Behaviourism

Behaviourism is the approach to psychology that is confined to what is objective, observable, and
measurable. Tis approach, which featured prominently in psychology until the 1950s, advocated a
scientific means of studying behaviour in carefully controlled conditions. The use of animals in many
behaviourist experiments may be influenced partly by the fact that they are less complicated than
humans, with a lower propensity to rely on previous experience when faced with a stimulus.
Behaviourism, which is discussed in connection with learning in Chapter 6, provided psychology with
a number of valuable experimental methods.

However, the preoccupation with behaviour that can be observed and measured objectively has obvious
weaknesses. These are primarily associated with the neglect of the processing capacity of the human
brain. Factors such as subjective feelings, expectations, plans, and thought processes are ruled out
because they do not lend themselves to scientific analysis in the same way that observable behaviour
does. In a sense, behaviourism may be seen as a mechanistic view of people, with the emphasis on the
inputs and outputs from the “machine” but with little regard to the functioning of the internal
mechanics.

Phenomenology

The phenomenological approach amounts to a humanistic reaction to behaviourism. An example is

the view that individuals strive for personal growth, and an illustration of this is Maslow’s self-
actualization as the ultimate level in his hierarchy of needs discussed in connection with motivation in
Chapter 4. The emphasis of the phenomenological approach is essentially on people’s experience rather
than their behaviour. For instance, even though on occasions we all share common experiences, each
person perceives the world in his or her own distinctive way. Our unique perceptions – and action
strategies based on them – tend to determine what we are and how we react. In the process the
individual utilizes previous experience, needs, expectations, and attitudes. Finally, in the
phenomenological approach, unlike the psychoanalytical approach, unconscious processes are not
systematically explored, but it is reasonably effective in treating the less severe mental disorders
(Eysenck, 2009).

Cognitive

The cognitive approach, which focuses on the internal mental states and processes of the individual
(e.g. perception, learning, memory, and reasoning), has been dominant in psychology since the 1970s
and is recognized as a major school of thought. Tis approach to psychology, which has a fair amount in
common with the phenomenological approach, is adopted throughout the book, where a cognitive view
is acknowledged (e.g. perception and decision making). It seeks to explain features of human behaviour
that are not directly observable.
Cognitive psychologists have made a major contribution to the development of the growing field of
neuro-psychology and cognitive neuroscience. Over the last decade there has been a significant amount
of activity in cognitive neuroscience. This is the area of cognitive psychology in which brain imagery is
used in conjunction with behavioural measures in order to increase our understanding of the cognitive
processes associated with doing a particular task (Eysenck, 2014). Cognitive psychology has also made
a very useful contribution to the development of cognitive therapy. The latter addresses thought
processes connected with anxiety and depression and, when combined with behaviour therapy, forms
cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), discussed in Chapter 16 with respect to stress reduction
strategies.

Research carried out into the prominence of widely recognized schools in psychology detected the
following trends (Robins, Gos- ling, & Craik, 1999):

• Psychoanalytical research has been initially ignored by mainstream scientific psychology over the
past several decades.

 Behavioural psychology has declined in prominence and it gave way to the ascension of
cognitive psychology during the 1970s.
 Cognitive psychology has sustained a steady upward trajectory and continues to be the most
prominent school.

NATURE OF ORGANIZATIONAL BEHAVIOUR

A number of the concepts examined in this book fall within the boundaries of organizational
behaviour, a subject that refers to the study of human behaviour in organizations. It is a field of study
that endeavors to understand, explain, predict, and change human behaviour as it occurs in the
organizational context (Wagner & Hollenbeck, 2014). Apart from the focus on the individual,
organizational behaviour is also concerned with the relationship between the individual and the group,
and how both interact with the organization. The organization is also subjected to analysis, as is the
relationship between the organization and its environment.

The primary goal of organizational behaviour is to describe rather than prescribe – that is, it describes
relationships between variables (e.g. motivation and job performance), rather than predicting that
certain changes will lead to particular outcomes. An example of a pre- diction is that the redesign of a
job (e.g. job enrichment) in a particular way will lead to an increase in job satisfaction and motivation
to work, which in turn will give rise to better performance on the job.

Organizational behaviour, as a social science rather than a natural science, encounters difficulties when
identifying, defining, measuring, and predicting relationships between concepts because it deals with
phenomena (e.g. the human condition) that are more complex than phenomena that constitute the
physical world. It adopts a multidisciplinary perspective, but it should be said that psychology as a
discipline makes the greatest contribution (Miner, 2003). The multidisciplinary perspectives are
outlined in Table 1.1. The development of organizational behaviour has been associated with the
growth of large organizations over the past century, although a preoccupation with issues related to
organization and management has been around for centuries.

The way organizational behaviour is handled by writers of textbooks in this field can differ.
Organizational behaviour enjoys a controversial relationship with management practice (Buchanan &
Huczynski, 2017) and some books, such as this one, show a tendency to emphasize the practical
application of theory while others adopt a managerial perspective. However, the dividing line between
the two perspectives is not so clear-cut when viewed across the board.

组织行为的本质

本书中检查的许多概念属于组织行为的范围，这是一个涉及组织中人类行为研
究的主题。这是一个研究领域，试图理解、解释、预测和改变在组织环境中发
生的人类行为(Wagner & Hollenbeck, 2014)。除了关注个人，组织行为还关注
个人和群体之间的关系，以及两者如何与组织互动。组织也受到分析，组织与
其环境之间的关系也是如此。

组织行为的主要目标是描述而不是规定——也就是说，它描述变量(例如动机和
工作绩效)之间的关系，而不是预测特定的变化将导致特定的结果。一个预测的
例子是，以特定的方式重新设计工作(如工作充实)将导致工作满意度和工作动
机的增加，这将带来更好的工作表现。

组织行为学作为一门社会科学而非自然科学，在识别、定义、测量和预测概念
之间的关系时遇到了困难，因为它处理的现象(例如人类状况)比构成物质世界
的现象更复杂。它采用了多学科的视角，但应该说，心理学作为一门学科的贡
献最大(Miner, 2003)。表 1.1 概述了多学科视角。在过去的一个世纪中，组织
行为的发展与大型组织的发展相关联，尽管与组织和管理相关的问题已经存在
了几个世纪。

该领域教科书作者处理组织行为的方式可能有所不同。组织行为与管理实践有
着争议性的关系(Buchanan & Huczynski, 2017)，一些书，比如这本书，倾向
于强调理论的实际应用，而另一些则采用管理视角。然而，从整体上看，这两
种观点之间的分界线并不那么明确。

Scientific management

In the earlier part of the twentieth century a school of thought, known as scientific management,
emerged. Tis major development – initiated by Taylor, Gilbreths, and Gantt – placed emphasis on
efficiency and productivity, with the spotlight on the interaction between the per- son and the job.
Frederick Winslow Taylor was the main instigator of this school of thought. He was not a theorist but
worked as an engineer in the iron and steel industry. In his time, it was normal for workers in this
industry to organize their own work. Work gang leaders hired their own crew who worked at their own
pace, used their own tools, and knew more about the work than did their supervisors. Taylor felt that
workers tended to ease of because they were lazy or they would deliberately restrict output to protect
their jobs and maintain generous staffing levels. It was apparent he did not trust workers. He felt the
solution to this problem lay in scientific management (Grey, 2009).

The main features of scientific management are as follows:

• Study jobs systematically with a view to improving the way tasks are performed.

• Select the best employees for the various jobs.

• Train the employees in the most efficient methods and the most economical movements to deploy in
the jobs.

• Offer incentives (e.g. higher wages) to the most able employees, and use piece rates to encourage
greater effort. The piece-rate system of payment provides greater reward for greater effort.

• Use rest pauses to combat fatigue.

• Entrust to supervisors the task of ensuring that employees are using the prescribed

methods.
• Subscribe to the notion of job specialization and mass production.

In scientific management managers are expected to manage (i.e. to plan, organize, and supervise) and
workers are expected to perform the specified operative tasks. In this approach monetary rewards are
considered to have a major motivational impact, although the main exponent of scientific management
(Taylor, 1947) believed that his system benefited both employers and employees. He felt his system
incorporated an impersonal fair- ness; that is, a fair wage for a fair day’s work. Workers would no
longer be dependent upon the patronage of a work gang leader and his system could also create a safer
workplace. At that time industrial injuries were a problem and it was felt that if a well-conceived
standard way of working was followed it would not only be productive but reduce accidents, and that
would appeal to the workers (Grey, 2009). Te workers and the embryonic trade unions resisted
Taylorism and considered it a form of exploitation.

Other notable exponents of scientific management are the Gilbreths and Gantt. The husband and wife
team Frank and Lilian Gilbreth are best known for their invention of motion study, a procedure in
which jobs are reduced to their most basic movements. Using a clock – called the micro chronometer –
analysts could use time and motion studies to establish the time required to perform each movement
associated with the job. Henry Gantt developed a task and bonus wage plan that paid workers a bonus
on top of their standard wages if they completed the job within a set time. Gantt also invented the Gantt
chart, a bar chart used by managers to compare actual with planned performance. Contemporary work
scheduling methods, such as PERT (Pro- gramme Evaluation and Review Technique), are based on
Gantt’s invention (Wagner & Hol- lenbeck, 2014).
Critics felt that scientific management con- tributed to the de-skilling or degradation of work and a
substantial transfer of power from workers to managers. Braverman (1974), a critic of Taylorism,
viewed the scientific management approach as capitalist profit-seeking and certainly not fair. With
reference to the

work of Braverman in this context, the following criticism of Taylorism has been made (Needle, 2004):

The extensive division of labor means that work becomes fragmented, the machine becomes more
important than the worker, and control shifts from the skilled worker firmly into the hands of
management, whose position is strengthened by their virtual monopoly of knowledge of the work
process.

There is further reference to scientific management in the section on job design in Chapter 4. An
illustration of Taylor’s approach appears in Panel 1.1.

在科学管理中，期望管理者进行管理（即计划、组织和监督），期望工人执行
指定的操作任务。在这种方法中，金钱奖励被认为具有重大的激励作用，尽管
科学管理的主要倡导者（Taylor，1947）认为他的制度对雇主和雇员都有利。
他觉得他的制度包含了一种非个人的公正；也就是说，一天的工作有一份合理
的工资。工人们将不再依赖于帮派头目的庇护，他的制度也可以创造一个更安
全的工作场所。当时，工伤是一个问题，人们认为，如果遵循一种经过深思熟
虑的标准工作方式，不仅可以提高生产率，而且可以减少事故，这将吸引工人
（Grey，2009）。工人和处于萌芽状态的工会抵制泰勒主义，认为它是一种剥
削形式。

科学管理的其他著名代表是吉尔布雷斯和甘特。夫妻团队弗兰克和莉莲·吉尔
布雷斯最著名的发明是动作研究，这是一种将工作简化为最基本动作的方法。
使用一种称为微型计时器的时钟，分析员可以利用时间和运动研究来确定执行
与工作相关的每个运动所需的时间。亨利·甘特（Henry Gantt）制定了一项任
务和奖金工资计划，如果工人在规定的时间内完成工作，则在标准工资的基础
上向他们支付奖金。甘特还发明了甘特图，一种管理者用来比较实际绩效和计
划绩效的条形图。当代工作调度方法，如 PERT（项目评估和审查技术），是基
于甘特的发明（Wagner&Hol-lenbeck，2014）。

批评人士认为，科学管理导致工作技能下降或退化，并导致权力从工人向管理
者大量转移。泰勒主义批评家 Braverman（1974）将科学管理方法视为资本主
义的利润追求，当然是不公平的。关于 Braverman 在这方面的工作，对泰勒主
义提出了以下批评（Needle，2004 年）：

广泛的分工意味着工作变得支离破碎，机器变得比工人更重要，控制权从熟练
工人牢牢地转移到管理层手中，管理层的地位因其对工作流程知识的虚拟垄断
而得到加强。
在第 4 章中关于工作设计的章节中有对科学管理的进一步参考。Taylor 方法的
说明见面板 1.1。

Classical bureaucracy

The classical theorists, inspired to some extent by the work of the German sociologist Weber on the
ideal bureaucracy, came forward with a blueprint for organizational design. Here the concern was with
how to organize effectively large numbers of employees into an overall structure. Weber’s model was
referred to as legal-rational or bureaucratic organization and was considered to be technically efficient.
The notion of efficiency is still alive in the mod- ern world where emphasis is given to devising the
best means to achieve particular ends (Grey, 2009).

Te concept of bureaucracy put forward by Weber (1947) is as follows:

 A hierarchy of authority, in which the power to act flows from the apex of the organization to
the lowest levels. Office holders react to orders issued by those above them to whom they
report.

 Rights and duties are attached to the various positions within the hierarchy, so that employees
know what is expected of them.

 Division of labor, in which activity is categorized by function (production, fnance, etc.) and
specialization.

 Rules and procedures, which inform employees about the correct way to process information
and run the organization, obvi- ate the necessity to exercise judgement and choice (discretion)
in the execution of tasks.

 Documentation, in which information is recorded in written form and committed to the

organization’s memory.

 Technical competence, which amounts to recruiting and promoting individuals who possess
the requisite qualifications.

 Separation of ownership from control, whereby those who manage the organization are not
those who own it.

Du Gay (2000) supports what he refers to as formal rational bureaucracy and believes an
important ethic is ingrained in it. Obtain- ing a job or being promoted does not depend on
having attended the same school as your

boss or on the color of your skin. Likewise, personal prejudice should not influence the service the
customer or client receives from an official. What has just been said in the last two sentences may be
an oversimplification; but what must be recognized is that the potential for the prevalence of bias and
prejudice is ever present.
There have been criticisms of Weber’s concept of bureaucracy along the following lines. It is felt that
the bureaucracy (the means) becomes more important than the ends (that which the bureaucracy sets
out to achieve), that division of labour breeds rigidity, and that there is alienation because people are
expected to perform highly specialized tasks without being able to use much discretion. Also, it is said
that classical bureaucracy ignores the significance of the informal organization, lacks a human face,
and is slow to adapt to change. There is further discussion of bureaucracy in Chapter 13.

古典官僚制

古典理论家在某种程度上受到德国社会学家韦伯关于理想官僚制的工作的启发，
提出了组织设计的蓝图。这里关注的是如何有效地将大量员工组织到一个整体
结构中。韦伯的模式被称为法律理性组织或官僚组织，并被认为在技术上是有
效的。效率的概念在现代世界仍然存在，强调设计实现特定目的的最佳方法
（Grey，2009）。

韦伯（1947）提出的官僚制概念如下：

•一种权力层次结构，在这种结构中，行动的权力从组织的最高层次流向最低层
次。办公室负责人对上级下达的命令做出反应。

•权利和义务附属于层级结构中的各个职位，以便员工了解对他们的期望。

•分工，其中活动按功能（生产、功能等）和专业化分类。

•规则和程序，告知员工处理信息和运行组织的正确方式，避免在执行任务时进
行判断和选择（自由裁量权）。

•文件，其中信息以书面形式记录并保存在组织的记忆中。

•技术能力，相当于招聘和提拔具备必要资格的个人。

•所有权与控制权分离，管理组织的人不是组织的所有者。

Du Gay（2000）支持他所说的正式理性官僚体制，并认为其中有一个重要的伦
理根深蒂固。获得一份工作或晋升并不取决于你是否在同一所学校就读

老板或你的肤色。同样，个人偏见不应影响客户或客户从官员处获得的服务。
刚才在最后两句话中所说的可能过于简单化了；但必须承认的是，偏见和偏见
盛行的可能性永远存在。

有人对韦伯的官僚主义概念提出了如下批评。人们认为，官僚主义（手段）比
目的（官僚主义所要达到的目的）更加重要，分工导致僵化，人们被期望执行
高度专业化的任务，而没有太多的自由裁量权，因此存在疏离感。此外，有人
说，传统的官僚机构忽视了非正式组织的重要性，缺乏人性化，并且适应变化
的速度很慢。第 13 章进一步讨论了官僚制。
Principles of organization

The principles of organization were expounded by practitioners such as Fayol and Urwick. Fayol
(1949) considered his principles of organization, listed below, as flexible and adaptable and was of the
view that managers could use intuition and exercise discretion in the way the principles were used.
Urwick (1947) adopted Fayol’s principles to guide managerial planning and control (Wagner &
Hollenbeck, 2014).

• Purpose or objective of the organization.

• Hierarchy, which amounts to the layers of

management within the organization.

• Span of control, which is the number of subordinates reporting to supervisors and

managers.
• Division of labour and specialization,

whereby the organization is compartmentalized by function or activity and this allows

members to specialize in very specific activities (buyer, accountant, etc.).

 Authority and responsibility, which in the

case of authority means the power to act and in the case of responsibility means being
accountable for the consequences of one’s actions as a member of the organization.

 Unity of command and direction, which signifies that direction and control spring ultimately
from one source (e.g. the chief executive).

 Communication, which is the medium through which information flows up and down the
organization and constitutes the lifeblood of the system.

 Chain of command, which is the pathway through which superiors issue instructions and
advice and subordinates provide feed- back on activities for which they are responsible.

 Coordination, which is a process aimed at ensuring that the different segments of the
organization are pulling together to achieve common objectives.

 Centralization and decentralization, which relate to the level at which major decisions are
taken (i.e. at the top or further down the organization).

 Definition, which relates to important issues such as defining duties, responsibilities, and
authority relationships within the organization.
  Balance, which means getting the balance right between the different parts of the
organization.

 Continuity, which implies that the organization subscribes to the processes of adjustment and
reorganization on a continuous basis.

The criticism levelled at the principles of organization is that they tend to play down the
importance of the individual’s personality in influencing events internally, as well as the
impact of the external environment.

组织的原则
法约尔和乌尔维克等从业者阐述了组织原则。 Fayol(1949)认为他的组织原则，如下所列，
是灵活的和适应性强的，并认为管理人员可以使用直觉和行使自由裁量权的方式使用这些
原 则 。 Urwick(1947) 采 用 了 Fayol 的 原 则 来 指 导 管 理 规 划 和 控 制 (Wagner & Hollenbeck,
2014)。
•组织的目的或目标。
•层次结构，相当于
组织内部的管理。
•控制范围，即下属向主管汇报的数量
经理。
•劳动分工和专业化，
因此，组织按照职能或活动进行划分，这就允许
专门从事特定活动的会员(如买方、会计等)。
•权力和责任，这在
“权威”指的是采取行动的权力，“责任”指的是作为组织成员对自己行为的后果负责。
•命令和方向的统一，这意味着方向和控制最终来自一个源头(比如首席执行官)。
•沟通，是信息在组织中上下流动的媒介，是系统的命脉。
•指挥链，这是上级下达指示和建议，下级对他们负责的活动提供反馈的途径。
•协调，这是一个过程，旨在确保组织的不同部门齐心协力实现共同目标。
•集中化和分权化，与做出重大决策的级别有关(即在组织的最高层或更下层)。
•定义，涉及重要问题，如定义组织内的职责、责任和权力关系。
•平衡，这意味着在组织的不同部分之间取得正确的平衡。
•连续性，这意味着组织支持在持续的基础上进行调整和重组的过程。
对组织原则的批评是，它们倾向于淡化个人个性在影响事件内部和外部环境的影响方面的
重要性。

Human relations movement

The human relations movement arose as a reaction to the earlier approaches (such as scientific
management) with their individualistic and over-rational emphasis, and their tendency to explain the
behaviour of workers as a response to an environment defined largely in material terms. It was initiated
by Elton Mayo, a social scientist from Harvard University, with a series of investigations con- ducted
at the Hawthorne works of the West- ern Electric Company in Chicago, between 1927 and 1932. Mayo
(1949) thought highly of this company and described it as an organization committed to justice and
humanity in its dealings with workers, where morale was of a high order. In recent years there are still
reflections on the importance and significance of the Hawthorne studies (Hassard, 2012). The first
experiment started with an assessment of the influence of illumination on work. For the purpose of this
experiment, two groups of workers were chosen. In one group, called the control group, the
illumination remained unchanged throughout the experiment, while in the other group, the test group,
there was an increase in the intensity of the illumination.

As had been expected, output in the test group showed an improvement, but what was not expected was
that output in the control group also went up. This puzzled the investigators, so they went ahead and
reduced the level of illumination for the test group; as a result, output went up once more. Obviously,
some factor was at work that affected output regard- less of whether illumination was increased or
reduced. Further experiments became necessary to identify the unknown factor influencing the results.
The experiments relating to the happenings in the Relay Assembly Room are briefly stated in Panel
1.3.

Even though the improvements in working conditions in the Relay Assembly Room were taken away,
the legacy of good human relations practice ensured that productivity would not be adversely affected.
Some significant points with reference to the workers’ response to their employment situation are as
follows:

• The workers collaborated with management in the introduction of the various changes, and
good relationships were established with supervisors, with an absence of suspicion between
workers and management.

• The workers found the experiment interesting, they approved of what was going on, and
welcomed being consulted by management. By being involved in the various deliberations,
they experienced an improvement in their status.

 Supervisors were viewed as helpful and interested in the workers’ suggestions. This type of
supervisory behaviour had the effect of promoting self-respect and the use of initiative on the
part of the workers.

 Social activity within the work group developed and manifested itself in a number of ways.
For example, natural leaders evolved, people related well to each other, there was a noticeable
increase in socialized conversation, and internal discipline became a group rather than a
management activity. Also, the need to consider feelings and attitudes was underlined when it
was noted that individuals had preferences for seating arrangements (i.e. who to sit next to).
The significance of informal organization was endorsed.

 The motivational effect of social needs and the importance of the social environment were
recognized, and a link between satisfaction and productivity was suggested.
 Interviewing and counselling were used to solicit information from the workers and provide
support to them. In particular, non- directive interviewing, where interviewees were free to
speak about all sorts of things that interested them or troubled them, instead of responding to a
direct question, was considered effective. This technique was adopted after using the directive
approach initially.

 The notion of the “Hawthorne effect” entered the vocabulary. This signifies that changes in
workers’ behaviour can be brought about by the mere fact that they are being observed.

In order to study informal norms more thoroughly, the next experiment focused attention on
male workers (wiremen, solder-men, and inspectors) in the Bank Wiring Room, where
equipment was wired and soldered before it was checked by the inspector. These workers
were not as compliant as the female workers in the Relay Assembly Room. What was notice-
able was the solidarity of the men in the face of management action, and this contributed to an
informal norm to restrict output, an oppo- site outcome to that reported earlier. (There is an
elaboration of this conclusion in a discussion of group norms in social comparison in Chapter
9.)

人类关系运动

人类关系运动的兴起是对早期方法(如科学管理)的一种反应。早期方法强调个人主义和
过度理性，并倾向于将工人的行为解释为对主要以物质术语定义的环境的一种反应。
1927 年至 1932 年间，哈佛大学的社会科学家埃尔顿•梅奥对芝加哥西部电力公司的霍
桑作品进行了一系列调查，由此发起了这项研究。梅奥(1949)高度评价了这家公司，并
将其描述为一个在对待员工时致力于正义和人道的组织，士气很高。近年来，人们对
霍桑研究的重要性和意义仍有反思(哈萨德，2012)。第一个实验从评估光照对工作的影
响开始。为了这个实验的目的，我们选择了两组工人。在一个被称为控制组的组中，
光照在整个实验过程中保持不变，而在另一个组，也就是实验组，光照强度增加了。

正如所预料的那样，实验组的产量有所提高，但没有预料到的是对照组的产量也增加
了。这让研究人员感到困惑，所以他们继续降低了实验组的光照水平;结果，产量又增
加了。显然，不管光照是增加还是减少，都有影响输出的因素在起作用。需要进一步
的实验来确定影响结果的未知因素。在图 1.3 中简要说明了与接力会场中发生的事件有
关的实验。

尽管接力会场工作条件的改善被取消，良好的人际关系惯例的遗产确保了生产率不会
受到不利影响。关于工人对其就业情况的反应，有以下几点值得注意:

•工人与管理层合作，引入各种变化，并与主管建立了良好的关系，工人与管理层之间
没有猜疑。

•工人们发现这个实验很有趣，他们对正在进行的事情表示赞同，并欢迎管理层的咨询。
通过参与各种讨论，他们的地位得到了改善。
 •主管被认为乐于助人，对工人的建议感兴趣。这种类型的监督行为对提高员工的自尊
和使用主动性有效果。

•工作小组内的社交活动以多种方式发展并表现出来。例如，天生的领导者进化了，人
们之间的关系融洽了，社交对话明显增加了，内部纪律变成了一个群体，而不是管理
活动。此外，当注意到个人对座位安排(即坐在谁旁边)有偏好时，强调了考虑情感和态
度的必要性。非正式组织的重要性得到了赞同。

•认识到社会需要的激励作用和社会环境的重要性，并提出了满意度和生产力之间的联
系。

•通过访谈和咨询从工人那里获取信息并为他们提供支持。特别是，非指导性面试被认
为是有效的，在这种面试中，受访者可以自由地谈论他们感兴趣或困扰他们的所有事
情，而不是回答一个直接的问题。这种技术是在最初使用定向方法后采用的。

•“霍桑效应”(Hawthorne effect)的概念进入了人们的词汇。这意味着工人行为的改变仅
仅是因为他们被观察到。

为了更彻底地研究非正式规范，下一个实验将注意力集中在银行配线室的男性工人(电
线工人、焊工和检查员)上，在检验员检查设备之前，设备是在配线和焊接的。这些工
人不像接力室里的女工人那样顺从。值得注意的是男性在面对管理行动时的团结一致，
这促成了一种限制产出的非正式规范，与之前报道的结果相反。(在第 9 章关于社会比
较中的群体规范的讨论中对此结论进行了详细阐述。)

Other findings with respect to the bank wiring group were as follows: (1) managers further up the
hierarchy were treated with greater respect than the supervisors further down; and (2) the group divided
itself into subgroups or cliques and membership of the subgroup had a material influence on the
workers’ behaviour.

There has been criticism of the human relations movement along the lines that the research
methodology lacked scientific rigour (Wagner & Hollenbeck, 2014), and a lack of concern with
broader organizational and environmental issues because of the narrow focus of the research. Also, it
was felt that there was a tendency to view the organization in unitarist terms, where superiors and
subordinates share a common outlook, free of disruptive tension and conflict, as opposed to a pluralist
view manifested in competing factions with conflict ever present. The latter probably reflects the
reality of many organizations. If there was organizational friction, advocates of the human relations
approach were likely to suggest basic remedies in the form of involving people, treating them with
respect, and improving communication.

Critics are likely to challenge the alleged causal link between employee participation and job
satisfaction and between the latter and productivity. They would also take issue with the position of the
human relation theorists who maintained that the formal and informal organizations were separate and
distinct entities, and that the goals of the formal and informal organization were often irreconcilable.
Finally, note an interesting observation by Hollway (1991) on the nature of the human relations
movement:

The Hawthorne studies combined two radical departures from previous industrial psychology. The first
involved a shift from the psycho-physiological model of the worker to a socio-emotional one. The
second was a change in method from an experimental one whose object was the body (or the inter- face
between the body and the job), to one whose object was attitudes as the intervening variable between
the situation (working conditions) and response (output).

关于银行汇款组的其他发现如下:(1)层级越高的经理得到的尊重比层级越低的
主管更多;(2)这个群体分成了几个小群体或小集团，小群体的成员身份对工人
的行为有实质性的影响。

对人类关系运动的批评是，研究方法缺乏科学严谨性(Wagner & Hollenbeck,

2014)，由于研究的焦点狭窄，缺乏对更广泛的组织和环境问题的关注。此外，
人们还认为，有一种倾向以一神论的方式来看待该组织，在这种情况下，上级
和下级有共同的观点，没有破坏性的紧张局势和冲突，而不是在冲突不断的相
互竞争的派系中表现出来的多元化观点。后者可能反映了许多组织的现实。如
果存在组织摩擦，人际关系方法的倡导者可能会建议基本的补救措施，包括让
人们参与进来，尊重他们，改善沟通。

批评人士可能会质疑员工参与和工作满意度以及工作满意度和生产力之间的因
果关系。他们也会对人类关系理论家的立场提出异议，后者认为正式组织和非
正式组织是独立的、不同的实体，正式组织和非正式组织的目标往往是不可调
和的。

最后，请注意 Hollway(1991)对人类关系运动本质的一个有趣观察:

霍桑的研究结合了两种与以往工业心理学截然不同的观点。第一个涉及从工作
者的心理-生理模型向社会-情感模型的转变。第二种是方法的改变，从实验的
对象是身体(或身体和工作之间的界面)，到态度作为情境(工作条件)和反应(输
出)之间的中介变量。

Panel 1.3 Hawthorne experiments: Relay Assembly Room

The researchers selected a small group of competent female workers who were engaged in assembling telephone
relays. A researcher observed their behaviour and maintained a friendly atmosphere in the group. The workers
were fully briefed on the purpose of the experiment, which was stated as to contribute to employee satisfaction and
effective work and were told to work at their normal pace. They were consulted at each phase of the experiment
and any changes would only take place in collaboration with them.

Before the start of the experiment the basic rate of production was recorded. Subsequently, output was recorded as
and when changes in conditions were introduced. Throughout the series of experiments, which lasted over a period
of five years, an observer sat with the girls in the workshop, noting all that went on, keeping them informed about
the experiment, asking for advice or information, and listening to their complaints.

The following is a brief summary of the changes introduced each for a period of 4 to 12 weeks, and the results:

 When normal conditions applied (i.e. a 48-hour week) including Saturdays and no rest pauses, the
workers produced 2400 relays a week.

 Piecework was introduced and output went up.

 Two five-minute rest pauses, morning and afternoon for a period of five weeks, were

introduced and output went up once more.

 Rest pauses, up to ten minutes, were introduced and output went up sharply.

 Six five-minute rest pauses were introduced, and output fell slightly as the workers

complained that their work rhythm was broken by the frequent pauses.

 There was a return to two rest pauses, and a hot meal was provided by the company

free of charge after the first rest pause; output increased.

 Work finished at 4.30 p.m. instead of 5.00 p.m. and output increased.

 Work finished at 4.00 p.m., and output remained the same.

 Finally, all the improvements in working conditions were taken away, with a reversion

to a 48-hour week, no rest pauses, no piecework, and no free meal. This state of affairs lasted for 12
weeks, and output was the highest ever recorded, at 3000 relays a week.

(Brown, 1954)

Panel 1.3 Hawthorne 实验:Relay Assembly Room

研究人员挑选了一小群从事组装电话中继的有能力的女性工人。一名研究人员观察了它们
的行为，并在群体中保持了友好的气氛。员工们被充分地介绍了实验的目的，实验的目的
是为了提高员工的满意度和工作效率，并被告知以他们正常的节奏工作。在实验的每个阶
段都要咨询他们的意见，任何改变只有在与他们合作的情况下才会发生。
在实验开始前，先记录基本生产速率。随后，当条件发生变化时，输出记录下来。在持续
了五年多的一系列实验中，一名观察员坐在工作室里的女孩们身边，记录着实验的进展，
让她们了解实验的情况，向她们寻求建议或信息，倾听她们的抱怨。
以下是 4 至 12 周期间每项改变的简要总结，以及结果:
•在正常条件下(即每周 48 小时)，包括周六和没有休息暂停，工人每周生产 2400 个继电器。
•引入计件工作，产量提高。
•分别在上午和下午进行两次五分钟的休息，持续五周
引进和产量再次上升。
•引入了长达 10 分钟的休息暂停，产量大幅上升。
•6 次 5 分钟的休息暂停，工人们的产量略有下降
抱怨他们的工作节奏被频繁的停顿打断了。
•恢复了两次休息暂停，公司提供了一顿热饭
免费后先休息暂停;产出增加。
•工作从下午 5 点改为下午 4 点半完成，产量增加。
•下午 4 点工作结束，产出保持不变。
•最后，工作条件的所有改善都被取消，出现了倒退
一周工作 48 小时，没有休息，没有计件工作，没有免费的午餐。这种情况持续了 12 周，
产量达到了有记录以来的最高水平，每周 3000 个继电器。(布朗,1954)

Systems approach

Before examining this approach, it is appropriate to define a system. A system, consisting of inputs, a
transformation process, outputs, and feedback from the environment, is an organized unit consisting of
two or more inter- dependent parts or subsystems, and can be distinguished from its environment by
some identifiable boundary. An organization can be viewed as an open system, as it is continually
adapting to and influencing its external environment (the economy, regulators, suppliers, customers,
etc.).

An important contribution to our under- standing of the systems approach can be found in the studies
conducted by the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations in the late 1940s and early 1950s. A well-
known study, using ideas from psychology, psychoanalysis, and open systems in biology, was an
investigation of how changes in the application of technology to production influenced social systems
(such as work groups) in the coalmining industry. Out of this study came the notion of the organization
as an open system comprising technical and social elements (i.e. a socio-technical

system), as well as the idea of organizations as adaptive systems. A major finding was that a change
from the old technology to the new technology of that time, and that the change affected the way
groups functioned in the coalmines. This was reflected as a lack of cooperation, tension, and a failure
to meet output expectations (Trist & Bamforth, 1951). There is a discussion of socio-technical systems
in Chapter 13 on organizations.

Contingency approach

This approach challenged the view that there are universal answers to organizational questions. Earlier
in the chapter the classical theorists of organization put forward a universal solution to the problem of
structuring organizations by advocating the principles of organization. However, in the contingency
approach there is an acceptance of the view that, for example, the structure of the organization is
dependent upon the contingencies of the situation in which each organization finds itself. Therefore,
there is no optimum way to structure the organization. Instead, one should look critically at the
situation in terms of the tasks to be carried out and the environmental influences when considering the
most appropriate structure to achieve organizational objectives.

Examples of major contingency perspectives examined later in this book are the contingency theories
of organization (e.g. Woodward; see Chapter 13) and contingency theories of leadership (e.g. Fiedler;
see the “Contingency theories” section in Chapter 11).

1. 系统方法
在研究这种方法之前，应该先定义一个系统。系统由环境的输入、转换过程、输出和反馈
组成，是由两个或多个相互依赖的部分或子系统组成的有组织的单元，可以通过一些可识
别的边界与其环境区分开来。一个组织可以被视为一个开放的系统，因为它不断地适应和
影响它的外部环境(经济、监管机构、供应商、客户等)。
20 世纪 40 年代末和 50 年代初，塔维斯托克人类关系研究所进行的研究对我们理解系统方
法作出了重要贡献。一项著名的研究，利用心理学、精神分析和生物学中的开放系统的观
点，调查了技术在生产中的应用如何影响煤矿工业中的社会系统 (如工作组)。从这项研究
中产生了组织作为一个包含技术和社会元素(即社会技术)的开放系统的概念
系统)，以及组织作为适应性系统的想法。一个重要的发现是旧技术向当时的新技术的转变，
这种转变影响了煤矿中群体的运作方式。这反映为缺乏合作、紧张和未能满足产出预期
(Trist & Bamforth, 1951)。在关于组织的第 13 章中有关于社会技术系统的讨论。
应急方法
这种方法挑战了组织问题有普遍答案的观点。在本章的前面，古典组织理论家通过倡导组
织原则，对组织的构建问题提出了一个普遍的解决方案。然而，在权变方法中有一种接受
的观点，例如，组织的结构依赖于每个组织发现自己所在的情况的权变。因此，没有最优
的组织结构。相反，在考虑实现组织目标的最适当结构时，应该从所要执行的任务和环境
影响的角度审慎地看待形势。
本书后面讨论的主要权变观点的例子是组织的权变理论(例如伍德沃德;参见第 13 章)和领导
权变理论(如费德勒;参见第 11 章的“权变理论”章节)。

DEFINITION

The question of motivation arises when we ask why people behave in a certain way. When people are
motivated, they are responding to conditions operating within and outside themselves. Motivation is
frequently studied with reference to needs, motives, drives, and goals or incentives. The emphasis on
needs and motives highlights the interconnection between motivation and personality.

Needs

Needs can be classified as, for example, physio- logical, security or safety, social, and ego or esteem
needs. It is possible to have a need and do nothing about it, but equally a pressing need can give rise to
a specific pattern of behaviour.
Motives

Motives consist of inner states that energize, activate, and direct the behaviour of the individual as he
or she strives to attain a goal or acquire an incentive. Motives can serve as a means by which
consumers evaluate competing products, such as with the purchase of a car. For example, a car buyer
motivated by convenience could be attracted to a model with certain electronic gadgets in preference to
a similar car without these facilities.

Drives

The concept of drive is an important feature of many theories of motivation and is linked with theories
of learning, such as Hull’s theory (see “Classical conditioning” in Chapter 6). An individual is said to
be in a state of drive when he or she adopts a pattern of behaviour to achieve a particular goal. For
example, a hungry person, who is obviously preoccupied with satisfying a physiological need, behaves
(i.e. is in a state of drive) in such a way as to indicate that he or she is in search of food or nourishment
(i.e. a goal or incentive). When the person obtains sufficient nourishment, the behaviour (the drive)
subsides for the time being. The stronger the drive, the greater the level of arousal experienced by the
individual.

In its original form, drive theory under- lined the importance of biological needs and the associated
drives. It was later extended to other types of behaviour not connected with basic drives, such as drives
associated

with status, achievement, and satisfactory social relationships (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). Drive
theory has been around for a long time, but there are some who feel that there are circumstances where
it may not be totally applicable. For example, humans have a capacity to pursue actions that increase
rather than reduce various drives (Baron, 2002). For example, to lose weight, people turn a blind eye to
having snacks even when they are hungry.

定义

当我们问人们为什么以某种方式行事时，动机的问题就出现了。当人们被激励
时，他们会对自身内外的条件做出反应。动机经常与需求、动机、驱动和目标
或激励有关。对需求和动机的强调强调了动机和人格之间的相互联系。

需要

需求可以分为，例如，生理的，安全或安全，社会的，自我或自尊的需求。有
了需要却什么也不做是可能的，但同样紧迫的需要也会引起特定的行为模式。

动机

动机包括激励、激活和指导个人行为的内在状态，因为他或她努力实现一个目
标或获得一个激励。动机可以作为消费者评价竞争产品的一种手段，比如购买
汽车。例如，一个受便利驱动的汽车购买者可能会被带有特定电子设备的车型
所吸引，而偏爱没有这些设施的类似车型。

驱动器

驱动的概念是激励的许多理论的一个重要特性,与理论的学习,如船体的理论(见
第 6 章“经典条件作用”)。一个人据说是在开车时,他或她采取一种行为模式
实现一个特定的目标。例如，一个饥饿的人，显然专注于满足一种生理需求，
他或她的行为(即处于一种驱动状态)表明他或她在寻找食物或营养(即一个目标
或激励)。当一个人获得足够的营养时，他的行为(欲望)就会暂时减弱。驱动力
越强，个体感受到的兴奋程度就越高。

在最初的形式下，驱动理论强调了生物需求和相关驱动的重要性。后来扩展到
其他类型的行为，不与基本驱动器连接，如关联驱动器

地位、成就和令人满意的社会关系(Baumeister & Leary, 1995)。驱动理论已

经存在很长一段时间了，但有些人认为在某些情况下它可能并不完全适用。例
如，人类有能力追求增加而不是减少各种动力的行动(Baron, 2002)。例如，为
了减肥，人们对吃零食视而不见，即使他们饿了。

Frustration

There are occasions when the individual is in a state of drive (a motivated state) to achieve a particular
goal that will satisfy a deficient need – for example, the hungry person is seeking food, or the
ambitious employee is seeking a more challenging job. But when an obstacle is placed in the
individual’s pathway to the achievement of the goal (such as being caught up in a traffic jam
preventing a job applicant from attending a selection interview), this can give rise to feelings of
frustration and produce either positive or negative reactions.

A positive reaction comes about when the person tries to resolve the difficulty in a constructive
manner. For example, in the face of opposition to the implementation of a certain plan of action, a
manager might decide to engage in more consultation with those who object to the scheme. It is also
conceivable that the frustrating event makes the individual divert his or her energies into the
achievement of alternative goals. In the lives of individuals over the centuries, frustrating events could
have been responsible for significant personal accomplishments.

However, frustration can generate various forms of destructive behaviour. The individual may engage
in physical or verbal aggression, or regress to an earlier form of behaviour when, for example, a display
of temper achieved the desired result. There are other circumstances when the individual reacts to
frustrating situations in the same way irrespective of the magnitude of the event and, as a result, the
reaction may be totally inappropriate in given circumstances (e.g. shouting or making caustic remarks
irrespective of the degree of magnitude of the frustrating event). Some individuals show a tendency to
give up and withdraw from the situation, whereas others find the atmosphere surrounding the obstacle
to the achievement of the goal unsettling and repress the experience to the unconscious mind.
Arousal and emotion

The thalamus and reticular formation (both areas of the brain) exert influence on the arousal
mechanism. The thalamus is the focal point of excitement and depression, pleasure and pain. The
function of the reticular

formation is to increase or decrease the level of arousal and, apart from faltering information, it decides
what should be passed on to the higher brain and what should be rejected. Obviously, a high priority
would be given to information that alerts us to a potential danger. An illustration of arousal in the
motivation process is provided in Panel 4.1. The emotion of fear features prominently in the illustration
– it activated fight. Anger is also an emotion that is considered in the context of motivation, and
produces a physiological change in the form of a greater production of noradrenaline, resulting in a
“fight” response.

Emotion is a characteristic that is discussed in Chapter 8 in connection with job satisfaction; the
justification for considering it here is that the emotion of fear, featured in the illustration in Panel 4.1
with its in-built action tendencies, is considered relevant in work motivation (see Panel 4.2).

A raised level of arousal implies increased awareness, energy, and speed, and can be effective in the
performance of well-learned mental and physical skills. On the other hand, a lower level of arousal is
more suited for tasks of a really complex nature. In a work situation we could expect job performance
in the former case to increase as arousal increases up to a certain point. In practice it is often difficult to
determine in advance the optimal level of arousal for a given job. Beyond the optimum level of arousal
performance could suffer if there is a further change in the level of arousal. As a general principle, and
as stated above, the more difficult a task the lower the level of arousal, otherwise a reduction in
performance will be experienced. This proposal is known as the Yerkes–Dodson law, and it seems to
apply in numerous situations.

It would be wise to consider this law in the light of individual differences and preferences. For
instance, at one extreme there is the person who prefers and seeks high levels of arousal (e.g. sky
divers) and at the other end of the scale are people who prefer to be in a low arousal state (Baron,
2002). It is accepted that arousal theory provides useful insights into the dynamics of motivation, but in
the light of what was said in the previous sentence one has to recognize some important limitations or
constraints. The relevance of arousal theory to marketing practice features in Panel 4.3 are also valid.
For example, the person’s accomplishments could be recognized by receiving congratulations from a
superior soon after the event, either in private or public. This is an example of an intrinsic reward,
which is considered later.

Goals or incentives

Goals or incentives satisfy or reduce the behaviour associated with the drive. For example, the hungry
person achieves the goal or acquires the incentive by eating the food, and this could lead to a reduction
or elimination of the hunger drive. Various incentive programmes have been designed to motivate
people to meet good standards. Tangible rewards such as jewellery, gifs, and plaques, as opposed to
cash, for meeting safety targets are especially common in the USA.

Providing incentives for appropriate or acceptable behaviour conjures up images of reinforcement

theory, discussed in Chapter 7. Tis behaviorist theory of learning is relevant in a motivational sense
when it maintains that rewarding behaviour with recognition is likely to encourage the repetition of that
behaviour. Apart from the tangible rewards mentioned earlier, there are other forms of recognition

NEED (CONTENT)THEORIES
Need theories fall into the category of content theories of motivation. They assume that individuals
possess a “baggage” of motives awaiting gratification, and there is an attempt to explain motivation in
terms of what arouses and energizes behaviour. The theoretical perspective of content theorists will be
examined in this section.

One particular view of motivation suggests that people strive towards realizing their inner potential
(self-actualization) and may suffer some personal disadvantage in doing so. For example, the
adolescent may feel it necessary to leave the comfort of the parental home in order to assert his or her
independence. Like- wise, there are occasions when a person forfeits comfort and security in order to
support an unpopular principle or cause. These are examples of a person’s desire to satisfy a pressing
need. Maslow (1954) identified a hierarchy of needs ranging from the most primitive, which

humans share with the lower forms of life, to those associated with the higher forms of life.

Hierarchy of needs

The hierarchy of needs consists of the following layers:

 Need for self-actualization.

 Need for esteem.

 Need for love and belongingness (affiliation).

 Need for safety.

 Need for survival (physiological).

The foot of the hierarchy represents the most basic needs, and the individual strives to move
upwards through the hierarchy. Maslow (1954) observed that “man is a wanting animal and
rarely reaches a state of complete satisfaction except for a short time. As one desire is
 satisfied, another pops up to take its place.” Tus, only if the lower needs are satisfied will the
higher needs appear.

需求理论属于激励的内容理论的范畴。他们假设个人拥有等待满足的动机“包袱”，并试图从
激发和激励行为的角度来解释动机。本节将考察内容理论家的理论视角。

一种关于动机的特殊观点认为，人们努力实现他们的内在潜力(自我实现)，并可能在这样做的
过程中遭受一些个人劣势。例如，青少年可能会觉得有必要离开舒适的父母家，以维护他或她
的独立性。同样地，有时一个人为了支持不受欢迎的原则或事业而放弃舒适和安全。这些都是
人们渴望满足迫切需要的例子。Maslow(1954)确定了从最原始的需求开始的需求层次

人类与较低生命形式分享，与那些与较高生命形式相关的人分享。

需求层次理论

需求层次由以下几层组成:

•自我实现的需要。

•需要尊重。

•对爱和归属感的需求。

•安全需求。

生存需要(生理上的)。

层次的底部代表最基本的需求，个人努力通过层次往上移动。马斯洛(Maslow, 1954)观
察到“人是一种渴望的动物，除了很短的时间外，很少能达到完全满足的状态。”当
一个欲望得到满足时，另一个欲望就会取而代之。”只有低需求得到满足，高需求才
会出现。

Physiological needs

With respect to some physiological needs, there are certain automatic responses to internal imbalances
in the human body. A self- correcting mechanism ensures that the level of sugar remains constant in the
bloodstream (except in diabetics). We are motivated to drink lots of liquid after eating salty foods.
When our body temperature becomes too high, we perspire and are motivated to remove a garment or
open a window in a room. A feature of physiological needs is that they have to be satisfied regularly.
Consumption of products related to these needs is high, and apart from the emphasis in an advertising
message on the convenience factor of certain foodstuffs, the nutritional value may also be
acknowledged.

Safety needs
Safety needs include physical security, emotional security, job security, a modestly comfortable and
predictable routine, and a desire for fair treatment and justice at work. The need for security could
motivate the car buyer to emphasize safety features, such as child-proof locks, head restraints, and a
collapsible steering wheel when making a choice. The need for security could also be manifest when
the individual is convinced that a signal- ling system is necessary for his or her future security; as a
result, he or she is motivated to install a smoke detector in the house. Security needs could be aroused
at work when there is uncertainty about continued employment with the company. Likewise, the threat
of health and safety hazards could arouse safety needs.

的生理需求

就某些生理需要而言，人体内部的不平衡会有某些自动的反应。一种自我纠正
机制确保血液中的糖分水平保持不变(糖尿病患者除外)。在吃了咸的食物后，
我们有动力喝大量的液体。当我们的体温过高时，我们会出汗，并有动力脱掉
一件衣服或打开房间的窗户。生理需求的一个特点是必须定期得到满足。与这
些需求有关的产品的消费量很高，除了在广告信息中强调某些食品的方便因素
外，还可能承认其营养价值。

安全需求

安全需求包括身体安全、情感安全、工作安全、适度舒适和可预测的日常生活，
以及在工作中对公平待遇和正义的渴望。对安全的需求可能会促使购车者在做
选择时强调安全特性，如儿童安全锁、头部约束装置和可折叠方向盘。当一个
人确信信号传输系统对他或她未来的安全是必要的时，对安全的需要也可能是
明显的;因此，他或她有动力在房子里安装烟雾探测器。当不确定是否继续在公
司工作时，安全需求可能会被激发。同样，健康和安全危险的威胁可能引起安
全需求。

Affiliation needs

Higher than safety needs come affiliation or social needs. These include social contacts, belonging to a
group, friendship, and love. Social motivation is also described as dependency (submissive behaviour
aimed at an authority figure), dominance, personal relation- ships (both platonic and sexual), and
aggression (Argyle, 1968). It can find expression in many ways. For instance, in order to avoid a
feeling of inferiority among others, a consumer may be attracted to the use of a particular product and
some people may purchase goods that meet with the social approval of others.

Social or affiliation needs act as important motivators of behaviour when the need to belong to a group
at work offers, for example, the opportunity to develop meaningful associations with colleagues, to
give and receive friendship, understanding, and compassion, and to be accepted by colleagues. There is
strong evidence to indicate that social bonding and the need to belong are very influential (Baumeister
& Leary, 1995). The consequences of not satisfying security and social needs could be various forms of
undesirable behaviour – resistance to change, antagonism, and an unwillingness to cooperate –
intended to defeat the achievement of organizational goals.
Esteem needs

The next level in the hierarchy deals with esteem needs, divided into self-esteem and esteem from
others. Esteem is the evaluative aspect of the self-concept and is concerned with how worthwhile and
confident the individual feels about him/herself. Self-esteem includes the need for self-respect and self-
confidence, the need to achieve something worthwhile as a result of job performance, the need to be
fairly independent at work, the need to acquire technical knowledge about one’s job, and the need to
perform one’s duties in a competent manner.

Esteem from others includes the need for recognition as a result of efficient and effective job
performance, the need to be appreciated by colleagues for one’s overall contribution at work, and the
need to establish a reputation and status in the organization. The desire for power would also probably
belong to the category of esteem needs.

Self-image could be viewed as an essential part of esteem motivation, and there is a tendency to
develop attitudes and beliefs towards the self that are consistent and integrated (Argyle, 1968). The
person could be motivated to get others to accept and respect the self-image, and perhaps avoid people
or alternatively try to change their attitudes if they are not prepared to do so. Those endowed with high
self-esteem work harder if they are told that things are not going well, tend to be less conformist, and
generally are more accomplished. On the other hand those with low self-esteem are more likely to be
derailed by a variety of organizational events, including being more upset by negative comments
(Furnham, 2005a).

Attribution theory (see page 232) is invoked when it is suggested that one should be on one’s guard
against certain biases likely to affect the concept of self-esteem. These are referred to as the self-
serving bias and false uniqueness bias (Eysenck, 2014), where one might expect individuals attribute
ambiguous information as relatively fettering and readily accept positive feedback while tending to
reject negative feed- back (Hepper, Gramzow, & Sedikides, 2010).

Self-actualization needs

At the apex of the pyramid are the self- actualization needs, implying self-fulfillment derived from
achievement following the successful accomplishment of, for example, a demanding and challenging
assignment at work. Tis is the epitome of intrinsic motivation, where an enhancement of competency
and autonomy is experienced, with beneficial consequences (Gagne, Forest, Vansteenkiste, Crevier-
Braud, Broeck, Aspeli, et al., 2014; Welters, Mitchell, & Muysken, 2014).

归属的需要

高于安全需求的是从属关系或社会需求。这些包括社会联系，属于一个团体，
友谊和爱情。社会动机也被描述为依赖(针对权威人物的顺从行为)、支配、个
人关系(柏拉图式和性)和攻击(Argyle, 1968)。它可以在很多方面得到表达。
例如，为了避免在他人中产生自卑感，消费者可能会被某种产品的使用所吸引，
有些人可能会购买得到他人社会认可的商品。

当需要在工作中属于一个群体时，社会或从属需求成为重要的行为动机，例如，
与同事发展有意义的联系，给予和接受友谊、理解和同情，以及被同事接受的
机会。有强有力的证据表明，社会联系和归属的需要是非常有影响力的
(Baumeister & Leary, 1995)。不满足安全和社会需要的后果可能是各种形式
的不良行为- - -抵制改变、对抗和不愿合作- - -目的是挫败组织目标的实现。

尊重需要

下一个层次涉及自尊需求，分为自尊和来自他人的自尊。自尊是自我概念的评
价方面，与个人对自己的价值和自信程度有关。自尊包括自尊和自信的需要，
在工作表现中获得有价值的东西的需要，在工作中相当独立的需要，获得有关
工作的技术知识的需要，以及以称职的方式履行自己的职责的需要。

他人的尊重包括高效的工作表现所带来的认可的需要，一个人在工作中的整体
贡献需要得到同事的赞赏，以及在组织中建立声誉和地位的需要。对权力的渴
望也可能属于尊重需求的范畴。

自我形象可以被视为自尊动机的一个重要组成部分，并且有一种倾向是对自我
形成一致和完整的态度和信念(Argyle, 1968)。这个人可能会被激励去让别人
接受和尊重自己的形象，如果别人还没有准备好改变他们的态度，他可能会避
开别人，或者尝试改变他们的态度。那些拥有高度自尊的人如果被告知事情进
展不顺利，他们会更努力地工作，往往不那么墨守成规，通常也更有成就。另
一方面，那些低自尊的人更有可能被各种各样的组织事件所干扰，包括更容易
被负面评论所困扰(Furnham, 2005a)。

“归因理论”(见第 232 页)是指人们应该警惕某些可能影响自尊概念的偏见。

这被称为 self-serving bias 和 false uniqueness bias (Eysenck, 2014)，人
们可能会认为个体将模棱两可的信息归为相对束缚，容易接受正面反馈，而倾
向于拒绝负面反馈(Hepper, Gramzow， & Sedikides, 2010)。

自我实现的需要

在金字塔的顶端是自我实现的需求，这意味着自我实现来自于成功完成之后的
成就，例如，一项苛刻和具有挑战性的工作任务。这是内在动机的缩影，其中
能力和自主的增强是经验，并带来有益的结果(Gagne, Forest,
Vansteenkiste, Crevier-Braud, Broeck, Aspeli, et al.， 2014;Welters,
Mitchell， & Muysken, 2014)。
Need for power

Unlike the need for achievement, the need for power is a motive that involves other people in the
organization and is closely linked with leadership or management styles (discussed in Chapter 11).
Because man- agers in large organizations frequently cannot act alone, they have to depend on
influencing others for their success. For this reason, McClelland believes that the need for power is
related to success in the exercise of managerial leadership.

A system has been devised for arriving at a need for power profile (termed N.Pow) in a similar manner
to that adopted by McClelland in connection with N.Ach (Verof, 1953). After closely studying the
relationship of N.Pow to style of management and performance, it was concluded that for managers in
large organizations, rather than for entrepreneurs, N.Pow is more important for effectiveness than
N.Ach (McClelland, 1970). For example, an empirical association was found between success in
managerial positions and a moderately high need for power, high self-control, and a low need for
affiliation (McClelland & Boyatzis, 1982).

Some might feel uncomfortable about being told that they are high in N.Pow because of the traditional
association between seeking power and suppression, exploitation, and tyranny. But there are others
who seek power in the form of positions of responsibility in organizations and feel good about it and
behave in a way that advances the common good. It is suggested that individuals with a high need for
power can be successful managers if they satisfy the following criteria: they seek power for the good of
others rather than self-aggran- dissident; their affiliation needs are modest; and they have the self-
control to moderate the desire for power if there is a danger that it will adversely affect interpersonal
relationships (Pinder, 2015). As an ideal, this statement is admirable but satisfying the criteria would be
a stiff challenge.

需要力量
与对成就的需求不同，对权力的需求是一种涉及组织中其他人的动机，与领导或管理风格
密切相关(在第 11 章讨论)。因为大型组织中的管理者往往不能单独行动，他们必须依靠影
响他人来获得成功。因此，麦克利兰认为，对权力的需要与管理领导能力的成功运用有关。
已经设计了一个系统，以达到对功率剖面的需求(称为 N.Pow)，类似于麦克利兰在与 N.Ach
(Verof, 1953)的联系中采用的方式。在仔细研究了 n.p oww 与管理风格和绩效的关系后，我
们得出结论，对于大型组织中的管理者而言，n.p oww 比 n.h ach (McClelland, 1970)对有效
性更重要。例如，管理职位的成功与中等程度的权力需求、高自控力和低从属需求之间存
在经验关联(McClelland & Boyatzis, 1982)。
有些人可能会感到不舒服，因为他们被告知，他们在 n.p oww 很高，因为寻求权力与镇压、
剥削和暴政之间的传统联系。但也有一些人以在组织中担任责任职位的形式寻求权力，他
们对此感觉良好，并以一种促进共同利益的方式行事。研究表明，对权力有高度需求的人
如果满足以下标准，就可以成为成功的管理者:他们为他人的利益而不是自我膨胀——持不
同政见者寻求权力;他们的从属需求是适度的;如果权力有对人际关系产生不利影响的危险，
他们有自我控制能力来缓和权力欲望(Pinder, 2015)。作为一种理想，这种说法令人钦佩，
但要满足标准将是一个严峻的挑战。
Dual-factor theory

The work of Herzberg (1966) is consistent with Maslow’s and McClelland’s theories. His dual- factor
theory is based on considerable empirical evidence and is built on the principle that people are
motivated towards what makes them feel good, and away from what makes them feel bad. His research
identifies motivators as factors producing good feelings in the work situation; these are listed in Table
4.1. By contrast he suggests that hygiene factors, also listed in Table 4.1, arouse bad feelings in the
work situation.

Hygiene factors are clearly concerned with the work environment rather than the work itself. They
differ significantly from motivators in as much as, metaphorically speaking, they “can only prevent
illness but not bring about good health”. In other words, lack of adequate “job hygiene” will cause
dissatisfaction, but its presence will not of itself cause satisfaction; it is the motivators that do this. The
absence of the motivators will not cause dissatisfaction, assuming the job hygiene factors are adequate,
but there will be no positive motivation. It is a feature of Herzberg’s approach that job satisfaction and
job dissatisfaction are not oppo- sites. The opposite of job satisfaction is not job dissatisfaction, it is no
job satisfaction; the opposite of job dissatisfaction is lack of job dissatisfaction. This is illustrated in
Table 4.2.

Empirical endorsement of Herzberg’s theory is available (Hodgetts & Luthans, 1991). How- ever, this
evidence should be considered in the light of the criticisms voiced later. Adopting Herzberg’s
approach, a manager should build motivators into the job to promote job satisfaction positively; in
order to minimize dissatisfaction, hygiene factors should be improved. Both motivators and hygiene
factors are mentioned in Panel 4.4. Earlier it was suggested by Herzberg that motivators are critical
factors residing in the job. He prescribes various methods of job enrichment as a way of building
motivators into the job. Job enrichment is an approach to job design (considered later in this chapter)
that attempts to make tasks more intrinsically interesting, involving, and rewarding. It comprises both
vertical and horizontal loading.
Vertical loading entails injecting more important and challenging duties into the job, whereas
horizontal loading is akin to job enlargement (increasing the number or diversity of task activities) and
job rotation (i.e. moving people back and forth among different tasks). The underlying belief in
Herzberg’s approach is that increased job satisfaction is an important source of motivation and will
lead to better performance because of its association with increased productivity and reduced turnover,
absenteeism, and tardiness. There is a discussion on a number of facets of job satisfaction with respect
to attitudes in Chapter 8.

指定的理论

Herzberg(1966)的工作与 Maslow 和 McClelland 的理论是一致的。他的双因素

理论基于大量的经验证据，建立在这样一个原则之上:人们被激励着去做让他们
感觉良好的事情，而远离让他们感觉糟糕的事情。他的研究将激励因素定义为
在工作环境中产生良好感觉的因素;如表 4.1 所示。相比之下，他认为同样列在
表 4.1 中的卫生因素会在工作环境中引起不良情绪。

卫生因素显然与工作环境有关，而与工作本身无关。打个比方，它们“只能预
防疾病，而不能带来健康”。换句话说，缺乏足够的“工作卫生”会引起不满，
但它的存在本身不会引起满意;是激励因素在起作用。假设工作卫生因素足够，
激励因素的缺失不会引起不满，但不会产生积极的激励。赫茨伯格研究方法的
一个特点是，工作满意度和工作不满意度并不是对立的。工作满意的反面不是
工作不满意，而是没有工作满意;工作不满的反面是缺乏工作不满。表 4.2 说明
了这一点。

对赫茨伯格理论的实证支持是可行的(Hodgetts & Luthans, 1991)。无论如何，

这一证据应该在以后提出的批评中加以考虑。采用赫茨伯格的方法，管理者应
在工作中建立激励因素，积极提升工作满意度;为了尽量减少不满，应改善卫生
因素。激励因素和卫生因素均在小组 4.4 中提及。早些时候，赫茨伯格提出，
激励因素是存在于工作中的关键因素。他规定了工作充实的各种方法，作为在
工作中建立激励因素的方法。工作充实是工作设计的一种方法(将在本章后面讨
论)，它试图使任务在本质上更有趣、更有参与性和更有回报。它包括垂直载荷
和水平载荷。

垂直负荷意味着在工作中注入更重要和更具挑战性的任务，而水平负荷类似于
工作扩大(增加任务活动的数量或多样性)和工作轮换(在不同任务之间来回移
动)。赫茨伯格的方法的基本信念是，提高工作满意度是激励的重要来源，并将
导致更好的业绩，因为它与提高生产力、减少人员流动、旷工和迟到有关。在
第 8 章中有一个关于工作满意度的几个方面与态度的讨论。

Criticisms of dual-factor theory

There is research evidence that is not entirely compatible with the findings of Herzberg. The following
are illustrative of the criticisms made:

(1) Hygiene and motivator factors can both cause satisfaction as well as dissatisfaction.

There is no recognition in the dual-factor theory of the part played by the expectations that people bring
with them to the job. For example, when expectations are not met, people can feel dissatisfied (Wer-
nimont, 1966). The issue of expectancy will be considered in the next section.

(2) If there is a mismatch between what people bring to the job (input) and what they receive in return
(output), this has significance in terms of satisfaction irrespective of the distinction between motivators
and hygiene factors. Here we enter the realm of the concept of equity, which is also examined in the
next section.

(3) The mediating influence of category of worker and culture is neglected. For example, an enriched
job may have meaning and promote satisfaction for one category of worker but not for another (Hulin
& Blood, 1968; Turner & Lawrence, 1965). In a classic study in Luton in the UK, researchers found
that workers sought jobs voluntarily on the car assembly line, and it is interesting to note that these
workers had previously given up jobs else- where offering interest, status, responsibility, and the
opportunity to use their ability and skill (Goldthorpe, Lockwood, Bechhofer, & Platt, 1970). No doubt
they were primarily attracted by monetary or material considerations.

As to national culture, there is empirical endorsement of Herzberg’s theory. Hodgetts and Luthans
(1991) report a number of successful international replications of Herzberg’s findings. However,
Adler’s (2007) evidence would indicate that national culture could still exercise an important influence.
For example, findings suggest that workers in New Zealand and Panama respond to motivators and
hygiene factors differently from US workers.

4. (4)  The supremacy of financial reward (accorded the status of a hygiene factor by Herzberg)
as a motivating force has been underlined by developments in pay remuneration (Konrad,
2000). In particular, performance-related pay often increases productivity (Bratkovich, 1989),
and can result in satisfaction with this system of remuneration (Heneman, Greenberger, &
Strasser, 1988). (A discussion of perfor- mance-related pay appears later in this chapter.)

5. (5)  The way Herzberg’s research was con- ducted, and the type of questioning used, both
have weaknesses (House & Wigdor, 1967). Methodological considerations feature
prominently in serious evaluations of the dual-factor theory. Generally, studies that use the
same methodology as Herzberg employed – that is, content analysis of recalled incidents by
respondents – are supportive of the theory (Pinder, 1984). Studies that use other methods for
measuring satisfaction and dissatisfaction often come forward with results quite different from
Herzberg’s findings (Hulin & Smith, 1967). Therefore, it should be noted that if a theory is
dependent on a particular research method for its substance, as appears to be the case with
Herzberg’s theory, its validity could be considered questionable.
Finally, it appears the dual-factor theory is no longer of significant interest to researchers

in the field of motivation. In a recent review of the evidence, “we are left not really knowing whether to
take the dual-factor theory itself seriously. But there is support for many of the implications the theory
has for enriching jobs to make them more motivating” (Pinder, 2015).

对双因素理论的批评
有研究证据与赫茨伯格的发现并不完全一致。以下是对这些批评的说明:
(1)卫生和激励因素既能引起满意，也能引起不满意。
在双因素理论中，人们对工作的期望所起的作用并没有得到承认。例如，当期望没有得到
满足时，人们会感到不满意(Wer- nimont, 1966)。预期的问题将在下一节中讨论。
(2)如果人们为工作带来的(输入)和他们得到的回报(输出)不匹配，无论动机和卫生因素之间
的区别，这都对满意度有重要意义。在这里，我们进入了公平概念的领域，这也将在下一
节中进行研究。
(3)忽略了工人类别和文化的中介作用。例如，一份丰富的工作可能对某一类工人有意义，
并提高其满意度，但对另一类工人却没有 (Hulin & Blood, 1968;Turner & Lawrence, 1965)。
在卢顿在英国的一项经典研究,研究人员发现,在汽车生产线工人寻找工作主动,而且有趣的
是,这些工人曾放弃了其他工作 ,提供利益,地位、责任 ,和机会使用他们的能力和 技能
(goldthrope,洛克伍德,Bechhofer &普拉特 1970)。毫无疑问，吸引他们的主要是金钱或物质
方面的考虑。
在民族文化方面，赫兹伯格的理论得到了实证的认可。Hodgetts 和 Luthans(1991)报告了许
多赫兹伯格的发现在国际上的成功复制。然而，Adler(2007)的证据表明，民族文化仍然可
以发挥重要的影响。例如，研究结果表明，新西兰和巴拿马的工人对激励因素和卫生因素
的反应与美国工人不同。
(4)经济奖励(赫茨伯格赋予了卫生因素的地位)作为激励力量的至高无上地位已被薪酬的发
展所强调(Konrad, 2000)。具体来说，绩效薪酬通常会提高生产率(Bratkovich, 1989)，并能
使员工对这种薪酬体系感到满意(Heneman, Greenberger， & Strasser, 1988)。(有关绩效薪酬
的讨论将在本章后面讨论。)
(5)赫茨伯格的研究方式和提问方式都有不足之处(House & Wigdor, 1967)。在对双因素理论
进行认真评价时，方法方面的考虑是突出的。一般来说，使用赫茨伯格采用的相同方法的
研究——即对被调查者回忆事件的内容分析——支持该理论(Pinder, 1984)。使用其他方法
测 量满 意和 不满 意的 研究 往往 得出 与 Herzberg 的发 现截 然不 同的 结果 (Hulin & Smith,
1967)。因此，应该注意的是，如果一种理论的实质依赖于一种特定的研究方法，就像赫茨
伯格的理论那样，它的有效性可能被认为是有问题的。
最后，双因素理论似乎不再是研究人员的重要兴趣
在动机方面。在最近对证据的回顾中，“我们还不知道是否应该认真对待双因素理论本
身。”但这一理论的许多含意是有支持的，即丰富工作，使其更有动力”(Pinder, 2015)。
Theory X and theory Y

While advocating a similar position to that advanced by Herzberg, McGregor (1960) postulates two
views of humans – namely, theory X and theory Y.

Theory X is the belief that people are naturally lazy and unwilling to work and must be bribed,
frightened, or manipulated if they are to put in any effort at all. This is contrasted with the optimistic
perspective of people – theory Y. This view is likely to be held by a manager who believes in providing
motivational devices.

A theory Y view states that work is as natural as play; the capacity to assume responsibility for
directing one’s own efforts is widely, not narrowly, distributed in the population, and if people are
passive, indolent, and irresponsible on the job it is because of their experiences in organizations and not
generally because of some inherent human weakness. McGregor would subscribe to the theory Y view,
in the belief that there are more people than is generally believed who are able and willing to make a
constructive contribution towards the solution of organizational problems. Reflecting on theories X and
Y, Pinder (2015) had this to say: “One of the most insightful and enduring observations made by
behavioural science concerning work is that made by McGregor.” A similar view was expressed earlier
by Cooper (2001).

X 理论和 Y 理论
McGregor(1960)在主张与 Herzberg 相似的立场的同时，提出了两种关于人类的观点，即 X
理论和 Y 理论。
X 理论认为，人们天生懒惰，不愿意工作，如果他们要付出任何努力，就必须受到贿赂、
恐吓或操纵。这与人的乐观观点(y 理论)形成了鲜明的对比。这种观点很可能是相信提供激
励手段的经理所持有的。
Y 理论认为，工作和玩耍一样自然;承担指导自己努力的责任的能力是广泛的，而不是狭隘
的，分布在人群中，如果人们在工作中是被动的，懒惰的，不负责任的，这是因为他们在
组织中的经验，而不是一般的人性的弱点。McGregor 会赞同 Y 理论的观点，他相信有更多
的人能够并且愿意为解决组织问题做出建设性的贡献。Pinder(2015)在回顾 X 和 Y 理论时说:
“ 行 为 科 学 关 于 工 作 的 最 具 洞 察 力 和 最 持 久 的 观 察 之 一 是 McGregor 所 做
的。”Cooper(2001)也表达了类似的观点。

Cognitive evaluation theory

Intrinsic and extrinsic rewards have been discussed above as distinct entities. But in cognitive
evaluation theory the relation- ship between intrinsic and extrinsic rewards is developed. It is
suggested that if there is too much of a preoccupation with extrinsic rewards (material benefits), this
could lead to an adverse effect as far as the appeal of intrinsic rewards (psychological benefits) is
concerned.
This theory suggests that when emphasis is placed on extrinsic rewards for good performance in a job
known to be rich in intrinsic motivation, there will be a subsequent decline of interest in the intrinsic
rewards previously associated with the job (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 1999). Basically, the theory says
that when extrinsic rewards (e.g. performance- related pay) are given to employees for performance in
an enriched job, it causes the intrinsic rewards derived from doing something they really enjoy to
decline. If we lend credence to cognitive evaluation theory, it could be concluded that to prevent the
diminution of intrinsic rewards we should ensure that pay (an extrinsic reward) is not dependent upon
performance. But such a proposition might be difficult to comprehend in the typical organizational
setting.

While it is possible to find support for cognitive evaluation theory there are also reservations about the
research methodology used in the studies testing the theory, predominantly in laboratory settings, and
the way the findings have been interpreted (Robbins & Judge, 2013)

认知评价理论

内在奖励和外在奖励在前面已经作为不同的实体进行了讨论。但在认知评价理论中，内在奖励
和外在奖励的关系得到了发展。如果过多关注外部奖励(物质利益)，就会对内在奖励(心理利益)
的吸引力产生不利影响。

这一理论表明，当强调在一个具有丰富内在动机的工作中表现良好的外在奖励时，对先前与该
工作相关的内在奖励的兴趣就会随之下降(Deci, Koestner， & Ryan, 1999)。基本上，该理论认
为，当外部奖励(如绩效相关的薪酬)被给予员工在一个丰富的工作中的表现时，它会导致内在
奖励从他们真正喜欢的事情中获得的下降。如果我们相信认知评价理论，我们可以得出这样的
结论:为了防止内在奖励的减少，我们应该确保薪酬(一种外部奖励)不依赖于绩效。但在典型的
组织环境中，这样的主张可能很难理解。

虽然有可能为认知评估理论找到支持，但对测试该理论的研究方法(主要是在实验室环境下)以
及对研究结果的解释方式仍有保留(Robbins & Judge, 2013)。

COGNITIVE (PROCESS) THEORIES

A cognitive perspective in psychology was explained briefly in the opening chapter of this book. The
cognitive approach to motivation is primarily concerned with the desire of individuals to produce an
effect on their environment and in the process to develop certain skills. Individuals in their relationship
with the environment like to be active, to explore, to manipulate, to control, to create, and to
accomplish things (White, 1960). Likewise, young children like to hold, rattle, and pull toys apart.
Monkeys became more skilled with practice at manipulating mechanical devices placed outside their
cages (Harlow, 1953).

A cognitive theory of motivation recognizes that many aspects of motivation arise when people are
fully aware of their motives and actions, and of the risks involved, and make plans guided by their
expectations. We find a number of instances where people engage in purposeful behaviour, in which
they set a course of action right at the beginning, recognize the obstacles on the way to achieving their
plans, and finally if they overcome the obstacles it’s possible they feel satisfied with their performance.
It appears that the greater the sense of self-control attained, the greater the level of success in carrying
out both short- and long-term plans. If individuals feel that the increasing level of self-control covers
actions freely chosen rather than imposed, self-determination theory would indicate that this a
beneficial motivational situation (Kong & Ho, 2016). The most popular cognitive theories are goal-
setting, expectancy theory, and equity theory. These are called process theories. Unlike content
theories, discussed earlier in this chapter, which assume that individuals are endowed with a bundle of
motives awaiting gratification and do not acknowledge individual choice or social influence, process
theories focus on how behaviour is initiated, redirected, and terminated.

Self-efficacy is closely associated with the cognitive approaches to motivation and therefore will be
examined later.

本书的第一章简要地解释了心理学中的认知视角。对动机的认知方法主要关注个人对环境
产生影响的愿望，以及在发展某些技能的过程中。在与环境的关系中，个体喜欢积极、探
索、操纵、控制、创造和完成事情(White, 1960)。同样，小孩子喜欢拿着、拨浪鼓和把玩
具拆开。猴子变得更熟练的操作机械设备放置在笼子外的实践(Harlow, 1953)。
一个关于动机的认知理论认为，当人们充分意识到他们的动机和行为，以及所涉及的风险
并根据他们的预期制定计划时，动机的许多方面就会出现。我们发现了许多有目的行为的
例子，在这些例子中，人们在一开始就确定了正确的行动方针，认识到实现计划的道路上
的障碍，最后，如果他们克服了障碍，他们可能对自己的表现感到满意。似乎自我控制意
识越强，执行短期和长期计划的成功程度就越大。如果个体感觉自我控制水平的提高涵盖
了自由选择的行为而不是强加的行为，自我决定理论将表明这是一个有益的激励情境
(Kong & Ho, 2016)。最流行的认知理论是目标设定理论、期望理论和公平理论。这些被称
为过程理论。与本章前面讨论的内容理论不同，内容理论假设个体被赋予了一系列等待满
足的动机，而不承认个人选择或社会影响，过程理论关注的是行为是如何开始、改变和终
止的。
自我效能感与动机的认知方法密切相关，因此将在后面进行检验。

Goal setting

It is said that goal-setting theory has been significant in promoting our understanding of work
motivation (Mitchell & Daniels, 2003). A goal is basically a desirable objective, the achievement of
which is uppermost in the mind of a person. Goals can be used for two purposes in organizations:
 1. (1)  As motivational devices, in the sense that employees work towards meeting these goals.
2. (2)  As a control device, when performance is monitored in relation to the goals set for
individuals and departments.

Organizational goals ideally should be SMART (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, with a time
frame) to be of most value (Latham, 2003). Realistic targets might be expressed as, for example, “to
reduce overhead costs by 10 per cent” or “to increase sales revenue by 10 per cent over the next year”.
Subsumed in these organizational goals would be numerous individual goals directed towards
achieving the overall goal.

The starting point for a goal-setting theory of motivation is that behaviour is influenced by conscious
goals and implementation intentions (Gollwitzer, 1999). The earliest experimental studies of goal-
setting as an independent variable were conducted by Mace (1935) in the UK over 80 years ago. He
was the first researcher to compare the effects of specific, challenging goals with goals such as “do
your best” and to compare the effects of goals that differ in levels of difficulty.

The model of goal-setting we are familiar with today was first postulated by Locke (1968), who felt
that performance was shaped by goal difficulty and goal specificity. Sub- sequent if research has shown
a close association between performance and goal difficulty and specificity (Hollenbeck & Klein,
1987).

Goal difficulty

Goal difficulty is the extent to which a goal is challenging and demanding of effort, but it is not easy in
all circumstances to define what is a challenging and attainable goal (Miles & Clenney, 2012). For a
particular athlete,

a difficult goal could be to secure a place in the national squad for a major global sporting event. This
could necessitate a lot of hard work to achieve the goal. For another athlete, such a goal would be too
difficult to achieve, and it could be considered unattainable. In such a case, it is unlikely to have any
motivating effect, so the athlete in question puts little effort into training. Therefore, for some people a
challenging goal raises the level of performance (Wegge, 2000), while others do not respond positively
to difficult goals. The setting of difficult goals for a particular group (e.g. research scientists) was found
to be negatively related to performance at work (Yearta, Maithis, & Briner, 1995). Therefore, the
setting of difficult goals result may not be the best approach to adopt where creativity and high-level
problem solving are critical. Generally, if the difficult or complex goals are set for tasks of an
unfamiliar nature, this could have a detrimental effect on performance, but repeated practice at such
tasks could reverse the stated effect (Kanfer, Ackerman, Murtha, & Dugdale, 1994).

The concept of self-efficacy (belief in one’s capability) – examined below – was introduced in the
context of goal difficulty and it was concluded that it is important for goal difficulty to match the
individual’s perceived self-efficacy (Earley & Lituchy, 1991). With a raising of the level of
performance and the level of self-efficacy, goals and quality standards can be made more demanding or
challenging.
Overall, it may be concluded that even though success is not guaranteed when the person faces a
difficult goal, most people would accept the challenge of difficult rather than easy goals if the
expectation is that acceptable intrinsic and extrinsic rewards will follow the completion of the task
(Mento, Lock, & Klein, 1992). This is a view in line with more recent evidence. The academic
performance of students pursuing an MBA course was analyzed. A proportion of the students set
themselves vague, general goals (e.g. to perform well at the end of the course). Other students set them-
selves hard, specific goals (e.g. to attain certain, high standards in individual modules). It was found
that those who set themselves hard, specifc goals performed better and experienced higher satisfaction
with the MBA course than did those who set themselves general goals (Latham & Brown, 2006).

目标设定

据说目标设定理论在促进我们对工作动机的理解方面具有重要意义(Mitchell &
Daniels, 2003)。目标基本上是一个理想的目标，实现它是一个人最重要的思
想。在组织中，目标可以用于两个目的:

1. (1)作为激励手段，即员工为实现这些目标而工作。

2. (2)作为一种控制装置，当绩效与为个人和部门设定的目标相关时进行监控。

理想的组织目标应该是 SMART(具体的、可衡量的、可实现的、相关的、有时间
框架的)，这样才最有价值(Latham, 2003)。现实的目标可以表述为，例如，
“将间接成本降低 10%”或“在未来一年将销售收入提高 10%”。在这些组织目
标中包含着许多旨在实现总体目标的个人目标。

动机目标设定理论的出发点是，行为受有意识的目标和执行意图的影响
(Gollwitzer, 1999)。最早将目标设定为自变量的实验研究是由 Mace(1935)在
80 多年前的英国进行的。他是第一个将具有挑战性的具体目标与“尽最大努
力”等目标的效果进行比较，并将不同难度目标的效果进行比较的研究人员。

我们今天所熟悉的目标设定模型是由 Locke(1968)首先提出的，他认为表现是
由目标难度和目标特异性决定的。随后的研究表明，表现与目标难度和特异性
之间有密切的联系(Hollenbeck & Klein, 1987)。

目标困难

目标难度是指目标具有挑战性和需要付出努力的程度，但在所有情况下定义什
么是具有挑战性和可实现的目标并不容易(Miles & Clenney, 2012)。对于一个
特定的运动员来说，

一个困难的目标可能是确保在一个重大的全球体育赛事的国家队的位置。这可
能需要许多艰苦的工作来实现这个目标。对于另一名运动员来说，这样的目标
太难实现了，可能会被认为是无法实现的。在这种情况下，它不太可能有任何
激励作用，所以运动员在训练中很少付出努力。因此，对一些人来说，具有挑
战性的目标提高了表现水平(Wegge, 2000)，而其他人对困难的目标没有积极的
反应。研究发现，为特定群体(如科研人员)设定困难的目标与工作表现呈负相
关(Yearta, Maithis， & Briner, 1995)。因此，在创造性和高水平的问题解
决至关重要的情况下，设定困难的目标结果可能不是最好的方法。一般来说，
如果困难或复杂的目标是为一个不熟悉的性质的任务设置的，这可能会对表现
有不利的影响，但在这些任务上的重复练习可能会扭转所述的效果(Kanfer,
Ackerman, Murtha， & Dugdale, 1994)。

自我效能感(相信一个人的能力)的概念——下面将进行研究——是在目标难度
的背景下引入的，结论是目标难度与个体感知到的自我效能感相匹配是很重要
的(Earley & Lituchy, 1991)。随着绩效水平和自我效能水平的提高，目标和
质量标准可以变得更加苛刻或更具挑战性。

总的来说,可能得出的结论是,尽管并不能保证就一定成功,当人面对困难的目标,
大多数人会接受困难的挑战,而不是简单的目标如果预计可接受的内在和外在的
奖励将遵循任务的完成(锁,门特&克莱因,1992)。这一观点与最近的证据相一致。
分析了攻读 MBA 课程学生的学习成绩。有一部分学生给自己设定了模糊、笼统
的目标(例如，在课程结束时表现良好)。其他学生为自己设定了困难的、具体
的目标(例如，在各个模块中达到一定的高标准)。结果发现，那些为自己设定
艰苦、明确目标的人比那些为自己设定总体目标的人表现更好，对 MBA 课程的
满意度更高(Latham & Brown, 2006)。

Goal specificity

Goal specificity amounts to a definition of the target to which performance will be directed. An
example of a specific goal is to reduce over- head costs by 8 per cent. You will notice that the goal is
expressed in quantitative terms. In areas where qualitative factors (e.g. the quality of leadership) are
considered, specificity is difficult to establish.

Latham and Locke’s model

An expanded model of goal-setting, designed to reflect the complexity of the setting of goals in
organizations, was proposed (Locke & Latham, 2006). This is shown in Figure 4.1. You will notice that
goal-directed effort or behaviour in this model is influenced by four goal attributes – difficulty and
specificity (as in the original model), plus acceptance and commitment.

Goal acceptance and goal commitment

Goal acceptance is the extent to which a person accepts the goal as legitimate for him or her. Goal
commitment is the extent to which the person is interested in attaining the goal, and this is reflected in
the extent to which the per- son will take the necessary steps to attain the goal. According to Latham
and Steele (1983), acceptance and commitment are enhanced by factors such as participation in goal
setting, coming up with realistic and challenging goals, and accepting that goal achievement will lead
to rewards that are valued by those involved.
Other researchers view commitment to difficult goals as a natural precondition for effective
performance (Hollenbeck & Klein, 1987). Goal commitment can be defined as a willing- ness not to
abandon or lower a goal (Wright, O’Leary-Kelly, Cortina, Klein, & Hollenbeck, 1994), and apparently
it is stronger when the goal is made public by communicating it to peers. Those people who believe
they can control their fate (i.e. they are of an internal locus of control disposition) and are high
achievers tend to have the strongest goal commitment (Hollenbeck, Williams, & Klein, 1989; Tubbs,
1993). In a meta-analytic review of the research literature, Donovan and Radosevich (1998) endorse
commitment as a moderating variable in the relationship between goal-setting and performance but
conclude that it is not as influential as previously suggested.

目标专一性

目标专一性指的是将绩效导向的目标的定义。具体目标的一个例子是将间接成本降低 8%。你
会注意到这个目标是用数量来表示的。在定性因素(如领导素质)被考虑的领域，特殊性是很难
确定的。

莱瑟姆和洛克的模型

提出了一个扩展的目标设定模型，旨在反映组织中目标设定的复杂性(Locke & Latham, 2006)。

如图 4.1 所示。你会注意到，在这个模型中，目标导向的努力或行为受到四个目标属性的影响
——难度和特异性(就像在原来的模型中一样)，加上接受和承诺。

目标接受和目标承诺

目标接受是指一个人在多大程度上接受这个目标对他或她来说是合理的。目标承诺是一个人对
实现目标感兴趣的程度，这反映在个人采取必要步骤来实现目标的程度上。根据 Latham 和
Steele(1983)的研究，参与设定目标、提出现实且具有挑战性的目标，以及接受目标实现将带来
相关人员重视的奖励等因素会提高接受度和投入度。

其他研究人员认为，对困难目标的承诺是有效表现的自然先决条件(Hollenbeck & Klein, 1987)。

目标承诺可以被定义为一种不放弃或降低目标的意愿(Wright, O’leury - kelly, Cortina, Klein， &
Hollenbeck, 1994)，显然，当目标通过与同龄人沟通而公开时，这种意愿会更强烈。那些相信自
己能控制自己命运的人(即他们具有内控倾向)和高成就者往往具有最强的目标承诺(Hollenbeck,
Williams， & Klein, 1989;Tubbs, 1993)。在对研究文献的元分析综述中，Donovan 和
Radosevich(1998)支持承诺在目标设置和绩效之间的关系中是一个调节变量，但结论是，它的影
响没有之前认为的那么大。

Participation

On the question of a participative style in goal- setting, the case for it is far from clear, as can be seen
from the evidence. Participation in goal- setting in both laboratory and field experiments is an
improvement on a style that amounts to simply telling people the goal assigned to them (Arnold,
Cooper, & Robertson, 1998; Sholihin, Pike, Mangena, & Li, 2011). But participation in goal-setting is
considered less effective than a style that takes the form of assigning goals to people and then offering
a rationale or justification for those goals. This finding was endorsed in an exploratory study dealing
with groups rather than individuals, when it was concluded that assigning difficult goals with a
“tell/sell” style (see discussion of the leadership continuum in Chapter 11) is in general as effective as
setting these goals through a participative process (Wegge, 2000). After an evaluation of the evidence
on the role of participation in goal-setting, it was concluded that participation may have weak and
indirect effects on task performance (Pinder, 2015).

Related to participation in goal setting is the question of feedback. Good feedback can engender a sense
of achievement, accomplishment, and recognition. It highlights present performance in relation to past
performance, personal performance in relation to others’ performance, and can produce improved and
more creative effort (Latham & Locke, 1979). Self-generated feedback – where the employee is able to
monitor his or her own progress – has been shown to have greater effect than feedback emanating from
official sources within the organization (Ivancevich & McMahon, 1982).

The next step in the Figure 4.1 model shows how goal-directed effort leads to performance, but the
outcome is influenced by two intervening variables – organizational support, and individual abilities
and traits. An example of positive organizational support is ensuring that staffing levels and resources
generally are of the required magnitude to achieve the goal. Negative organizational support could
manifest itself as a failure to repair equipment essential for the execution of the tasks involved in
attaining the goal.

The abilities, skills, and other personal characteristics required to do the job have also to be considered
(Judge, Erez, Bono, & Toresen, 2002). A personal characteristic sometimes mentioned in this context is
that of self-efficacy. This concept was referred to earlier and will be examined below; it was briefly
acknowledged as part of a cognitive perspective on personality in Chapter 2 and refers to an
individual’s belief that he or she is capable of performing a task (Gist, 1987). The greater a person’s
self-efficacy, the more confidence he or she has to succeed in a task. People with low self-efficacy are
more likely to reduce their effort or cease an activity, while those high in self-efficacy will try harder to
meet the challenge in difficult circumstances (Gist & Mitchell, 1992; Locke & Latham, 2006). The
last-but-one step in the model shows that when the person has performed the task, he or she receives
various intrinsic and extrinsic rewards. The final step shows the level of satisfaction being influenced
by intrinsic and extrinsic rewards. The relationship between performance, rewards, and satisfaction in
Latham and Locke’s model bears some similarity to the expectancy model postulated by Porter and
Lawler (1968), discussed later in this chapter.

参与

关于目标设定中的参与式风格的问题，从证据中可以看出，其理由远不清楚。
在实验室和现场实验中参与设定目标是对一种方式的改进，这种方式相当于简
单地告诉人们分配给他们的目标(Arnold, Cooper， & Robertson,
1998;Sholihin, Pike, Mangena， & Li, 2011)。但是，参与设定目标被认为
不如分配目标给人们，然后为这些目标提供理由或理由的方式有效。这一发现
在一项针对群体而非个人的探索性研究中得到了认可，该研究得出的结论是，
以“告诉/出售”的方式分配困难的目标(见第 11 章关于领导连续体的讨论)通
常与通过参与式过程设置这些目标一样有效(Wegge, 2000)。在评估了参与在目
标设定中的作用的证据后，我们得出结论，参与可能对任务绩效有微弱的间接
影响(Pinder, 2015)。

与参与目标设定有关的是反馈问题。好的反馈能产生一种成就感、成就感和认
同感。它强调当前表现与过去表现的关系，个人表现与他人表现的关系，可以
产生改进和更有创造性的努力(Latham & Locke, 1979)。自我产生的反馈——
员工能够监督自己的进步——已经被证明比来自组织内部官方来源的反馈更有
效(Ivancevich & McMahon, 1982)。

图 4.1 模型的下一步显示了目标导向的努力如何导致绩效，但结果受到两个中
间变量的影响——组织支持和个人能力和特征。积极的组织支持的一个例子是
确保人员配备水平和资源一般达到实现目标所需的规模。消极的组织支持可能
表现为未能修理为执行实现目标所涉任务所必需的设备。

做这项工作所需的能力、技能和其他个人特征也要考虑在内(Judge, Erez,
Bono， & Toresen, 2002)。在本文中有时提到的一个个人特征是自我效能。这
一概念已在前面提到，下文将加以审查;在第二章中，它被简单地认为是人格认
知观点的一部分，指的是一个人相信他或她有能力完成一项任务(Gist,
1987)。一个人的自我效能越强，他或她就越有信心完成任务。自我效能低的人
更有可能减少努力或停止一项活动，而自我效能高的人会更努力地在困难的环
境中迎接挑战(Gist & Mitchell, 1992;Locke & Latham, 2006)。模型中的最
后一步表明，当一个人完成了任务，他或她会收到各种内在和外在的奖励。最
后一步显示了受内在和外在奖励影响的满意度水平。Latham 和 Locke 的模型中
绩效、奖励和满意度之间的关系与 Porter 和 Lawler(1968)假设的期望模型有一
些相似之处，本章稍后将对此进行讨论。

Evaluation of goal-setting theory

It comes as no surprise that goal-setting theory related to tasks remains the most powerful and useful
model of motivated work behaviour in existence (Latham & Pinder, 2005). Goal-set- ting theory has
been extensively reported in the research literature on motivation and in the early days was criticized
for being a technology rather than a theory, although such criticism is less applicable today (Arnold &
Randall, 2010).

The critical variables in goal-setting are goal difficulty and specificity when performance is considered.
Less importance is attached to acceptance and commitment, and although the theory takes a short-term
rather than a long- term view it is a useful approach to motivation (Moorhead & Grifn, 2014).

It has been suggested that goal-setting as a theory has greater relevance for people who are eager to
derive a good learning experience from the challenge of meeting difficult goals, rather than proving to
others their capability to meet exacting standards. Such people are likely to be competent and able
performers in the long term (Farr, Hofman, & Ringenbach, 1993).
An avenue through which goal-setting is applied in an organizational context – called management by
objectives (MBO) – is discussed under “Development techniques and interventions” in Chapter 15.
MBO subscribes to the notion of specific and reasonably demanding goals with a provision for
feedback and a participative approach. A particular version of MBO, known as Management by
Objectives and Results, has been implemented in Nordic countries, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark,
over an appreciable length of time. The results of a study on this theme were mixed, but when failure to
meet objectives arose, the following factors tended to exist: lack of top management commitment,
unrealistic expectations, and unfair allocation of rewards for meeting goals (Spauld- ing, Gamm,
Grifth, & Khristiansen, 2015).

It is suggested that goal-setting theory focuses too much on cognitive factors associated with
motivation and not enough emphasis is placed on emotional factors (Eysenck, 2014). Also, it does not
give sufficient attention to the influence of national culture. Most

of the research in goal-setting is conducted in the US – an individualistic society – where individual

achievement and performance are highly valued. But it is conceivable that goals set by a group or team
are more effective in collectivist rather than in individualistic societies. It is reported that moderate
goals that are achievable, rather than difficult goals, have the greatest motivational impact in
collectivist and high power distance cultures (Crown, 2007). Cross-cultural factors in goal-setting are a
con- struct that is under-researched.

Finally, grappling with subconscious goals (we are unaware they were set!) appears to be attracting the
interest of some researchers (Latham, Stajkovic, & Locke, 2010).

目标设定理论的评价

毫不奇怪，与任务相关的目标设定理论仍然是现有的最强大和有用的工作动机
行为模型(Latham & Pinder, 2005)。目标设定理论在动机的研究文献中被广泛
报道，在早期被批评为一种技术而不是一种理论，尽管这种批评在今天不太适
用(Arnold & Randall, 2010)。

当考虑绩效时，目标设定的关键变量是目标难度和目标特异性。接受和承诺不
那么重要，尽管该理论采取的是短期视角而不是长期视角，但它是激励的一个
有用方法(Moorhead & Grifn, 2014)。

有人认为，目标设定作为一种理论，对于那些渴望从实现困难目标的挑战中获
得良好学习经验的人，而不是向别人证明他们有能力达到严格的标准的人，有
着更大的相关性。从长期来看，这样的人很可能是有能力的、有能力的表演者
(Farr, Hofman， & Ringenbach, 1993)。

在第 15 章的“发展技术和干预”中讨论了在组织环境中应用目标设定的途径—
—称为目标管理(MBO)。MBO 赞同具体和合理要求目标的概念，并提供反馈和参
与式方法。MBO 的一个特殊版本，称为目标与结果管理，已经在北欧国家、挪
威、瑞典和丹麦实施了相当长的一段时间。关于这一主题的研究结果是混合的，
但当未能达到目标出现时，往往存在以下因素:缺乏高层管理承诺，不切实际的
期望，实现目标的奖励分配不公平(Spauld- ing, Gamm, griffth， &
Khristiansen, 2015)。

有研究认为，目标设定理论过于关注与动机相关的认知因素，而对情绪因素重
视不够(艾森克，2014)。对民族文化的影响也没有给予足够的重视。大多数目
标设定的研究是在美国进行的，美国是个个人主义的社会，个人的成就和表现
非常受重视。但可以想象的是，在集体主义社会中，由团体或团队设定的目标
比在个人主义社会中更有效。据报道，在集体主义和高权力距离文化中，可以
实现的适度目标比困难的目标具有最大的动机影响(Crown, 2007)。目标设定中
的跨文化因素是一个有待研究的结构。

最后，与潜意识目标(我们不知道它们是设定的!)作斗争似乎吸引了一些研究人
员的兴趣(Latham, Stajkovic， & Locke, 2010)。

Porter and Lawler’s expectancy model

One of the most important modifications and extensions to Vroom’s model is the Porter and Lawler
(1968) expectancy model. They place expectancy theory firmly in an organizational context, with
practical ramifications. They also put forward the view that the strength of motivation is dependent
upon the per- son’s perceived probability that the motivated behaviour will lead to a desired outcome.
Their model is illustrated in Figure 4.3. The factors that affect the amount of effort people put into their
work are the value they place on the outcome that they hope will materialize as a result of their efforts,
and the probability that reward will follow the effort. Porter and Lawler are in agreement with Vroom
when they propose that the probability that effort will lead to acceptable performance should be
multiplied by the strength of the causal relationship between first-level and second-level outcomes
(instrumentality) – the good performance/reward equation.

But effort is not the only consideration: a person’s abilities and traits will also have an effect on
performance, as well as the person’s perception of his or her organizational role. The next thing to
consider is the relationship between performance and rewards. Rewards are of two types: intrinsic
(such as a sense of challenge, achievement, and success) and extrinsic (organizational rewards such as
pay, promotion, and fringe benefits). Porter and Lawler felt that intrinsic rewards have the edge over
extrinsic rewards when it comes to good performance because intrinsic rewards are intimately
connected with performance itself (Pinder, 2015).

But overall satisfaction should come about if both intrinsic and extrinsic rewards are the consequence
of performance. The level of satisfaction depends on how close the rewards are to what the person
perceives as equitable for the services rendered. The closer the ft between actual rewards and perceived
equitable rewards, the greater the level of satisfaction experienced.

The feedback loop between satisfaction and reward indicates that rewards associated with higher-order
needs (intrinsic rewards) assume greater importance as the individual receives more rewards for his or
her effort. Apparently the more intrinsic rewards the individual receives, the better this is from the
point of view of higher future effort. Note that intrinsic rewards are usually more immediate and direct
than extrinsic rewards.

The emphasis on intrinsic rewards reminds one of Herzberg’s motivators but, unlike Herzberg’s model
in which satisfaction precedes performance, the Porter and Lawler model shows performance leading
to satisfaction, with rewards and perceived equity serving as intervening variables. But note that
whereas Herzberg would classify pay as a hygiene fac- tor, as opposed to a motivator, the weight given
to extrinsic rewards, such as pay, in the Porter and Lawler model is significant.

Reverting to Figure 4.3, the feedback loop between intrinsic/extrinsic rewards and the perceived
probability that effort will lead to reward suggests that if good performance is rewarded the perceived
likelihood that effort leads to reward will grow stronger.

The message conveyed by the work of Porter and Lawler is that not only should jobs be designed or
redesigned (job enrichment) so that they pose challenge, variety, and autonomy (i.e. intrinsic qualities),
but also extrinsic rewards, such as pay, should be provided and equated with perceived equitable
rewards. In addition, there should be a match between the employees’ traits and abilities and the
requirements of the job.

The Porter and Lawler model has not been extensively tested, but the authors have amassed some
evidence that is consistent with the model. The message conveyed by this work is as follows: one
should attempt to relate employees’ traits and abilities to the job and ensure that employees have
accurate perceptions as to the requirements of their roles.

This action is likely to contribute to a high level of effort. Also, jobs should be designed so that they
pose challenge, variety, and autonomy (intrinsic qualities), but make sure that extrinsic rewards, such
as pay, fall into line with perceived equitable rewards.

Finally, expectancy theory could be a powerful explanatory force if one could see clearly a strong
relationship between effort and performance as well as between performance and rewards. The theory
would have greater validity if the link between performance and reward is visible and realistic. But that
is not always the case particularly when other considerations intervene, for example seniority-based
pay or, for that matter, skill-based pay.

波特和劳勒的期望模型

波特和劳勒(1968)的期望模型是对弗鲁姆模型最重要的修改和扩展之一。他们
将期望理论牢固地置于组织环境中，具有实际的影响。他们还提出了这样的观
点:动机的强度取决于个人对被激励的行为将导致预期结果的感知概率。他们的
模型如图 4.3 所示。影响人们在工作中付出多少努力的因素是他们对自己所希
望的结果的价值，以及努力后得到回报的可能性。波特和劳勒同意弗鲁姆的观
点，他们提出，努力将导致可接受的绩效的概率应该乘以一级和二级结果之间
因果关系的强度(工具性)——良好的绩效/奖励等式。

但是努力并不是唯一的考虑因素:一个人的能力和性格特征也会影响他的表现，
以及他或她对组织角色的看法。接下来要考虑的是绩效和奖励之间的关系。奖
励有两种类型:内在的(如挑战、成就和成功的感觉)和外在的(组织奖励，如薪
酬、晋升和附加福利)。Porter 和 Lawler 认为内在奖励比外在奖励更有优势，
因为内在奖励与绩效本身密切相关(Pinder, 2015)。

但是，如果内在和外在奖励都是绩效的结果，那么总体满意度就应该出现。满
意度的高低取决于回报与人们对所提供服务的公平程度的接近程度。实际奖励
和可感知的公平奖励之间的距离越近，满意度越高。

满足感和奖励之间的反馈循环表明，与高阶需求相关的奖励(内在奖励)具有更
大的重要性，因为个人从他或她的努力中获得了更多的奖励。显然，从未来更
努力的角度来看，个人得到的内在回报越多，就越好。注意，内在奖励通常比
外在奖励更直接。

对内在奖励的强调让人想起了赫茨伯格的激励因素之一，但与赫茨伯格的满意
先于绩效的模型不同，波特和劳勒模型显示，绩效导致满意度，而奖励和感知
到的公平作为中介变量。但请注意，虽然赫茨伯格将薪酬归类为卫生因素，而
不是激励因素，但在波特和劳勒的模型中，给予外部奖励(如薪酬)的权重是重
要的。

回到图 4.3，内在/外在奖励和努力会带来奖励的感知概率之间的反馈循环表明，
如果良好表现得到奖励，努力会带来奖励的感知可能性将变得更强。

波特和劳勒的工作传达的信息是，不仅应该设计或重新设计工作(工作充实)，
以便它们具有挑战性、多样性和自主性(即内在品质)，而且还应该提供外部奖
励，如薪酬，并与可感知的公平奖励等同。此外，员工的特质和能力应该与工
作的要求相匹配。

波特和劳勒的模型还没有被广泛测试，但作者收集了一些与模型一致的证据。
这项工作传达的信息如下:一个人应该尝试将员工的特点和能力与工作联系起来，
并确保员工对他们的角色要求有准确的认识。

这一行动可能有助于提高工作效率。此外，工作的设计应该具有挑战性、多样
性和自主性(内在品质)，但要确保外部奖励，如薪酬，与可感知的公平奖励一
致。
最后，如果人们能清楚地看到努力和绩效以及绩效和奖励之间的强大关系，期
望理论可能是一种强大的解释力量。如果绩效和奖励之间的联系是可见的和现
实的，这个理论就会有更大的有效性。但情况并非总是如此，尤其是当其他考
虑因素介入时，例如基于资历的薪酬或基于技能的薪酬。