Acquired Needs Theory

acquired needs theory

Psychologist David McClelland’s acquired needs theory splits the needs of employees into three categories: achievement, affiliation, and power. The degree to which people are motivated by these needs vary and are influenced by their own experiences.

Achievement

Employees who are achievement-motivated are driven by the desire for mastery. They prefer working on tasks of moderate difficulty in which outcomes are the result of their effort rather than luck. They value receiving feedback on their work.

Affiliation

Employees who are affiliation-motivated are driven by the desire to create and maintain social relationships. They enjoy belonging to a group and want to feel loved and accepted. They may not make effective managers because they may worry too much about how others will feel about them.

Power

Employees who are power-motivated are driven by the desire to influence, teach, or encourage others. They enjoy work and place a high value on discipline. However, they may take a zero-sum approach to group work—for one person to win, or succeed, another must lose, or fail. If channeled appropriately, though, this can positively support group goals and help others in the group feel competent.

Mixed Motivations

The acquired needs theory doesn’t claim that people can be neatly categorized into one of three types. Rather, all people are motivated by all of these needs in varying degrees and proportions. An individual’s balance of these needs forms a kind of profile that can be useful in identifying their particular motivational needs. It is important to note that needs do not necessarily dictate how successful a worker is in their job. For example, it is possible for an employee to be strongly affiliation-motivated, for example, but still be successful in a situation in which they have not developed strong group relationships.

McClelland proposed that those in top management positions generally have a high need for power and a low need for affiliation. He also believed that although individuals with a need for achievement can make good managers, they are not generally suited to being in top management positions.