Posted by Global Marketing

5 min

Psychologists have proposed many different theories of what motivates people. These theories are often called content theories in that they relate to the content or object of motivation. Several of the most prominent content theories focus specifically on needs: they argue that we all have certain needs that we are motivated to satisfy. The stronger the need, the more motivated we are.

Motivation and needs

Perhaps the best-known needs theory of motivation is Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. Maslow suggested that we all have five universal, instinctual needs arranged in a hierarchy of importance. At the bottom of the hierarchy are basic physiological needs (such as those for food, water, and shelter) as well as safety needs. Above those are higher-order needs for belonging, esteem, and ultimately self-actualization.i

Importantly, Maslow believed that each of the lower-order needs must be satisfied before the higher-order needs can motivate. In other words, a person won’t be motivated to seek belonging or esteem if they can’t even meet their needs for food and safety.

In practice, what this might mean is that workers won’t be motivated to excel in their jobs and strive for a shared goal if they’re not earning enough money or are worried about their job security. Already this suggests an important starting point for leaders to reward followers: to ensure they’re paid appropriately and treated fairly.

However, the practical usefulness of Maslow’s hierarchy is quite limited if we want to understand what motivates people beyond these broad strokes. Maslow believed that the order of the hierarchy is the same for everyone, but what if belonging, esteem, and self-actualization are actually more or less important—or even mean different things—to different people, depending on their personality?

The FIRO® framework, developed by Will Schutz, offers an alternative perspective of human needs, rooted in these personality differences.

According to the framework, all of us have certain physiological needs, but also three social needs that are just as essential: Inclusion (the need to belong and be involved in groups), Control (the need for influence and authority in decision-making), and Affection (the need for closeness and intimacy in one-on-one relationships).

Like Maslow’s hierarchy, the FIRO framework holds that these social needs are universal. We all have them to some degree. Crucially, however, this degree can differ from person to person, such that one need is more important than the others.

Put another way: different people might rank the needs differently in their own personal hierarchy.

We call the dominant need the core driver. This is what drives and motivates each person the most. It’s what we work hardest to establish and would be least willing to give up.

For example, perhaps Dan’s core driver is Affection and he feels less motivated by Inclusion, and even less by Control. However, Control is what motivates Ravi the most. For Sara, it’s Inclusion.

BREAK POINT

The vast majority of respondents agree or strongly agree with statements like:

• Life in the sea is being destroyed by plastics and microplastics (92%).
• Human activity is contributing to climate change (86%).
• People consume too many resources (89%).
• The way we live now is not sustainable for the planet (82%).

This is good news for organisations that want to be greener. Everyone’s on the same page, right?

Not quite.

The research shows a gap between people’s beliefs about climate change and their actions about climate change.

For example, the most common non-environmentally friendly behaviors that were usually or always carried out by more than 20% of respondents were:

• Using air travel for vacations.
• Buying drinks in a disposable plastic bottle.
• Being one of the first to turn on the air conditioning.

But the research also shows that a sizeable minority of respondents agree or strongly agree with statements such as:

• Environmental legislation has gone too far and is restricting our freedom (17%).
• Scientists have exaggerated the extent of climate change and global warming (16%).
• I’m not convinced that climate change is real (13%).
• There is no ‘climate emergency’, it’s all a big con (10%).

If there’s one thing this tells us, it’s not to make assumptions.

Pro-sustainability leaders can’t assume that everyone will follow or be committed to their goals. And leaders who don’t see sustainability as a business priority may well be in conflict with pro-sustainability employees, especially if those employees’ personal values are compromised.

Being inclusive and open to the possibility of different perspectives helps to prevent antagonism or negative conflict in an area where people may well have deep-set beliefs.

Fortunately, the MBTI model provides a framework for understanding difference and working positively with it. Here are some headline findings relating to MBTI preferences:

Personality type and pro-environmental attitudes

• Individuals with NF preferences showed the highest level of pro-environmental attitude, and those with ST preferences the lowest.
• ENFP, INFP, or INFJ types had the highest level of overall pro-environmental attitude.
• ISTP or ESTP types had the lowest level of overall pro-environmental attitude.

Personality type and pro-environmental behaviors

• N or F preferences on average scored significantly higher on Recycling.
• F preferences on average scored significantly higher on Conserve energy.
• E, N, or F preferences on average scored significantly higher on Environmental activism.
• ISTJ were on average the lowest scorers on Ethical consumption.
• ENFJ, ENTJ, and ENFP scored the highest on Environmental activism.

Personality type and organisational sustainability

• ISFP preferences were the most likely to quit if they discovered that their organisation was significantly contributing to climate change.
• ISTP preferences were the least likely to quit if they discovered that their organisation was significantly contributing to climate change.

What does this mean for different MBTI types?

With information like this, it’s possible for practitioners to help organisations, leaders, and managers gain a more accurate picture of how different people and employees might be likely to behave. At the very least it confirms the diversity of preferences, attitudes, and behaviors on the topic of sustainability.

This means leaders can tailor their environmental messages and activities a little more.

Here are just three examples of findings and recommendations relating to favorite processes, taken from the full report.

• Introverted Sensing (ISTJ and ISFJ) types are the least likely group to be environmental activists and the most likely to be climate change skeptics. How can organisations encourage such people to get involved? (e.g. avoid protests and demos. What experience and knowledge can they bring?)
• Extraverted Sensing (ESTP and ESFP) types live in the moment and usually aren’t keen on planning. Such spontaneity can mean they don’t always do things in the most sustainable way. Given this information, could they flex to be better planned in small ways like always having a shopping bag ready to take to the supermarket?
• Introverted Feeling (ISFP and INFP) types are the least likely to be climate skeptics and the most likely to travel in a sustainable way. Can they be encouraged to go to the next level?

MBTI type provides information on what people value and what matters to them, which helps leaders and managers get a better grip on what’s likely to motivate (or demotivate) their people.