Percepción de los docentes sobre la existencia de cibervictimización y uso

Motivation is a key concept in any leadership theory and has been on leadership scholars’

minds for a long time, even though they had different perceptions as to the importance and role of motivation. Whereas recent scholars consider motivation a key task of leadership (e.g.

“Inspirational Motivation” as one of the defining elements of TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP), McGregor as one who was concerned with this concept more than 20 years before the birth of the new leadership paradigms, considers it a leader’s task to prevent demotivation. In his view a leader did not need to motivate people, because they are self-motivated: Being motiva-ted is a mark of being alive (McGregor in Kessler 2004:157). Another one of the early theorists concerned with questions of motivation was Herzberg. But he also did not study methods of motivation. Rather, he considered it a leader’s task to prepare the work situation in such a way that job satisfaction could be achieved and job dissatisfaction avoided. These were not opposites for him but two distinct goals, the former being influenced by what he called

“motivator factors” (intrinsic to the work itself), the latter by “hygiene factors” (extrinsic to

151 This kind of dependency is not to be confused with what Heifetz defined as a natural “waxing and waning” of dependencies in leadership situations (Heifetz 2000:247), i.e. a leader being a dependable source of strength and support for staff—a process this writer would rather term interdependence to indicate the interaction between two or more mutually mature and respected parties.

the work, i.e. the work environment). Together they would contribute to motivated staff (Herzberg 1968:57).¹⁵²

In recent years the connection between leadership and motivation has become a more explicit concern for empirical studies (see Ilies, Judge & Wagner 2006:3 for an overview). In 1972, Fiedler used the motif of motivation to account for discrepancies in research results for the “LPC”-scale (Chemers 1997:34), and a few years later, with the self-concept based ap-proaches which had developed following House’s CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP, motivational processes were firmly implanted in leadership theories, and motivation played an ever increasing role. Bono and Ilies (2006:321) explain, based on results by mood-theorists, why motivation “functions” in a leader-follower relationship: Human beings like to feel good, so they turn to leaders who express positive emotions and who can—through mood contagion—

maintain the positive affective state of a follower.

Leadership research lately has started to investigate these processes in more detail to make them fruitful for leaders. The concern for this dissertation’s consideration about motivation, however, is not the details of motivational processes. Motivation reaches into the depth of a person’s identity, being fuelled by someone’s value system. This is an area again with deep ethical implications. So studying motivation, the focus cannot be only on how the research results help leaders to motivate others more effectively, but one also needs to consider whether the methods applied can bear ethical scrutiny.

Two people need to be mentioned in more detail in this discussion, since much of the research is based on their findings:

Figure 15: Hierarchy of needs according to Maslow

Abraham Maslow. He was a psychologist who is best known for the hierarchy of needs he defined (Maslow 1943), most often portrayed as a pyramid. Maslow linked needs and

152 Hofstede and Hofstede (2005:264ff) point to the fact that the value system underlying both McGregor’s and Herzberg’s respective theories is based on the strong individualistic and masculine outlook of US culture. In other cultures the distinction between hygiene (=extrinsic) and motivator (=intrinsic) factors could not be drawn along the same lines.

motivation in a person’s life. His basic claim was that lower needs needed to be fulfilled before a person would think about higher needs. It has been referred to already in section 3.2.1 that starting with SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP, leadership researchers would frequently explain their models with reference to Maslow’s hierarchy. One can easily see that this is an important factor in theories which have such a strong focus on providing meaning for followers.

David McClelland. While Maslow’s model gave a basic and intuitive explanation for why followers would respond to a transformational leader, McClelland’s theory of motivation (2009:221ff) gave leadership researchers a more detailed framework to consider motivational processes. McClelland distinguishes three types of motives for action: the need for achieve-ment, for affiliation, and for power.¹⁵³ With this distinction researchers could investigate leader motivation as well as follower motivation. Kanungo and Mendonca, for example, use a finer distinction of McClelland’s need for affiliation to explain the altruism motive which plays such an important role in their theory of ethical leadership (Kanungo & Mendonca 1998:138).

Apart from frequent general references to McClelland, one finds empirical studies specifically concerned with relating McClelland’s categories to CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP: De Hoogh, Den Hartog and Koopman et al. (2005)investigated what effect the three foundational motives of power, affiliation, and achievement have in CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP. And Choi (2006) looked at what kind of behaviour would trigger which kind of need in a follower. He related CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP’s main components envisioning, empathy, and empowerment to followers’ achievement, affiliation, and power needs respectively.

McClelland’s theory is one of the ways to explain what triggers motivation.¹⁵⁴ Another field needing consideration is how motivation works in a person. In this, leadership research-ers support differing opinions. House, Woycke and Fodor (1989:101) claimed in an early study that TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP motivated by addressing cognition and abilities in a follower, whereas CHARISMATIC LEADERSHIP would address the affective level (emotions and self-esteem) of a person. Others, like Bono and Ilies (2006:321, 331), agree in contributing a strong emo-tional effect to charismatic leadership behaviour, yet they would not restrict cognitive stimulation to TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP. Rather, they claim that TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADER

-SHIP addresses both systems: The affective system would react to charisma, and the cognitive

153 In his book he also talks about the “Avoidance” motive (McClelland 2009:373ff), but the research generally only takes into account the above mentioned three motives.

154 Barbuto (2005) finds the five-factor-scale of Leonard, Beauvais, and Scholl (intrinsic process motivation, instrumental motivation, self-concept-external motivation, self-concept-internal motivation, and goal internalisation motivation) more useful. However, because the ethical concerns in the end remain similar, a description of the most prevalent model was deemed sufficient.

system to the vision. For them motivation is the result of a chain of reactions starting with leader characteristics (like charisma, or vision articulation), which determine the influence processes a leader employs (emotional contagion, or goal setting). This affects the followers in certain ways (like triggering positive emotions, or improving self-efficacy and goal setting). And these effects in turn account for follower motivation (Ilies, Judge & Wagner 2006:6).

An affiliation motive can also be observed in Shamir’s development of his self-concept based theory (see section 3.3.1.2). He felt that the motivational theories of his time were one-sided in their individualistic-hedonistic basis and that to be able to account for some of the success of new leadership theories one needed to understand that people defined themselves also as part of a collective—hence the stress in his theory of linking self-concept aspects to the organisation as a collective (Shamir 1991a). And while he is certainly right in his evalu-ation of the strong bias of Western cultural systems toward individualism and an accompany-ing neglect of wider moral obligations, yet his approach carries with it a great danger of misuse by binding followers’ self-concept to the organisation in an unhealthy way (see section 5.3.4).

But it is not just from a cultural viewpoint that questions need to be raised. It has been mentioned already that from a Christian ethical point of view the aspects of intention, character and menschenbild come into play again.

In the context of this dissertation, intention is used as the concept describing a leader’s motivation in his/her actions toward followers. Knowing about the strong emotional effect charismatic/transformational behaviour has on followers, leaders need to be alert so as not to let their own need for power, affiliation, or achievement make them blind to the danger of using transformational methods for the sole purpose of being successful, without considera-tion of the ethical content of the goals pursued, as described in the previous secconsidera-tion.

Similarly, a leader who is driven by the need for affiliation without being aware of it, will be limited in his/her ability to correctly assess situations and decide on appropriate measures if they would endanger the leader’s positive perception by followers. For Christian leaders, as followers of Christ, it is therefore important that they be aware of their rootedness in the love God has toward them. This will give them the security and inner freedom needed to make even hard decisions, something which inappropriate dependency on the approval of follow-ers would prevent. Followfollow-ers’ need for power or affiliation can lead them to ingratiate them-selves to leaders in order to share in the power the leader has. If leaders are blinded by their own need for affiliation their ability to see through such unhealthy developments and their inclination to change them will be severely limited.

Because of the danger of misuse of motivational processes, Christian leaders will need to work on ongoing character development to be able to discern and withstand situations which would endanger the integrity of their character. They need to scrutinise their own motives in light of God’s value system. Considering their followers as people bearing the imago Dei will serve as a strong corrective in this respect. A leader will not try to bind a follower’s self-esteem to the organisation or to the leader’s personality, rather s/he will encourage followers to find their true self in the same source where the leader’s lay: in the love and acceptance of God. Aware of the dignity of the other, a leader will not be driven solely by Maslow’s need for self-actualisation. Rather, this will be accompanied by a desire to see the other bearers of the imago Dei also develop and become the selves God intended them to be. A strong individual-istic focus will thus change to a focus on community and developing as a community of character.