Motivation theories

We can distinguish between contentand processmotivation theories. Content theories

focus on WHAT, while process theories focus on HOW human behaviour is motivated.
Content theories are the earliest theories of motivation. Within the work environment
they have had the greatest impact on management practice and policy, whilst within
academic circles they are the least accepted. Content theories are also called needs
theories: they try to identify what our needs are and relate motivation to the fulfilling of
these needs. The content theories cannot entirely explain what motivate or demotivate
us. Process theories are concerned with “how” motivation occurs, and what kind of
process can influence our motivation.
The main content theories are: Maslow’s needs hierarchy, Alderfer’s ERG theory,
McClelland’s achievement motivation and Herzberg’s two-factor theory.
The main process theories are: Skinner’s reinforcement theory, Victor Vroom's
expectancy theory, Adam’s equity theory and Locke’s goal setting theory (Figure 1).
No single motivation theory explains all aspects of people’s motives or lack of
motives. Each theoretical explanation can serve as the basis for the development of
techniques for motivating.

Figure 1. Motivation theories (Source: Author's own figure)

Maslow – hierarchy of needs

 This is the earliest and most widely known theory of motivation, developed by
Abraham Maslow (1943) in the 1940s and 1950s.

This theory condenses needs into five basic categories. Maslow ordered
these needs in his hierarchy, beginning with the basic psychological needs
and continuing through safety, belonging and love, esteem and self-
actualization (Figure 2). In his theory, the lowest unsatisfied need becomes
the dominant, or the most powerful and significant need. The most
dominant need activates an individual to act to fulfil it. Satisfied needs do
not motivate. Individual pursues to seek a higher need when lower needs
are fulfilled.

Maslow's hierarchy of needs is often shown in the shape of a pyramid: basic needs at
the bottom and the most complex need (need for self-actualization) at the top. Maslow
himself has never drawn a pyramid to describe these levels of our needs; but the
pyramid has become the most known way to represent his hierarchy.

Figure 2. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (Source: Author's own figure)

1. Physiological needs (e.g. food, water, shelter, sleep)
It includes the most basic needs for humans to survive, such as air, water and food.
Maslow emphasized, our body and mind cannot function well if these requirements are
not fulfilled.
These physiological needs are the most dominant of all needs. So if someone is
missing everything in his/her life, probably the major motivation would be to fulfil
his/her physiological needs rather than any others. A person who is lacking food, safety,
love (also sex) and esteem, would most probably hunger for food (and also for money,
salary to buy food) than for anything else.
If all the needs are unsatisfied, and the organism is then overruled by the
physiological needs, all other needs may turn into the background. All capacities are put
into the attendance of satisfying hunger. Any other things are forgotten or got secondary
importance.
2. Safety and security (secure source of income, a place to live, health and well-
being)
If the physiological needs are relatively well contented, new needs will appear, the so
called safety needs. Safety needs refer to a person’s desire for security or protection.
Basically everything looks less important than safety and protection (the physiological
needs even sometimes). The healthy and fortunate adults in our culture are largely
satisfied in their safety needs. The peaceful, sure, safety and unwavering society makes
us feel in safety enough from criminal assaults, murder, unbelievable natural
catastrophes, and so on. In that case people no longer have any safety needs as first-line
motivators.
Meeting with safety needs demonstrated as a preference for insurance policies,
saving accounts or job security, etc., we think about the lack of economic safety. Children
have a greater need to feel safe. That is the reason why this level is more important for
children.
Safety and security needs include: Personal security; Financial security; Health and
well-being; Safety mesh against accidents, illnesses and their adverse impacts.
To tell the truth, in real dangers and traumas – like war, murder, natural
catastrophes, criminal assault, etc. -, the needs for safety become an active, first-line and
dominant mobilizer of human beings.
3. Belongingness and love (integration into social groups, feel part of a community
or a group; affectionate relationships)
If both the physiological and the safety needs are fulfilled, the affection, love and
belongingness needs come into prominence. Maslow claimed people need to belong and
accepted among their social groups. Group size does not mean anything: social groups
can be large or small. People need to love and be loved – both sexually and non-sexually
– by others. Depending on the power and pressure of the peer group, this need for
belonging may overbear the physiological and security needs.
Love needs involve giving and receiving affections (love is not synonymous with sex
– sex is a physiological need). When they are unsatisfied, a person will immediately
eliminate the lack of friends, peers and partner. Many people suffer from social
nervousness, loneliness, social isolation and also clinical depression because of the lack
of this love or belongingness factor.
4. Esteem (respect for a person as a useful, honourable human being)
In our society most people long for a stable and high valuation of themselves, for the
esteem of others and for self-respect or self-esteem.
Esteem means being valued, respected and appreciated by others. Humans need to
feel to be valued, such as being useful and necessary in the world. People with low self-
esteem often need respect from others. Maslow divided two types of esteem needs: a
‘lower’ version and a ‘higher’ version. The ‘lower’ version of esteem is the need for
respect from others: for example attention, prestige, status and loving their opinion. The
‘higher’ version is the need for self-respect: for example, the person may need
independence, and freedom or self-confidence.
The most stable and therefore the healthiest self-esteem is based on respect from
others. External fame or celebrity and unwarranted adulation won’t cause self-esteem,
although you feel better for a while.
5. Self-actualization (individual’s desire to grow and develop to his or her fullest
potential)
‘What humans can be, they must be.’ (Maslow, 1954)
Self-actualization reflects an individual’s desire to grow and develop to his/her fullest
potential. People like opportunities, choosing his/her own versions, challenging positions
or creative tasks. Maslow described this level as the ‘need to accomplish everything that
one can, to become the most that one can be’. Maslow believed that people must
overcome their other needs – described above -, not only achieve them. At this level,
individual differences are the largest.

As each level is adequately satisfied, we are then motivated to satisfy the next level in
the hierarchy, always new and higher needs are coming. This is what we mean, when
the basic human needs are drawn like a pyramid, a hierarchy. Life experiences,
including divorce and loss of job, may cause an individual to fluctuate between levels of
the hierarchy. These five different levels were further sub-categorised into two main
groups: deficiency and growth needs.
Deficiency needs – The very basic needs for survival and security.
These needs include:
• physiological needs
• safety and security needs
• social needs – belongingness and love
• esteem needs
It may not cause a physical indication if these ‘deficiency needs’ are not fulfilled, but
the individual will feel anxious and tense. So the most basic level of needs must be
fulfilled before a person wants to focus on the secondary or higher level needs.
Growth needs – Personal growth and fulfilment of personal potential.
These needs include:
• self-actualisation needs

This hierarchy is not as rigid as we may have implied. For example, there are some
humans for whom self-esteem or self-actualization seems to be more important than
love or belonging. The popularity of this theory of motivation rooted in its simplicity and
logic.
Alderfer – ERG theory: Existence needs, relatedness needs and growth
needs
Alderfer (Furnham, 2008) distinguished three steps or classes of needs: existence,
relatedness and growth. Maslow’s physiological and safety needs belong together to
existence needs. Relatedness can be harmonised to belongingness and esteem of others.
Growth is the same as Maslow’s self-esteem plus self-actualization. Both Maslow and
Alderfer tried to describe how these needs, these stages of needs become more or less
important to individuals.
• Existence needs: These include needs for basic material necessities. In short, it
includes an individual’s physiological and physical safety needs.
• Relatedness needs: Individuals need significant relationships (be with family,
peers or superiors), love and belongingness, they strive toward reaching public fame
and recognition. This class of needs contain Maslow’s social needs and external
component of esteem needs.
• Growth needs: Need for self-development, personal growth and advancement form
together this class of need. This class of needs contain Maslow’s self-actualization needs
and intrinsic component of esteem needs.

Alderfer agreed with Maslow that unsatisfied needs motivate

individuals. Alderfer also agreed that individuals generally move up the
hierarchy in satisfying their needs; that is, they satisfy lower-order before
higher-order needs. As lower-order needs are satisfied, they become less
important, but Alderfer also said: as higher-order needs are satisfied they
become more important. And it is also said that under some
circumstances individuals might return to a lower need. Alderfer thought
that individuals multiply the efforts invested in a lower category need
when higher categorized needs are not consequent.

For example there is a student, who has excellent grades, friends, and high standard
of living, maybe also work at the university. What happens if this individual finds that
he or she is frustrated in attempts to get more autonomy and responsibility at the
university, maybe also more scholarship that generally encourage individuals’ growth?
Frustration in satisfying a higher (growth) need has resulted in a regression to a lower
level of (relatedness) needs (‘I need just my friends, some good wine, I do not want to go to
the university anymore.’).
This event is known and called as the frustration-regression process. This is a more
realistic approach as it recognises that, because when a need is met, it does not mean it
will always remain met. ERG theory of motivation is very flexible: it explains needs as a
range rather than as a hierarchy. Implication of this theory: Managers must understand
that an employee has various needs that must be satisfied at the same time. ERG theory
says, if the manager concentrates only on one need at a time, he or she won’t be able to
motivate the employee effectively and efficiently. Prioritization and sequence of these
three categories, classes can be different for each individual.

McClelland – Need for achievement, affiliation and power

 In the early 1960s McClelland – built on Maslow’s work – described three human
motivators. McClelland (Arnold et al., 2005) claimed that humans acquire, learn their
motivators over time that is the reason why this theory is sometimes called the ‘Learned
Needs Theory’. He affirms that we all have three motivating drivers, and it does not
depend on our gender or age. One of these drives or needs will be dominant in our
behaviour.
McClelland’s theory differs from Maslow’s and Alderfer’s, which focus on satisfying
existing needs rather than creating or developing needs. This dominant motivator
depends on our culture and life experiences, of course (but the three motivators are
permanent). The three motivators are:
• achievement: a need to accomplish and demonstrate competence or mastery
• affiliation: a need for love, belonging and relatedness
• power: a need for control over one’s own work or the work of others

These learned needs could lead to diversity and variety between

employees. More precisely, prioritization and importance of these
motivational needs characterises a person’s behaviour. As we wrote,
although each person has all of these needs to some extent, only one of
them tends to motivate an individual at any given time.

Achievement motivation – a need to accomplish and demonstrate competence or

mastery. It pertains to a person’s need for significant success, mastering of skills, control
or high standards. It is associated with a range of actions. Individual seek achievement,
attainment of challenging (and also realistic) goals, and advancement in the school or
job.
This need is influenced by internal drivers for action (intrinsic motivation), and the
pressure used by the prospects of others (extrinsic motivation). Low need for
achievement could mean that individuals want to minimise risk of failure, and for this
reason people may choose very easy or too difficult tasks, when they cannot avoid
failure. In contrast, high need for achievement means that humans try to choose
optimal, sufficiently difficult tasks, because they want to get the chance to reach their
goals, but they have to work for it, they need to develop themselves.
Individuals with high need for achievement like to receive regular feedback on their
progress and achievements; and often like to work alone; seek challenges and like high
degree of independence.
Sources of high need for achievement can be: praise for success, goal setting skills,
one’s own competence and effort to achieve something, and it does not depend only on
luck; of course positive feelings and also independence in childhood. McClelland said
that training, teaching can increase an individual’s need for achievement. For this
reason, some have argued that need for achievement is not a need but a value.

Affiliation motivation – a need for love, belonging and relatedness

These people have a strong need for friendships and want to belong within a social
group, need to be liked and held in popular regard. They are team players, and they may
be less effective in leadership positions. High-need-for-affiliation persons have support
from those with whom they have regular contact and mostly are involved in warm
interpersonal relationships. After or during stressful situation individuals need much
more affiliation. In these situations people come together and find security in one
another. There are times when individuals want to be with others and at other times to
be alone – affiliation motivation can become increased or decreased. Individuals do not
like high risk or uncertainty.

Authority/power motivation – a need to control over one’s own work or the work of
others. These persons are authority motivated. There is a strong need to lead and to
succeed in their ideas. It is also needed to increase personal status and prestige. This
person would like to control and influence others. McClelland studied male managers
with high need for power and high need for affiliation and found that managers with a
high need for power tended to run more productive departments in a sales organization
than did managers with a high need for affiliation.
It is important to speak about gender differences in need for power. It is said that
men with high need for power mostly have higher aggression, drink more, act in
sexually exploitative manner, and participate in competitive sports, and also political
unrests. At the same time women with higher need for power show more socially
acceptable and responsible manner, are more concerned and caring. These types of
people prefer to work in big, multinational organisations, businesses and other
influential professions.
McClelland argues that strong need for achievement people can become the best
leaders – as we wrote it above. But at the same time there can be a tendency to request
too much of their employees, because they think that these people are also highly
achievement-focused and results-driven, as they are. Think about your teachers and
professors! I am sure they all want the best for you, they would like to develop you, but I
do not think you feel the same every time. McClelland said that most people have and
show a combination of these characteristics.

Herzberg – Two factor theory

It is also called motivation-hygiene theory.

This theory says that there are some factors (motivating factors) that
cause job satisfaction, and motivation and some other also separated
factors (hygiene factors) cause dissatisfaction (Figure 3). That means that
these feelings are not opposite of each other, as it has always previously
been believed.

Opposite of satisfaction is not dissatisfaction, but rather, no satisfaction. According to

Herzberg (1987) the job satisfiers deal with the factors involved in doing the job,
whereas the job dissatisfiers deal with the factors which define the job context.
 Figure 3. Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory (Source: Author's own figure)
If the hygiene factors, for example salary, working conditions, work environment,
safety and security are unsuitable (low level) at the workplace, this can make
individuals unhappy, dissatisfied with their job. Motivating factors, on the other hand,
can increase job satisfaction, and motivation is based on an individual's need for
personal growth. If these elements are effective, then they can motivate an individual to
achieve above-average performance and effort. For example, having responsibility or
achievement can cause satisfaction (human characteristics) (Dartey-Baah, 2011).
Hygiene factors are needed to ensure that an employee is not dissatisfied. Motivation
factors are needed to ensure employee's satisfaction and to motivate an employee to
higher performance.

Table 1. Herzberg's Two Factory Theory (Source: Author's own table)

Dissatisfaction – Low level

No dissatisfaction-High level Hygiene factors

No satisfaction – Low level

Satisfaction – High level Motivating factors

Herzberg’s five factors of job satisfaction (motivating factors):

• achievement
• recognition
• work itself
• responsibility
 • advancement
Only these factors can motivate us. But at the same time we need the lack of
dissatisfactions (we need hygiene factors, "workpeace") to achieve more efficient work.
Herzberg’s five factors of job dissatisfaction (hygiene factors – deficiency needs):
• company policy and administration
• supervision
• salary
• interpersonal relationships
• working conditions
Can we motivate with money, with higher salary? What did Herzberg and Maslow
say? Is it just the same or something different?
Herzberg addressed salary not a motivator in the way that the primary motivators
are, just like achievement and recognition. Salary can be a motivator, if you get always
higher and higher salary, but we cannot say that it is an incentive. Maslow said, money
or salary is needed to buy food to eat, to have some place to live and sleep, etc. It can be
a physiological need. Some differences between Herzberg and Maslow theory are
described in Table 2.

Table 2. Differences between Maslow’s and Herzberg’s theory (Source: Author's own
table)
Points of view Maslow’s theory Herzberg’s theory

Date of the in 1940’s in 1960’s

theory

Study group ordinary American people well-situated American people

About needs Every level of needs give us satisfaction Not every type of needs can give us satisfaction,
and give the opportunity to move on to just motivating factors.
the next level of needs.

Limitations of this theory:

• This theory oversees situational variables.
• Herzberg supposed a correlation, linear between productivity, performance and
satisfaction.
• The theory’s reliability is uncertain.
• No comprehensive measure of satisfaction was used.
• The theory ignores blue-collar workers, only white-collar men’s opinion was
discussed.
 However, Herzberg tried to bring more humanity and caring into companies’ life. His
intention was not to develop a theory that is used as a 'motivational tool’, but to provide
a guidance to improve organisational performance.
Table 3. Summary of Content Theories of Motivation (Source: Author's own table)
Maslow Alderfer McClelland Herzberg

Physiological Existence Hygiene

Safety and security

Belongingness and love Relatedness Need for Affiliation

Self-esteem Growth Need for power Motivators

Self-actualization Need for achievement

There are some critics for all need theories. Although, there is a consensus for the
general concept: human behaviour is motivated by the strong wish for fulfilling a
human need. Critics are:
• Universality: they do not care about gender, age, culture, religious or other factor
differences.
• Research support and methodology problems: these theories were not based on
reliable and creditable research results.
• Work focus: individuals have needs only at their workplaces, but not at any other
places of their life.
• Individual differences and stability over time.
• Process simplicity.

Skinner's reinforcement theory

The Reinforcement theory, based on Skinner's operant conditioning theory, says that
behaviour can be formed by its consequences (Gordon, 1987).

Positive reinforcements

, for example praise, appreciation, a good mark/grade, trophy, money, promotion or any
other reward can increase the possibility of the rewarded behaviours' repetition.
If a student gets positive verbal feedback and a good grade for his test, this
reinforcement encourages the performance of the behaviour to recur. If the teacher
doesn’t tell precisely what he expects, then the positive reinforcements can drive the
behaviour closer to the preferred. For example, when a student who is usually late to
class gets positive feedback when he arrives on time, the student becomes more and
more punctual. Positive reinforcement motivates to get the anticipated reinforcement of
required behaviour.

We use
negative reinforcement when we give a meal to a hungry person if he behaves in a
certain manner/way.
In this case the meal is a negative reinforcement because it eliminates the unpleasant
state (hunger).

Contrary to positive and negative reinforcement,

punishment can be undesired reinforcement, or reinforce undesired behaviour.

For example, if a student is always late to class and thus he gets negative verbal
feedback and also always has to tidy up the classroom at the end of the day, in this case
the undesirable behaviour is reinforced with an undesirable reinforcer. The
punishment declines the tendency to be late.
According to the theory, positive reinforcement is a much better motivational
technique than punishment because punishment:
• tries to stop undesirable behaviour and does not offer an alternative behaviour
• creates bad feelings, negative attitudes toward the activity, and the person who gives
the punishment
• suppresses behaviour, but does not permanently eliminate it.
Once certain behaviour has been conditioned through repetitive reinforcement,
elimination of the reinforcement will decline the motivation to perform that behaviour.
Therefore it is better not to give a reward every time. Reinforcement in the workplace
usually takes place on a partial or irregular reinforcement schedule, when reward is not
given for every response.
The reinforcement theory is included in many other motivation theories. Reward
must meet someone's needs, expectations, must be applied equitably, and must be
consistent. The desired behaviour must be clear and realistic, but the issue remains:
which reinforcements are suitable and for which person?

Vroom's expectancy theory

The expectancy theory places an emphasis on the process and on the content of
motivation as well, and it integrates needs, equity and reinforcement theories.
Victor Vroom's (1964) expectancy theory aims to explain how people choose from the
available actions. Vroom defines motivation as a process that governs our choices
among alternative forms of voluntary behaviour. The basic rationale of this theory is
that motivation stems from the belief that decisions will have their desired outcomes.
The motivation to engage in an activity is determined by appraising three factors.
These three factors are the following (Figure 4):
• Expectancy – a person’s belief that more effort will result in success. If you work
harder, it will result in better performance.
In this case the question is: "Am I capable of making a good grade on a math test if I
learn more?" Appraisal of this factor is based on the effort to learn math, on knowledge
of math, on the previous experience of math test results, on self-efficacy and specific
self-rated abilities.
 • Instrumentality – the person’s belief that there is a connection between activity
and goal. If you perform well, you will get reward.
In this case the question is that: "Will I get the promised reward (a good mark) for
performing well on a math test?" Appraisal of this factor is based on the accuracy and
consistency of marking. If one day I get a good grade and another day I get a bad grade
for the same performance, then the motivation will decrease.
• Valence – the degree to which a person values the reward, the results of success.
In this case the question is that: "Do I value the reward that I get?" Appraisal of this
factor is based on the importance of its subject (math), the good mark, and the good
performance in general.

Vroom supposes that expectancy, instrumentality and valence are

multiplied together to determine motivation. This means that if any of
these is zero, then the motivation to do something will be zero as well.

Figure 4. Vroom's expectancy theory (Source: Author's own figure)

A person who doesn’t see the connection between effort and performance will have
zero expectancy. A person who can’t perceive the link between performance and reward
will have zero instrumentality. For a person who doesn’t value the anticipated outcome,
reward will have zero valence.
For example if I think:
- that no matter how hard I’m studying I can’t learn math due to lack of necessary skills
or
- that no matter how good I perform on the test I don’t always get good mark so the
reward is unpredictable, not dependent on my success or
- the good mark from math is not important for me, and I’m not interested in math, so
the reward is not attractive, then I won’t be motivated to learn for the exam.
The expectancy theory highlights individual differences in motivation and contains
three useful factors for understanding and increasing motivation. This theory implies
equity and importance of consistent rewards as well (Konig & Steel 2006).

Adams' equity theory

The equity theory states that people are motivated if they are treated equitably, and
receive what they consider fair for their effort and costs.
 The theory was suggested by Adams (1965) and is based on Social Exchange theory.

According to this theory, people compare their contribution to work,

costs of their actions and the benefits that will result to the contribution
and benefits of the reference person. If people perceive that the ratio of
their inputs-outputs to the ratio of referent other's input-output is
inequitable, then they will be motivated to reduce the inequity (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Adams' equity theory (Source: Author's own figure)

At the workplace the workers put inputs into the job, such as education, experience,
effort, energy, and expect to get some outcomes such as salary, reward, promotion,
verbal recognition, and interesting and challenging work each in equal amounts (Figure
6).
 Figure 6. Examples for the inputs and outcomes in the equity theory (Source: Author's
own figure)
The equity theory works not just in the workplace, but at school as well. For example,
when for the same oral exam performance two students get different marks, then
inequity exists. In this case, the student who gets the worse mark may lose his/her
motivation to learn (reduce his/her efforts), or persuade the teacher to give him/her a
better mark, or change the perception of the reference person's performance ("I did not
know everything, but my classmate could answer all the questions"). At the school it can
demotivate students if someone who never studies or who never performs better than
the others always gets good mark. The greater the inequity the greater the distress an
individual feels, which will motivate the endeavour to make the outcomes and the
inputs equal compared to the reference person.
When inequity exists, a person might…
• reduce his/her inputs, efforts, quantity or quality of his/her work
• try to increase his/her outputs (ask for better mark, or pay raising)
• adjust his/her perception of reference person or his/her outcomes or inputs (re-
evaluate his/her or the reference person's effort or outcome)
• change the reference person
• quit the situation.
The problem with equity theory is that it does not take into account differences in
individual needs, values, and personalities. For example, one person may perceive a
certain situation as inequitable while another does not. Nevertheless ensuring equity is
essential to motivation.

Locke's goal-setting theory

Locke's (1990) goal setting theory is an integrative model of motivation just like the
expectancy theory.
 It emphasizes that setting specific, challenging performance goals and
the commitment to these goals are key determinants of motivation. Goals
describe a desired future, and these established goals can drive the
behaviour. Achieving the goals, the goal accomplishment further
motivates individuals to perform.

We can distinguish goals according to specificity, difficulty and acceptance. A specific

goal can be measured and lead to higher performance than a very general goal like “Try
to do your best!” A difficult, but realistic goal can be more motivational than easy or
extremely difficult ones. The acceptance of the goal is very important as well, therefore
involvement in the goal setting is recommended.
For example, if I decide to pass a medium level language exam in German in six
months – this goal is specific and difficult enough – because I want to work in Germany –
this goal is very important for me, therefore the goal commitment is high – then I will be
motivated to learn, and to pass the exam.
The following guidelines have been useful in the goal-setting (Figure 7):
• Set challenging but attainable goals. Too easy or too difficult/unrealistic goals don’t
motivate us.
• Set specific and measurable goals. These can focus toward what you want, and can
measure the progress toward the goal.
• Goal commitment should be obtained. If people don’t commit to the goals, then they
will not put effort toward reaching the goals, even specific, or challenging ones.
Strategies to achieve this could include participation in the goal setting process, use of
extrinsic rewards (bonuses), and encouraging intrinsic motivation through providing
workers with feedback about goal attainment. Pressure to achieve goals is not useful
because it can result in dishonesty and superficial performance.
• Support elements should be provided. For example, encouragement, needed
materials, resources, and moral support.
• Knowledge of results is essential – so goals need to be quantifiable and there needs
to be feedback.
Goal-setting is a useful theory which can be applied in several fields, from sport to a
wide range of work settings. Sports psychology in particular has adopted its
recommendations. The concept of goal-setting has been incorporated into a number of
incentive programmes and management by objectives (MBO) techniques in a number of
work areas. Feedback accompanying goal attainment may also enhance a worker’s job
performance and ability to become more innovative and creative on the job through a
trial-and-error learning process. Since goal-setting is a relatively simple motivational
strategy, it has become increasingly popular.
Figure 7. Process of motivation according to goal-setting theory (Source: Author's own
figure)