The following links point to articles that you will find of interest.

Article 1 - Stress, and how to deal with it.
Reprinted from BUZZ the in-house journal of the Surrey European Management School at the University of Surrey

Article 2 - Section on motivation from Human Resource Management and Development - Current Issues and Themes, by John Kempton, Macmillan Publishing. ISBN 0-333-60158-0

Stress, and how to deal with it

  1. HEALTHY EATING Eat at least five portions of fruit and vegetables each day and to boost energy levels increase your intake of carbohydrates like potatoes, wholemeal bread, whole-wheat pasta and brown rice. Cut out sweet things as they may give you a temporary lift when blood sugar levels are low but soon after you have eaten them blood sugar levels are back at an even lower level than before.
  2. RELAXATION Is just as essential to energy as exercising. A good way to relax is by visualisation. Relax all your muscles and imagine you are lying on a golden beach with the sound of the sea and the sun shining. Conjure up the smells and the warmth and focus on them.
  3. HEALTHY HOMES Open the window and let fresh air into your home. The layout of our homes can affect our health and well-being and a clogged sink or faulty wiring, for example, can dull your energy.
  4. DETOX Toxins build up in the body as a result of normal day-to-day living and are a drain on our energy levels. Skip food for a day and just drink water - around 2 litres - and plenty of fresh fruit. You may feel a little weak so take it easy and just read and relax. The following day you should feel doubly energetic and cleansed.
  5. EXERCISE This is the one thing that contributes towards increasing energy levels. It also helps to keep weight in check, makes you sleep better, eat better and feel more positive. Exercise is good for the circulation and oxygenates the blood, all of which combat fatigue and give you more energy. Exercise also makes us perspire which means it expels toxins more quickly, having a cleansing effect.
  6. INTERESTS Boredom is a major factor in sapping energy whereas doing something active, or something that interests you - such as a holiday or a new hobby - can be thoroughly energising. A change is as good as a rest!
  7. SLEEP Not getting enough sleep can make you feel wretched and without energy. Don't go to bed on a full stomach - this can keep you awake while your digestive system is working hard. If you have problems about going to sleep practise a breathing or relaxation technique when you are in bed.
  8. SUNSHINE Make the most of any winter sunshine. Many people feel slower and depressed in winter months because of the lack of sunlight. Even when the sun is not shining it pays to get outside into the daylight.
  9. OILS Essential oils can have an energising effect. Professional aromatherapy massage can make you feel like walking on air.
  10. MEALS Eat small meals regularly and skip large meals which make you feel sleepy. For maximum energy meals should be big enough to satisfy you but not so filling that they leave you without the power to do anything else. Reprinted from BUZZ the in-house journal of the Surrey European Management School at the University of Surrey

Section on motivation from

Human Resource Management and Development - Current Issues and Themes

by John Kempton Macmillan Publishing. ISBN 0-333-60158-0


"Although many perceive its objective as disciplined obedience to a management plan, the real purpose of management is motivation of the group to use its energy to achieve objectives." John Harvey-Jones(1984)

Motivation is reflected in the attitudes and behaviour of staff. Motivated staff exhibit high performance, energy, enthusiasm and effort. De-motivated staff exhibit apathy, indifference and are uncooperative. Motivation theory provides an opportunity to understand the behaviours involved.

Motivation is the process of uncovering needs and realising them. What this means is that we each have needs or motives that we want to fulfil. The role of management is to identify the needs and meet them to motivate staff. So, some people are most motivated by money, some by recognition and some by doing a good job. Some people are motivated by all these things but at different times.

Motivation theory helps us to understand what needs are and how to meet them. An important place to start is with assumptions about people. Edgar Schein(1969) an American professor has identified some different assumptions about people that will determine our view of how to motivate them.

  1. Rational-Economic Man
    This assumption is based on the work of Adam Smith in the 1770's and has already been referred to under Scientific Management theories. The assumption is that people are interested only in their own self-interest, and the 'maximisation of personal gain'. Schein proposes that this leads to a society of untrustworthy, money oriented people being organised by a trustworthy elite - managing for the benefit of the masses. Taylor in his scientific management theory clearly stated that man is motivated by money. Fayol in his Classical approach advocated a paternalistic approach from management to manage the masses.
  2. Social Man
    This assumption owes a lot to Mayo and the Human Relations school. The assumption is that people are motivated by social needs. Social interaction and groups are what people want. Managers who direct and control tasks are replaced by Leaders who encourage and support.
  3. Self-Actualizing Man
    This assumption is based on a need identified by Maslow (see later in this chapter) It is not social needs that motivate people but self-fulfilment. Managers need to provide demanding and challenging work for people.
  4. Complex Man
    Basically people are more complicated and variable than as described above. Different situations will require different approaches. So, a manager needs to vary their own behaviour relative to that of their subordinates. The employee and the organisation need to form a 'Psychological Contract' based on what they expect of each other. This forms the basis of how we motivate people.

There are two key theories of Motivation - Content and Process theories.

Content Theories

These theories tend to concentrate on the link between individual motivation and job satisfaction. They assume that needs are both physiological and psychological and that managers have the facility to offer rewards to meet individual needs.

Probably the most influential content (and indeed motivation) theory is that of Abraham Maslow (1943) who proposes the Hierarchy of Needs.

This theory is based on needs and it operates on an ascending scale. As the needs at one level are met, the next level of needs are uncovered and so on until an individual reaches the highest level of Self-Actualization. A persons individual motivation can also move up and down the hierarchy as a response to uncertainty or insecurity.

The hierarchy of needs

  • Title Key components
  • Self- Actualization
  • Esteem Needs
  • Social Needs
  • Safety Needs
  • Physiological Needs

Physiological needs

The first level needs are concerned with having enough to eat and drink. In the organisational context this can be translated to mean physical comfort, pay and basic working conditions.

Safety Needs

This level of need, also known as security needs is concerned with job security. Concerns about avoiding redundancy. These first two levels of need are dominant until satisfied. When satisfied the individual moves on to the higher order needs.

Social Needs

This level of need is about feeling loved and wanted. In the work situation this relates to relationships and friendships, particularly in the work group.

The next two levels of need can be thought of as being more outward facing. That is, where social needs are concerned with relationships inside the organisation, the next needs are to do with - out the organisation.

Esteem Needs

This level of need is about status and recognition in the eyes of the world. The clearest interpretation of this is seen in the UK in company cars. The bands are usually managed ruthlessly. Junior staff cannot possibly drive the same cars as senior people. One story I have heard is of a manager who was in a certain car category. He wanted to get the top of the range model of a car in the band below. The request was vetoed by senior management because it would confuse the issue of management levels. Therefore, senior management wanted it to be clear who was in what level! The "I'm the king of the castle" syndrome.

Self-Actualization Needs

This highest level is achieved when an individual is realising their full potential. They are completely challenged by their job and everything with them is absolutely great. In fact this is the target we should all be striving for but unfortunately factors, such as the job or the organisation, get in the way. However, if we are in the right organisation for ourselves, doing a job that closely matches the skills we possess, then it is possible. We might say, therefore, that the rewards are to be gained from doing the job well. The manager is a resource in helping us achieve our results.

I worked for one company, where, just prior to the beginning of the recession, we had a really good thing going. The business was good, people were paid well and looked after. The training provided was exceptional. For a period of about 6 months many of us were motivated at or near the Self-actualization level. One member of staff on a training course actually said to me "I love this company". What he meant was, I think, that he was really motivated about the company and the people in it. And then...... recession!

Perhaps we can see some proof of Maslows theory at the present time. People in organisations are becoming very concerned about job security, or rather fear of redundancy. It becomes an overriding fear and, not surprisingly, seems to hinder people being concerned about the higher level needs.

Hertzberg - The Two Factor Theory

Another approach to motivation is that of American psychologist Hertzberg(1959). In the 1950s, he conducted a study based on asking subjects about when they felt especially satisfied or dissatisfied. From this he developed the Two Factor Theory. He identified certain needs as Satisfisers or motivators. These factors include achievement and responsibility and the things that people do at work. Herzberg suggests that these are motivators because they are areas of Personal Growth. The contrast are Dissatisfiers. Herzberg suggests that certain factors have to be present, and these he called Hygiene factors - to prevent dissatisfaction. So, a dissatisfaction was only present when a factor, such as salary, was not meeting the expectation of the employee. If the factor was changed, the satisfaction of the employee stopped being a source of dissatisfaction, but it did not become a source of satisfaction. Most of the items identified were concerned with what is done to or for employees. The items include salary, supervision, working conditions and company policy. The relevance of this theory for us today is that unless the job itself offers scope for personal growth then the employee will not be able to be satisfied and therefore not motivated. The message for organisations is then that you can provide excellent working conditions in an attempt to motivate staff but it is the job that needs to be exciting. Perhaps this theory can be used to explain why, if you visit the toilets (and I can only speak for the Gents) of some of these high tech, prestigious companies in London and elsewhere, you will find graffiti and vandalism. You can almost hear the Directors saying how could the staff be so ungrateful when we provide them with these lovely open plan offices, pot plants and glass-fronted buildings! Every amenity for staff is provided yet if the staff do not feel fulfilled they will not be motivated.

(The premise of this theory about fulfilling work can be found in the chapter on Leadership. Current thinking has it that it is the managers responsibility to make sure that their staff have interesting and fulfilling tasks to complete.)

McGregor Theory X and Theory Y

McGregor's(1960) Theory X and Theory Y is I believe one of the most influential theories of motivation because the ideas recur in other areas of Human Resource Management. (Particularly current theories on leadership and empowerment ) McGregor proposed two sets of assumptions about people working in organisations.

Theory X stated that people are by nature lazy and work as little as possible. They lack ambition, dislike responsibility and prefer to be led. People are also self-centred, resistant to change and indifferent to the goals of the organisation. The implications for management are that as well as organising the elements of productive enterprise, people have to be persuaded, rewarded, punished and generally directed.

Theory Y states that people have only become passive and resistant to organisation needs as a result of their experiences in organisations. People are zestful and capable of taking responsibility. It is the responsibility of management to enable people to be able to develop themselves. The implications for management are that as well as organising the 'elements of productive enterprise' their essential task is to arrange for people to be able to achieve their own goals by directing their own performance towards the objectives of the organisation.

The kind of theory you ascribe to will flavour your views about people in organisations. Content theories concentrate on the 'content' of motivation in the form of fundamental Human Needs. The Content theories listed above can be criticised for being very static. One way of describing Content Theory is to think of it as putting the cart before the horse by arguing that enhancing human satisfaction always leads to improved task performance. Another assumption of content theory is that individuals seek to satisfy all their needs.

Process Theories

Process theory is more 'alive', it is a much more active approach and provides better guidance to managers on motivation techniques. Process theories then, offer a more dynamic approach. As the name implies the process element relates to the idea of the process of developing motives and not a static analysis of needs. Process theory argues that getting the right task determines human satisfaction. Other assumptions are that it focuses on choice behaviours.

One of the most important Process theories is the Valency-Instrumentality-Expectancy theory (VIE) of Vroom(1964). This process theory is normally known as Expectancy Theory.

The meaning of the theory is;

Valency is the value or anticipated satisfaction from an outcome.

Instrumentality can be interpreted as meaning that if we do one thing we believe it will lead to another.

Expectancy is the probability that action or effort will lead to an outcome. (This theory is also known as Path-Goal Theory).

Basically, what this means is that the strength of expectation is based on past experiences, but where past experience is an inadequate guide then motivation may be reduced. Motivation is only likely when a clearly perceived relationship exists between the performance and the outcome. The outcome is seen as a means of satisfying needs. An example of this could be that of a bonus scheme. It only works if the link between effort and reward is clear and the value of the reward is worth the effort. We can also think of the concept as relating to training. Someone might decide to train as an Accountant because they perceive accountants as being professionals who earn good money and have good jobs. The student decides that the effort of studying, perhaps while working, is worth doing for the rewards to be achieved at the end, when they qualify.

If we take this Accountancy example one step further we can see that in the past Accountancy has been a good profession, (indeed middle class mothers have been telling their children over the years to become Doctors, Solicitors or Accountants ) However, even accountants have been losing their jobs in time of recession. It would be interesting to know whether because of this potential accountants are not considering the profession because they perceive that the rewards available for the effort have reduced?

This whole argument leads us into a rather large aside, the issue of the attitudes individuals bring to work. A theory to look at here is the idea of Orientations to work put forward by Goldthorpe(1968) in his book 'The Affluent Worker'.

Goldthorpe looked at the 'Orientation to work' of employees and he defined this as meaning employees preferences about rewards for work. Goldthorpe's work identified an 'instrumental orientation to work amongst highly paid manual workers'. For these people work is a means to an end. Work is a way to maintain an affluent lifestyle. The work process can be seen in scientific management terms as an exchange of effort for wages. A further orientation that has been identified is that of 'Cosmopolitans', that is people see themselves more as members of a profession than as members of specific organisations. Work may be the central interest in their lives but their focus is broader. Interestingly enough this is one of the biggest differences between western work practices and Japanese practices. In Japanese culture, once you are employed by a company you are an employee of that company and as such you can expect to do whatever job the company wants you to do. The British, and western approach is based more on learning skills that can be transferred across companies.

Getting back to Process theories one of the most significant and useful approaches is that of Porter & Lawler(1968). They described the process model of expectancy theory. This approach goes beyond motivational factors on their own and considers performance as a whole. Motivation, satisfaction and performance are considered as separate variables. Therefore, satisfaction is an effect rather than a cause of performance, and performance leads to job satisfaction.

This approach offers managers a tool for identifying the sources of problems concerned with motivation. The model shows the complexity of an individuals motivation patterns. The manager needs to analyse the performance and job satisfaction of a subordinate and, in particular, the personal values they attach to rewards, and consider their perception of the likelihood of that reward being met.

  • Value Abilities of and Reward Qualities
  • Effort Performance Job Satisfaction
  • Probability that Role Perceived Equitable rewards depend Perceptions Rewards upon effort
  • Porter & Lawlers Process Model of Motivation

Key to model:

Value of Rewards is the value to the individual of satisfying needs of security, social esteem, autonomy, self-actualization.

Probability that rewards depend upon effort is as perceived by the individual. Their expectations about the relationship between effort and reward.

Ability, these are the individual characteristics such as intelligence, manual skills, know how.

Role Perceptions are what the individual wants to do or thinks they are expected to do. These are positive if the organisation and the individual correspond. They are negative if the organisation and individual views do not coincide.

So what are some of the other ways of getting individuals to do what the Manager or the organisation wants? The next section will look at the effects of Power and Obedience.

Power and Obedience

Leaders can arise from different sources, they may be imposed, appointed, elected or emerge naturally. Leadership implies power so it is necessary to examine the concept and role of power.


Power can be defined as the ability to achieve outcomes regardless of authority and responsibility. If we take the example of Industrial Relations, an unofficial strike leader has no official authority to call a strike, and will not have that right written into a job description. However that individual has the power to call strike action.

So, within an organisation the influence of a leader will be dependent upon Power. People allow themselves to be influenced if they believe that the leader has power. French and Raven(1968) have identified five areas where power is reflected in management styles.

Reward Power

The ability and resources to reward those who comply: by offering pay, promotion, praise or privileges

This type of power is very commonly seen in organisations. Indeed pay, promotion and praise are clearly responsibilities of managers. There is perhaps a suggestion that reward power is a little negative, to be used by managers who cannot get results any other way.

Coercive Power

The ability to mete out negative consequences, or remove positive ones. This is the opposite to reward power and works through fear and punishment. This is the style of some managements and perhaps the last resort of some managers. As a source of power it is not going to get the best out of power. Perhaps we can say that many organisations are adopting a coercive style to Human Resources during recession. The fear for employees is that of losing their jobs, and management could exploit this by reducing benefits or by making references to promotion being based upon people working hard and doing overtime.

Legitimate Power

The leaders position in the hierarchy will determine the amount of power they have. This type of power is more common in the traditional organisations or Role Culture organisations. These are organisations where everyone has their place and it is very clear what your place is. This will be determined by the size of your office, the level of car and the seniority of your Secretary.

Referent Power

People will be influenced by the leader because they respect and admire the leader. The leader may have 'charisma'.

Some people clearly have charisma and can get others to do what they want. This leader does not have to hold a high position in the hierarchy.

Expert Power

Others will be influenced by the leader because they believe the leader has superior expertise in a particular area. Every office has a computer expert who is not from the official computer department but who has expertise, can explain things and sort them out.


Another area to consider when we think about Leadership is that of obedience. Obedience expected of people by those in positions of authority.

Stanley Milgram (1963), conducted experiments on destructive obedience in the 1960's. The basic experiment involved electric shocks being administered. The people administering the shocks were being observed. The victims, who received the shocks, (and it should be made clear that the electric shocks were simulated by this group), were part of the experiment. The subjects understood they were participating in an experiment on the effects of Punishment on learning. When the victim gave a wrong answer the subject would be required to administer an electric shock. In the room with the subject was an experimenter who would give one of four answers when questioned.

  1. Please continue or Please go on.
  2. The experiment requires that you continue.
  3. It is absolutely essential that you continue.
  4. You have no other choice: you must go on.

The results of the experiment showed that forty subjects administered shocks and twenty six reached the maximum amount of 450 volts, which would mean administering severe pain. The subjects were all under stress and one observer is quoted as saying;

"I observed a mature and initially poised businessman enter the laboratory smiling and confident. Within twenty minutes, he was reduced to a twitching, stuttering wreck who was rapidly approaching a point of nervous collapse. He constantly pulled on his earlobe and twisted his hands. At one point he pushed his fist into his forehead and muttered 'Oh God. Let's stop it!'And yet he continued to respond to every word of the experimenter and obeyed to the end."

Milgram was criticised over questions of ethics but the results showed he induced a high level of obedience from people who otherwise considered their actions to be wrong.

It is not unusual for individuals to do things in the organisation or in groups that they would not do otherwise.


Eysenck H 1965 The Structure of Human Personality Penquin London
French J & Raven B The Bases of Social Power - in Cartwright D & Zander A (1953)Group Dynamics New York Harper & Row
Goldthorpe JH et al 1968 The Affluent worker Cambridge University Press
Hertzberg F, Mausner b & Snyderman B 1959 The Motivation to Work New York :John Wiley
Makin Cooper C & Cox 1991 Managing People at work British Psychological Society London
Maslow A 1943 A Theory of Human Motivation Psychological Review US
McGregor D 1960 The Human Side of Enterprise (New York: McGraw Hill) Milgram S 1963 Behavioural Study of obedience Journal of Abnormal Psychology (New York)
Mintzberg W 1973 The Nature of Managerial Work (New York:Harper & Row)
Porter L & Lawler E 1968 What Job Attitudes tell About Motivation HBR Jan/Feb US
Roethlisber FJ & Dickson WJ 1939 Management and the Worker (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press)
Vroom VH 1964 Work and motivation (New York: John Wiley)