An Investigation of the Applicability of Maslow's Need Hierarchy

285 Pages·2017·10.52 MB·English

by  Karen Kathryn Arnold

LLoouuiissiiaannaa SSttaattee UUnniivveerrssiittyy
LLSSUU DDiiggiittaall CCoommmmoonnss
LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses Graduate School
1979
AAnn IInnvveessttiiggaattiioonn ooff tthhee AApppplliiccaabbiilliittyy ooff MMaassllooww''ss NNeeeedd HHiieerraarrcchhyy
TThheeoorryy aanndd tthhee PPoorrtteerr--LLaawwlleerr MMooddeell ooff MMoottiivvaattiioonn..
Karen Kathryn Arnold
Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College
Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses
RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn
Arnold, Karen Kathryn, "An Investigation of the Applicability of Maslow's Need Hierarchy Theory and the
Porter-Lawler Model of Motivation." (1979). LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 3374.
https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/3374
This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It
has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses by an authorized administrator of LSU
Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected].
INFORMATION TO USERS
This was produced from a copy of a document sent to us for microfilming. While the
most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document
have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material
submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or notations which may appear on this reproduction.
1.The sign or “target” for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is “Missing Page(s)”. If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages.
This may have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating
adjacent pages to assure you of complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black mark it is an
indication that the film inspector noticed either blurred copy because of
movement during exposure, or duplicate copy. Unless we meant to delete
copyrighted materials that should not have been filmed, you will find a
good image of the page in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., is part of the material being photo­
graphed the photographer has followed a definite method in “sectioning”
the material. It is customary to begin filming at the upper left hand corner
of a large sheet and to continue from left to right in equal sections with
small overlaps. If necessary, sectioning is continued again—beginning
below the first row and continuing on until complete.
4. For any illustrations that cannot be reproduced satisfactorily by
xerography, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and
tipped into your xerographic copy. Requests can be made to our
Dissertations Customer Services Department.
5. Some pages in any document may have indistinct print. In all cases we
have filmed the best available copy.
University
Microfilms
International
300 N. ZEEB ROAD, ANN ARBOR, Ml 48106
18 BEDFORD ROW, LONDON WC1 R 4EJ. ENGLAND
'• ' ' ri 7 .i ;> o
ARI'UtL!.■’ # Kt-FIL' b '■:! ^ v -
AIY J >' Vi' i T.IS- ! TbF• ,PPt. X C r, i.'i I L T !' Y n F
MA S L 11 vL• ■ ■: T!: " 1 ■>'■Y YH •.iY A W THk
PORTFi-««L.A',».i h •• i F ’n.n T v <\ i T i ' i -
Tb!; L-M'j / I ■ i ■. i b. i Vi- 'b-; 1'Y -
A LP ,XL ' it ib i'' i. •• •: •• Vi'1 -■1 i { >\\ \ j* 0 - f"' i ‘ 1 « <’
C i i P k „ 1979 : ; ‘ ^ -i KA iM.CY?!
University
Micrdrilrns
International soon /hbhdahannwiboh.mmbiw
@ 1979
KAREN KATHRYN ARNOLD
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
AN INVESTIGATION OF THE APPLICABILITY
OF MASLOW'S NEED HIERARCHY THEORY AND
THE PORTER-LAWLER MODEL OF MOTIVATION
A Dissertation
Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the
Louisiana Stai i University and
Agricultural and Mechanical College
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in
The Department of Management
by
Karen Kathryn Arnold
B.S., Louisiana State University in New Orleans, 1971
M.B.A., Louisiana State University in New Orleans, 1972
August 1979
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This writer would like to acknowledge the fact that a number of
people were helpful during various stages of this dissertation.
First, Dr. 0. Jeff Harris, chairman of my dissertation committee,
is to be thanked. Dr. Harris was always "there" and was always willing
to be of assistance throughout the development and writing of this
dissertation. His suggestions, comments, and advice during not only
the dissertation, but also throughout my doctoral program at Louisiana
State University have been beneficial and were very much appreciated.
Next, a very special thanks goes to Dr. Janet Fowler of the
Department of Quantitative Methods. Dr. Fowler contributed her time as
well as her statistical and programming expertise. Her invaluable help
enabled me to put together an extensive computer program to analyze the
large amount of data that this research project encompassed.
I would also like to thank the faculty who served as members of
my dissertation committee: Dr. Herbert Hicks, Dr. Raymond Lesikar,
Dr. Leon Megginson, Dr. Jerry Wallin, and Dr. Alvin Bertrand. In addi­
tion, Mr. Jerry Boudin, Associate Director of Institutional Research at
Louisiana State University was very cooperative in helping me secure
faculty directories for the Alexandria and Shreveport campuses.
Finally, a special appreciation goes to my family — four people
for whom there can never be enough words of appreciation for all they
have done for me. My parents, Claire and Alanson Arnold; my sister,
Dr. Debbie Arnold; and my brother, Lance Arnold, have stood with me to
provide a continual source of support and encouragement in all of my
undertakings. Last, but by no means least, I must mention my friend,
Carolyn DeLatte, who in many intangible ways, "saw me through" the
writing of this dissertation.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................................... ii
LIST OF TABLES.................................................. vii
LIST OF FIGURES............................................... ix
ABSTRACT..................................................... xi
CHAPTER
I INTRODUCTION......................................... 1
MOTIVATION - ITS GENERAL ASPECTS ................ 1
MOTIVATION - ITS IMPORTANCE IN ORGANIZATIONS . . 3
PURPOSES OF THE STUDY............................... 6
NEED FOR THE STUDY................................ . 7
JUDICIAL-LEGISLATIVE FACTORS .................... 9
ECONOMIC FACTORS ............................... 13
SOCIETAL TRENDS.................................. 17
INTRINSIC FACTORS ............................... 20
GENERAL METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF THE STUDY . . . 26
RATIONALE......................................... 26
THE QUESTIONNAIRE — ATTITUDE MEASURES AND JOB
BEHAVIOR MEASURES ............................... 28
DESCRIPTION OF RESEARCH SITES ................... 32
SAMPLE AMD PROCEDURE............................ 33
DESCRIPTION OF DATA ANAYSIS METHODS ............ 34
II THE APPLICABILITY OF MASLOW'S NEED HIERARCHY THEORY. 43
HYPOTHESES...................................... 48
ATTITUDE MEASURES ............................... 49
TESTS OF HYPOTHESES AND RESULTS................. 54
DISCUSSION...................................... 65
OTHER RESULTS.................................. 83
CONCLUSION...................................... 88
III THE PORTER-LAWLER MODEL............................ 91
EXPECTANCY THEORY ............................... 91
VARIABLES CONTAINED IN THE MODEI................ 96
Value of Reward............................... 97
Perceived Effort-Reward Probability . . . . 99
Effort............................................ 100
iv
Page
Abilities and Traits......................... 101
Role Perceptions............................ 102
Performance.................................. 103
Rewards...................................... 103
Perceived Equitable Rewards ................ 105
Satisfaction ............................... 105
RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN AND AMONGST VARIABLES . . 106
IV THE APPLICABILITY OF THE PORTER-LAWLER MODEL. . . 108
SATISFACTION OF NEEDS ......................... 108
Hypotheses.................................. 112
Attitude Measures............................ 115
Effort and Performance Measures ............ 117
Tests of the Hypotheses and Results. . . . 117
Discussion.................................. 130
Summary...................................... 148
ROLE PERCEPTIONS............................... 152
Hypotheses.................................. 156
Attitude Measures............................ 157
Tests of the Hypotheses and Results. . . . 159
Discussion.................................. 163
Summary...................................... 172
PAY AS A SATISFIER........................ 176
Hypotheses.............................. 181
Pay Program of the Organization Studied . . 187
Attitude Measures........................ 189
Tests of the Hypotheses andR esults. . . . 192
Discussion.............................. 200
Summary................................. 210
V SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, LIMITATIONS OF STUDY, DIREC-
TIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH......................... 214
MASLOW'S NEED HIERARCHY THEORY: SUMMARY OF
FINDINGS......................................... 214
THE PORTER-LAWLER MODEL: SUMMARY OF FINDINGS . 220
Need Satisfaction............................ 220
Role Perceptions............................ 224
Pay as a Satisfier......................... 227
LIMITATIONS OF STUDY............................ 230
Method of Data Analysis...................... 230
v
Page
Research Instrument.................. 234
Sample...................................... 235
DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ................ 236
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................... 238
APPENDIX I — THE QUESTIONNAIRE............................ 24 7
APPENDIX II — LETTER FROM RESEARCHER..................... 260
APPENDIX III — LETTERS OF PERMISSION FROM PUBLISHERS. . . 26 3
VITA......................................................... 267
vi
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE Page
I COMPOSITION OF THE 1976 FEMALE WORK FORCE BY
MARITAL STATUS.................................. 16
II RELATIONSHIPS AMONG MEASURES OF JOB
PERFORMANCE...................................... 31
III QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE RATES ................... 35
IV CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDENTS ................ 36
V SELF-RATINGS OF EFFORT AND PERFORMANCE. . . . 40
VI CORRELATIONS BETWEEN NEED SATISFACTION AND NEED
IMPORTANCE FOR THE TOTAL RESPONDENTS . . . . 56
VII CORRELATIONS BETWEEN THE SATISFACTION OF
PHYSIOLOGICAL, SECURITY, AND SOCIAL NEEDS AND
THEIR RESPECTIVE IMPORTANCE ................... 61
VIII CORRELATIONS BETWEEN THE SATISFACTION OF ESTEEM
AND SELF-ACTUALIZATION NEEDS AND THEIR
RESPECTIVE IMPORTANCE ......................... 64
IX CORRELATIONS BETWEEN THE SATISFACTION OF EACH
NEED CATEGORY AND ITS RESPECTIVE IMPORTANCE . . 81
X MEAN NEED SATISFACTION, IMPORTANCE, AND
FULFILLMENT FOR THE FIVE NEED CATEGORIES . . . 84
XI SUMMARY OF RESULTS: MASLOW'S THEORY . . . . 89
XII LOW AND HIGH SELF-RATINGS OF EFFORT AND
PERFORMANCE AS RELATED TO FULFILLMENT . . . . 120
XIII COMPARISON OF T-VALUES TO DETERMINE DEGREE OF
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PERFORMANCE AND FULFILLMENT
VS. PERFORMANCE AND DISSATISFACTION.............' 125
XIV SUMMARY OF RESULTS: SATISFACTION OF NEEDS . . 149
XV MEAN RANKING OF TRAITS BY HIGH AND LOW SELF-
RATED PERFORMANCE GROUPS ...................... 161
vil