I can't resist the temptation to get involved with this one...!
<<<< some stuff deleted >>>>
>
> This shouldn't come as a suprise to many in this conversation. Surely
> we've discovered that "pay for xxxxx" isn't going to motivate people for
> long. I suggest that motivation and organisational learning are mutually
> incompatible phrases.
>
> "Motivation" is one of those metanarratives of management that keeps in
> place the reductionist psychology that is thwarting every good programme
> known to OD and related fields. TQM and learning programmes continually
> flounder as they rely on the thinking of reductionist psychology without
> knowing it let alone challenging it.
>
> For those who want to rise to the defense of motivation, consider the
> following:
> - What is the place of motivation in plant life, systems of plant
> life (such as a rainforest) or intentional development of plant
> life such as farming or gardening? Try motivating your plants to
> grow.
> - What is the place of motivation in animal life and systems of
> animal life (such as herds, colonies or whole ecosystems)? Try
> motivating a _wild_ animal. (I don't want to upset pet lovers.)
> - Why does motivation become useful, or even possible, just because
> we have introduced language or self consciousness?
>
Nature is a lot smarter than we are, because there is better
balance among all, and I mean all the elements participating in it. NOww,
you might be right in the "motivation" and OL, TQM/CQI, and other
contemporary approaches may not go together. I'll try to explain this!
I've teaching Org. Behavior for some time now. Years ago I started
to question what I was doing in these courses in general, and with the
topics of motivation and leadership in partiucular. Every time that I
covered these subjects, I always asked myself "what did we learned today
about motivation that will be useful to these guys when they go out there?
The answer was always the same: nothing!
Motivation as we now it does not go together with OL or TQM/CQI
attempts. The major reason is that motivation is basically an
indidualistic approach to dealing with individuals in organizations. But
most of what organizations try to accomplish require or demand teasm
efforts, whether we understand this or not. Well, OL, TQM/CQI, and others
demand teamwork, openness, trust, etc., and most of the motivational
efforts promote secrecy, individualism, "heroes recognition," and other
dysfunctional behaviors. My crticisms here are not totally addressed to
the developers of most of the motivation models, but mainly to how we teach
them and apply them.
I believe that organizations need a universal approach to
motivation. Does this approach exist? I am not sure, but I have been
putting my learning partners in the classroom to work on that. It has been
fun, and the jury is still out. But I can see that we can have more
effective organizations if we can achieve that universal approach to
motivation. I can anticipate that it will be based on notions such as the
shared vision, the basic human needs to be treated with diginity and to
self-actualize, life-long learning, the understanding of systems thinking,
and others. There needs to be a balance and a harmony among all players,
so that organizational (members) learning and growth is not interrupted.
Today's motivational models do not contribute to or deal with our
understanding of these notions.
Ivan,
***************************************************************
R. IVAN BLANCO, Ph.D. Voice 305 899-3515
Assoc. Prof. & Director Fax 305 892-6412
International Business Programs
Andreas School of Business _________E-Mail Addresses________
Barry University Bitnet: Blanco%bu4090@Barryu
Miami Shores, FL 33161-6695 Internet: Blanco@bu4090.barry.edu
<<<<< ---------------- >>>>>
"Las naciones marchan hacia el termino de su grandeza, con
el mismo paso que camina su educacion." "The nations march
toward their greatness at the same pace as their educational
systems evolve." Simon Bolivar
===============================================================