Work Motivation Inventory (WMI)
Purpose: The Work Motivation Inventory (WMI) is used to provide a personal motivational profile, addressing the needs actually experienced by the individual in his or her work. It is used as a companion instrument and, when compared to the manager's Management of Motives Index (MMI), the WMI shows how a manager's practices, as well as personal needs, may be influencing how he or she meets the needs of others.
Model: Based on Abraham Maslow's "Needs Hierarchy" concept of human motivations and Frederick Herzberg's Hygiene-Motivator model of job satisfaction.
Scoring: Self-scored
Format: A 60-item paired comparison paper/pencil self-report inventory for assessing worker feelings about what stimulates them, realities about why they work and their own levels of job satisfaction. When compared with the MMI, the instrument shows the discrepancies between what is important to workers and what managers think is important to them.
Brief Description: The WMI is designed to assess the kinds of needs and values which people see as important considerations in making decisions about their work. It is designed to give you data about yourself and to provide you with information about your own satisfaction with your job. These data can then be used to match particular needs with the potentials of a particular job.

The WMI provides a personal motivational profile, addressing the needs actually experienced by the individual. It may be used in several ways. When used as a co-worker instrument and compared to the manager's MMI , the WMI sheds light on any discrepancy between what an employee feels is important and what the manager offers in the way of motivational support. When completed by the manager and the results compared with the MMI, the WMI indicates areas in which the individual's own needs may be influencing how he or she meets the needs of others.

Sample Item: For each item indicate which of the two alternatives would be most characteristic of the way you would handle the situation described. For each item, you will have 5 points to distribute. If one alternative is completely characteristic, and the other is completely uncharacteristic of you, then you would give the first alternative 5 points and the other 0 points. The points may be distributed in any combination that adds to 5.
1. In deciding to take a promotion, I would be most concerned with the extent to which:
A. I would be able to explore new areas and do more creative work.
B. The job would be a source of personal pride and be viewed with respect by others.

Companion Piece: Management of Motives Index (MMI)
Video Support: Work Motivation: How Managers Can Make the Most of It
Languages: English
Authors: Jay Hall, Ph.D., and Martha Williams, Ph.D.
Publication Date: Copyright - 1967, Teleometrics
Revision Date: Copyright - 1980,  1986,  1994,  1995,  2000, Teleometrics International, Inc.
Norms: In this instrument norms provide a reference point in the form of the "average range" of obtained raw scores. So that you can compare your personal work motivation with the needs and values of other working people, a normative profile based on the scores of 36,058 individuals is included in chart form on the profile summary page of the instrument.
Reliability
and
Validity:
Reliability is good; the median co-efficient of stability (test - retest) has been established at .70 over a 6-week time span. The instrument discriminates among high, average and low achieving managers, and different management styles, indicating good concurrent validity. Construct validity is high as revealed by Canonical analysis of the instrument with the CPI and the MMPI which have yielded correlations of .79 (p < .008) and 6.9 (p < .008) respectively. The WMI is deemed suitable for both concept and diagnostic training, team discussion, and research purposes.

Bibliography
CUNNINGHAM, Claude H., WAKEFIELD, James A. and WARD, G. Robert. An empirical comparison of Maslow's and Murray's needs systems. The Journal of Personality Assessment, Vol. 39, No. 6, 1975. p. 594.

DONNELL, Susan M. and HALL, Jay. Men and women as managers: A significant case difference. Organizational Dynamics, Spring, 1980. Also in J. HALL (ed.), Models for Management: The Structure of Competence. The Woodlands,Texas: Woodstead Press, 1988. pp.467-486.

HALL, Jay. To achieve or not: The manager's choice. California Management Review, Vol. 18, No. 4, Summer, 1976. Also in J. HALL (ed.) Models for Management: The Structure of Competence. The Woodlands, Texas: Woodstead Press, 1988, pp. 497-519.

HALL, Jay. What makes a manager good, bad or average? Psychology Today, August, 1976.

HALL, Jay and DONNELL, Susan M. Managerial achievement: The personal side of behavioral theory. Human Relations, Vol. 32, No. 1, January, 1979.

HENNIGSEN, Kathleen A. Factors contributing to job satisfaction of public health nurses. A master's thesis: University of Illinois, Chicago, 1976.

JONES, Howard L. (University of Houston), SASEK, Jan and WAKEFIELD, James A. (California State College). Maslow's need hierarchy and Cattell's 16PF. The Journal of Clinical Psychology, January, 1976.

RATLIFF, Jimmy D. Professional negotiation and perceived need deficiencies of secondary teachers inTennessee. A doctoral dissertation: East Tennessee State University, in preparation for submittal, April, 1983.

THOMAS, John E. The evaluation of a management training seminar using superior and subordinate ratings of participants' performance. A master's thesis: California State University, Long Beach, August, 1977.

Related Readings
HERZBERG, Frederick. Work and the Nature of Man. Cleveland, Ohio: World Publishing, 1966.

HALL, Jay. Management synthesis: An Anatomy of management style. In J. HALL (ed.),Models for Management: The Structure of Competence. The Woodlands, Texas: Woodstead Press, 1988. pp.445-466.

HALL, Jay. Managerial competence: Working productively with most of the people most of the time. In J. Hall (ed.), Models for Management: The Structure of Competence. The Woodlands, Texas: Woodstead Press, 1988. pp. 487-496.

HALL, Jay (ed.). Managing the motivational process: Human needs and working conditions. Section II in Models for Management: The Structure of Competence. The Woodlands, Texas: Woodstead Press, 1988. pp. 57-108.

Powered by MindFire