motivational analysis of organizations

All of the coefficients are very high, significant at the .001 level. The instrument is
thus a highly reliable one.
Internal Factors
The MAO-B scores of about 500 employees of a large bank were factor analyzed,
rotated by the varimax method. Only those factors with an eigenvalue of 1 or above
were taken, extracting in all five factors.
The five factors showed that the MAO-B has one factor of personal responsibility,
one factor reflecting fear of responsibility, two positive factors related to people (one of
personal growth with the help of others and the other encompassing human concern),
and one factor of integration and centralization of tasks. Achievement, influence, and
control contributed to the personal responsibility factor, whereas dependence and
affiliation emerged as independent factors. Extension motivation was distributed into the
various factors. Three motives emerged in the behavior of employees; these can be
called the achievement motive, the task motive, and the affiliation (or human
relationship) motive.
Validity
The relationship between effective role behavior (as reflected by the operating
effectiveness quotient) and some personality variables was found in a study of five
hundred employees, a sample of the employees of a large multi-locational firm. The
levels of significance of the correlations appear in Table 3. 1
As can be seen from the table, all dimensions of effective role behavior are
positively correlated with role efficacy (see Pareek, 1980a, 1980b). It can be said that
people who experience higher role efficacy use more effective role behavior on all
dimensions. The same is true of the two dimensions of locus of control, internality and
externality (see Pareek, 1982). Two types of external locus of control were discovered
using the scale by Levenson (1972,1973): externality events caused by others and
externality events caused by chance. The correlation values were significant in the
expected direction for all dimensions of role-behavior effectiveness. However, the
correlation between the control dimension and internality was not found to be
significant. It can be concluded that, on the whole, people having a higher external locus
of control show less effective role behavior, and those having a higher internal locus of
control show more effective role behavior (except, perhaps, on the control dimension).
As can be seen in Table 3, effective role behavior had a significantly negative
correlation with the total role-stress score (see Pareek, 1983). Of the total for role stress,
four of six correlations were significant at the .001 level; for the “extension” dimension,
the correlation was significant at .004; and for affiliation, it was at .002. The correlation
value of both of these dimensions (which are of an interpersonal nature) with two role
stresses (role isolation and role erosion) were not significant. The correlation value of
1 A minus sign indicates that the correlations were negative.
The Pfeiffer Library Volume 19, 2nd Edition. Copyright © 1998 Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer ❚❘ 105