theory and Herzberg’s, (1968) moti-
Copyright © 2012 SciRes.
278