- 10 Oct, 2024
- 0 Comments
- 7 Mins Read
A Deep Dive into Motivation: From Maslow to Modern Neuroscience
Motivation is the fuel that keeps us striving, exploring, and achieving. It’s a fundamental force behind human behavior, and over the years, various theories have tried to understand what really drives us. Today, we’ll explore some of the classic and modern theories of motivation—from Maslow’s famous hierarchy to what cutting-edge neuroscience has to say about how our brains process rewards, fairness, and drive.
Maslow’s Hierarchy: A Classic, But Not Without Criticism
Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, introduced in the 1950s, is perhaps the most well-known motivational theory. It suggests that humans have a progression of needs—physiological, safety, social, self-esteem, and self-actualization. According to Maslow, we only move up to focus on higher needs once the more fundamental ones are met. The ultimate goal is to reach self-actualization, where we realize our full potential.
Although this theory became very popular, especially in educational and business settings, it lacks strong empirical validation. There’s no concrete research from Maslow to substantiate the hierarchical structure, and critics argue that human needs don’t always unfold in such a neat, step-by-step manner. Additionally, Maslow suggested that no need is ever fully satisfied, which means that humans continuously move between needs even if they focus on higher-level needs.
Expanding on Needs: Motivation-Hygiene and ERG Theories
Frederick Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene Theory (1959) expanded on the idea of needs by dividing motivational factors into intrinsic and extrinsic categories. Intrinsic factors—like achievement, recognition, and growth—are powerful motivators. On the other hand, extrinsic factors—such as salary, work conditions, and company policies—influence whether an employee is satisfied but may not necessarily motivate them to excel. Many scholars believe intrinsic factors are more critical in fostering true motivation.
Later, in 1969, Clayton Alderfer developed the ERG Theory, a simplified version of Maslow’s hierarchy. It condensed human needs into three categories: Existence, Relatedness, and Growth. This theory acknowledges that people can experience multiple levels of needs simultaneously, and unlike Maslow, it allows for regression when higher needs are frustrated.
McClelland’s Theory of Achievement, Power, and Affiliation
David McClelland (1961) offered a different angle, focusing on the need for achievement, power, and affiliation. His theory suggests that high achievers prefer jobs with personal responsibility, feedback, and moderate risk. Interestingly, those who score high in achievement aren’t necessarily effective managers since their focus tends to be more individualistic. According to McClelland, the best managers are often those who are driven by power—less interested in affiliation and more inclined to influence others.
The drive for power and affiliation can often conflict, as managers driven by a need for power may not prioritize social bonds. McClelland’s research also indicates that the need for achievement is most impactful when jobs offer opportunities for personal responsibility, feedback, and moderate risks.
Goal Setting and Reinforcement: Getting Specific About Motivation
Edwin Locke’s Goal-Setting Theory (1968) posits that setting challenging, specific goals leads to higher performance. People tend to work harder when the goals are clear and ambitious. Reinforcement Theory, on the other hand, emphasizes behavior modification through rewards and consequences—focusing primarily on external factors. According to this theory, people are motivated by the outcomes of their actions, which either reinforce or discourage particular behaviors.
Expectancy and Goal-Gradience Theories
Expectancy Theory, proposed by Victor Vroom in 1964, suggests that people are motivated when they believe their actions will lead to specific outcomes, such as the possibility of getting a raise. If people expect that their effort will be rewarded, they are more likely to be motivated to put in that effort.
Goal-Gradience Theory, developed by Clark Hull in 1932, suggests that motivation intensifies as we get closer to achieving a goal. Research shows that the closer individuals are to achieving a reward, the greater their motivation to complete the task.
Social Comparisons and Fairness: The Power of Equity
A key element of motivation is fairness. The Equity Theory suggests that people are motivated when they perceive fairness in the rewards they receive compared to others. If an employee discovers they are paid less than a peer for similar work, feelings of unfairness can lead to decreased motivation, even retaliation. Neuroscience has started to confirm this. Studies have shown that unfair situations activate the brain’s “pain circuitry”—highlighting how emotional the experience of inequity can be.
In a study by Takahashi et al. (2009), when participants imagined someone they envied, the brain’s pain circuitry was activated. Additionally, feelings of satisfaction, known as “schadenfreude,” were observed when something bad happened to the envied individual. Tania Singer and colleagues (2006) also showed that observing unfair people experience pain activated reward-related brain regions, especially in individuals with a high tendency for revenge.
The Brain Behind Motivation: Dopamine and Serotonin
Motivation is deeply rooted in brain chemistry. The neurotransmitter dopamine plays a major role in “wanting”—the drive that keeps us pursuing goals, whether it’s food, money, or a promotion. Dopamine originates in areas like the Ventral Tegmental Area (VTA) and travels to the prefrontal cortex and nucleus accumbens, creating feelings of reward and motivation.
The dopaminergic system drives approach behaviors, including exploration and foraging, through connections such as the mesolimbic pathway to the nucleus accumbens and the mesocortical pathway to the prefrontal cortex. Dopamine is associated with reward and is responsible for motivation and vigor.
While dopamine is linked to approach behaviors and positive reinforcement, serotonin influences avoidance behaviors, such as managing threats or risks. Serotonin, originating from the Raphe Nuclei region of the midbrain, has connections to the amygdala, striatum, and cortex, which helps regulate responses to stress and threats.
Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Rewards in the Brain
Researchers like Berridge and Robinson (1995) distinguish between “liking” and “wanting.” “Liking” is the pleasure we feel when we get a reward, which is influenced by the opioid system, while “wanting” is the anticipation of the reward, heavily driven by dopamine. Both systems interact within the brain’s reward centers, like the nucleus accumbens, and help explain how different motivators work.
Primary rewards like food and sex engage the brain’s reward circuitry directly, whereas secondary rewards like money indirectly activate these areas through anticipation and association. Neuroscientific research also indicates that avoidance of punishment can activate reward regions, aligning with the idea that safety needs can be motivating, as Maslow suggested.
Implications for the Workplace
Understanding motivation from both psychological and neuroscientific perspectives is crucial for creating positive work environments. Studies have found that motivated employees are significantly more productive—up to four times more according to some research. Conversely, demotivated employees can be costly, with Gallup estimating that lack of engagement costs companies 34% of an employee’s salary.
Fairness and transparency are particularly important for maintaining motivation. Creating an environment where employees feel valued, treated equitably, and part of decision-making processes leads to higher engagement. Neuroscience supports this—when employees perceive fairness, the brain’s reward systems activate, enhancing motivation and productivity.
The Role of Avoidance and Frustration
Interestingly, frustration is a powerful demotivator. When goals are blocked, it activates the brain’s “aversive” systems, leading to negative emotions and decreased effort. Studies on animals and humans alike show that unmet expectations can lead to aggression or withdrawal. This highlights the importance of setting realistic goals and providing the necessary resources for employees to meet them.
Amsel’s concept of “frustrative non-reward” (1958) shows that blocking rewards can lead to frustration and aggression. Recent research suggests that unmet goals and blocked pathways can lead to negative behaviors, which can be detrimental to organizations.
Social Comparisons and Inequity in the Brain
Social comparison is a significant driver of motivation. In a study by Fliessbach et al. (2007), participants rewarded more than their peers showed increased activity in the ventral striatum, which is associated with feelings of reward. On the other hand, unfair situations can activate aversive systems, causing dissatisfaction and frustration.
The sense of unfairness has deep roots, as even animals like capuchin monkeys have been shown to react negatively to unequal reward distributions (Brosnan & de Waal, 2003). This suggests that the drive for fairness is an evolutionary trait that influences motivation.
Wrapping Up: Motivation is Complex, But Manageable
Motivation isn’t just about pushing harder or offering more rewards. It’s about understanding what drives each individual—whether it’s achievement, fairness, social connection, or personal growth. By considering both the psychological theories of needs and the brain mechanisms behind them, we can create environments that boost motivation while minimizing frustration and disengagement.
Motivation, as it turns out, is an intricate interplay between expectation, reward, and fairness. By tapping into both the “wanting” and “liking” systems in the brain—and by ensuring fairness and setting clear goals—leaders can inspire people to reach their full potential.
To enhance motivation and productivity effectively, it’s important to understand how the brain’s reward and motivation systems work. This review of neuroscientific research shows that most motivators—whether linked to needs, expectations, or fairness—are influenced by the brain’s “wanting” system, powered by dopamine. Negative experiences, such as unfairness, activate aversive systems, emphasizing the need to avoid demotivation triggers. By applying these insights, organizations can create environments that boost motivation and productivity, while minimizing stress and frustration.
Motivation is deeply tied to both the positive pull of rewards and the negative push of avoiding unpleasant outcomes. Successful leadership in motivating teams requires balancing these forces to keep employees engaged and driven.
Reference: Mobbs, Dean; McFarland, Walter (Eds.) (2013): The Neuroscience of Motivation. 1st: NeuroLeadership Institute New York, NY (Handbook of neuroleadership).