Motivation

Problem with Extrinsic Motivation and How Maslow's Theory Can Help
Introduction
Tesla has been identified as a company that struggles with employee motivation under CEO Elon Musk, who has attempted to push his employees to outperform in order to meet production targets (James, 2019). Rather than using intrinsic motivation to compel employees to self-actualize and reach their fullest and maximum levels of potential, Musk uses extrinsic motivation—which only takes one so far before the trade-off between excessive labor and long hours fails to seem worth it to employees (James, 2019). As Gerhart and Fang (2015) explain, pay, benefits and bonuses are extrinsic motivators that companies use to push employees to meet targets. However, at some point employees will conduct a cost-benefit analysis of their own and determine whether the additional labor and longer hours are worth the extra benefits or bonuses. The reliance by the company upon extrinsic motivators hits a wall. The solution to this problem is to promote intrinsic motivation, which is where the employee is motivated by a desire to succeed, to do a job as well as it possibly can be done, and by an internal drive within himself that aims to improve at every opportunity (Youssef-Morgan & Noon, 2017). Those who are intrinsically motivated want to do something because they feel the work is its own reward and they genuinely enjoy doing it. However, when too much pressure and unrealistic expectations are put on employees who have not reached that level of self-actualization, production begins to break down. This paper will show why the solution to Tesla’s motivation problems is to provide a better basis for the development of employees’ self-actualization so that they can be intrinsically motivated to help the company succeed.
Background
In recent years, Tesla has struggled to meet production targets, which Musk set to share shareholders that the company was indeed growing and able to scale. The production targets were lofty and after years of coming up short, Musk began to put immense pressure on employees, calling for round the clock production, planned bathroom breaks, and even production in an outdoors tent, hastily constructed so as to keep the production line moving. Employees complained of horrific working conditions that led to workplace accidents, people using the bathroom right on the floor, and shoddy production practices leading to inferior products (Wong, 2018).
Musk himself is intrinsically motivated, as can be seen by his desire to take on so many projects and push himself in so many directions at once (James, 2019). However, the reality of life is that not everyone’s employees have the same internal drive. Three challenges that employees face are: 1) the inability to work long hours because of family needs, 2) lack of a support system, and 3) lack of freedom in their work. Micromanaging employees rarely leads to the kind of success envisioned by the company, but Musk is notorious for micromanagement, as he sees no other way to success since his employees are not intrinsically motivated like he is (James, 2019; Wong, 2018). So instead of helping his employees to be intrinsically motivated, he watches them like a hawk and constantly pushes and cajoles them as far as they can go with threats and mandatory work times.
As Jee Young (2016) explains, organizations should seek to develop a person-organization fit in which employees are matched well with their positions in the company and in which there is a sense of family supportiveness and self-efficacy on maintaining a proper work-life balance. Tesla has so far failed in achieving that kind of organizational culture. While it tries to create person-organization fit by appealing to workers who share in Tesla’s vision, it lacks the supportive infrastructure and emphasis on having a work-life balance. Musk himself never stops working and he wants and expects his employees to be the same (James, 2019). The reality is that employees want to have a work-life balance that enhances their lives—not makes life miserable.
In ramping up production and putting more stress on workers to reach goals, Tesla has created an environment filled with stress and the result has been a high rate of turnover, particularly among executives (Automotive News, 2019). The effect of a high turnover rate is increased instability. Instability does not help to create the right kind of motivation needed for success.
Process Theories of Motivation
Process theories of motivation include Skinner’s operant conditioning theory, which posits that people will do whatever is required if they are rewarded. It is a simple theory that posits that extrinsic motivation is all that is required for human motivation. Equity theory, posited by Adams suggests that workers will feel motivated if they believe they are being treated fairly and are receiving a fair return for their work (Youssef-Morgan & Noon, 2017). A third theory is Maslow’s theory of human motivation based on the needs hierarchy. The idea behind Maslow’s theory is that if human beings have their lower level needs satisfied they will be able to reach the height of human motivation, which is intrinsic motivation—i.e., they will be self-actualized to motivate themselves to achieve great things.
The theory of operant conditioning is somewhat primitive and would likely not lead to the type of success required at Tesla. Equity theory could be applied, but Tesla’s financials are not in the best shape and so paying employees what they would deem a fair return on their labor might not be in the cards for the company insofar as its balance sheet is concerned—at least for now. The third theory—Maslow’s—has the most promise as it would focus on installing the infrastructure and culture needed to help employees become self-motivated, as James (2019) recommends.
Solutions
Possible solutions that James (2019) points out would be “1) ceding employees maximum control over their work assignments and  2) creating support systems, like in-house day-care, that will allow employees the freedom required to become intrinsically motivated.” Freedom to work as they know how to work would help to create a happier, more peaceful environment where employees feel trusted, confident and motivated to do the jobs they were hired to do. They will be more likely to reach a state of self-actualization if their esteem levels are high, according to Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs and theory of human motivation.
Conclusion
Since Tesla is currently facing a motivation challenge stemming from a lack of intrinsic motivation among workers, the company could benefit from the application of Maslow’s theory of human motivation, which focuses on making sure employees have basic needs met first—such as support for families and esteem—and then they will be more likely to be able to push themselves to accomplish great goals. The idea is that humans can be self-actualizing, and all it takes is for the lower level needs in the hierarchy of needs to be satisfied first.
References
Automotive News. (2019). Tesla burning through execs like cash. Retrieved from https://www.autonews.com/executives/tesla-burning-through-execs-cash
Gerhart, B., & Fang, M. (2015). Pay, intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, performance, and creativity in the workplace: Revisiting long-held beliefs. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 489-521
James, G. (2019). Elon Musk Ain't All that Great at Motivating Employees. Retrieved from https://www.inc.com/geoffrey-james/elon-musk-ant-all-that-great-at-motivating-employees.html
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370.
Wong, C. (2018). Tesla workers say they pay the price for Elon Musk's big promises. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/jun/13/tesla-workers-pay-price-elon-musk-failed-promises
Youssef-Morgan, C. & Noon, A. (2017). Industrial/Organizational psychology (2nd ed.). Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/