motivational analysis of organizations

ackup motive (the one with the next-highest number) are noted in the blanks provided
(see the two vertical columns on the extreme right of the matrix). The dominant and
backup columns are helpful in diagnosing and in planning action to improve the
motivational climate of the organization or unit involved. Finally, the respondent
determines which motives appear most often in the dominant and backup columns and
writes these motives in the blanks provided for overall dominant motive and overall
backup motive.
An organization may total all respondents’ index numbers for each motive and then
average the numbers for an overall organizational index of each; or the total of the
numbers in each vertical column of the individual respondents’ matrices can be added
and averaged and the index number written, using the conversion table. The advantage
of the index is to show the relative strength of the climate with regard to the motives; the
cutoff point is 50. If the index number for a particular dimension is greater than 50, the
climate is relatively strong in that dimension; if the index number is less than 50, the
climate is relatively weak in that dimension. The index also helps in comparing
organizations or units within an organization.
Reliability
Retest reliability of the MAO-C has been reported by Sen (1982) and by Surti (1982).
Validity
Validity studies have not been done for the MAO-C. However, indirect evidence of the
instrument’s validity has been provided as a result of other research on organizational
climate. Research on organizational climate as an independent measure and measures of
organizational effectiveness share enough in common to warrant some generalizations.
Hellriegel and Slocum (1974) have summarized these generalizations as a significant
relationship between climate and both job satisfaction and performance.
Deci (1980) suggested three different kinds of environments as being associated
with three different attributional patterns. A “responsive and informational”
environment (in the terms of the MAO-C, one that is characterized by achievement and
expert influence) has been linked with internality; a “controlling and demanding”
environment (one characterized by control and dependency) has been linked with
externality; and a “nonresponsive and capricious” environment has been linked with
“impersonality.”
Organizational environments and climate seem to influence the development of
internality. Baumgartel, Rajan, and Newman (1985), using four indices of organizational
environment (freedom-growth, human relations, performance pressure, and personal
benefit) found clear evidence of the influence of organizational environments on locus
of control. They concluded that internality could be developed by creating educational
and work environments characterized by freedom to set personal performance goals,
opportunity for personal growth, and opportunity to influence important events or
conditions.
The Pfeiffer Library Volume 19, 2nd Edition. Copyright © 1998 Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer ❚❘ 119