In this 1970 classic HBR article, Harry Levinson shares practical insights into the mysteries of motivation and takes a fresh look at the use and abuse of the most powerful tools for inspiring and guiding complex organizations. He argues that to motivate people successfully, management must focus on the question, "How do we meet both individual and organizational requirements?" When we make assumptions about individual motivations and increase pressure based on them, we ignore the fact that people work to meet their own psychological needs. Commitment must derive from the individual's wishes to support the organization's goals. Yet, the individual's desires are entirely absent from most performance measurement systems; managers assume that these desires are perfectly aligned with corporate goals and that if they're not, the individual should move on. Self-motivation occurs when individual needs and organizational requirements converge. Successful management systems begin with the employee's objectives. The manager's task is to understand the employee's needs and then, with the employee, assess how well the organization can meet them.

"In my role, I'm the guy who catches it all. I can't seem to get people to stand still and listen, and I can't continue to take all the hostility. I don't know how much longer I can last in this job." The executive who speaks these words is one of several who describe their feelings of burnout in this article, first published in May/June 1981. Anyone can feel overwhelmed by the challenges posed by complex organizations and the need to deal with conflicting personalities, says psychologist Harry Levinson. In this article, he suggests ways in which top management can help prevent burnout. In his retrospective commentary, Levinson notes that although burnout is as prevalent today as it was 15 years ago, the assumption underlying his article--that top management can play a role in preventing burnout--now feels outdated. Why? Because we are living in an age of self-reliance.

In this double-barreled review, two leading authors present different but complementary theories of leadership. Warren Bennis reviews Howard Gardner's Leading Minds: An Anatomy of Leadership, predicting that it will become a classic text on leadership. Harry Levinson presents us with "The Leader as Analyst," a review of Manfred F.R. Kets de Vries's Life and Death in the Executive Fast Lane.

Those responsible for selecting leaders may use these 20 dimensions of personality to evaluate candidate's behavior. A psychologist's experience offers a list of personality dimensions and a scale of characteristics with which to measure behavior. The 20 dimensions are classified into three groups according to psychological themes: thinking; feelings and interrelationships; and outward behavior and characteristics.

Abrasive personalities frequently prevent young, high-powered, and capable executives from gaining top positions in companies. A profile of the problem personality reveals a generally intelligent, analytical, hard worker who exhibits impatience with others and reluctance to delegate assignments. These highly competent people become key to the organization yet their political insensitivity makes them unpromotable. They tend to overorganize and oversupervise and often demoralize their subordinates. Their problems must be approached in a forthright manner.

Present performance appraisal techniques evaluate behavior by making subjective and impressionistic judgments rather than quantitative judgments and providing inadequate information about performances. Static job descriptions contribute to the inadequacy of appraisal systems as they do not define the subtleties of the relationships which will influence employees' roles and careers. Employees need to develop political skill in addition to professional competence and this need demands a dynamic job description, a critical incident process, and a psychological support system.

American management attempts to motivate employees through the carrot-and-stick approach. According to the Great Jackson Fallacy executives unconsciously envision themselves as manipulators and controllers, and their subordinates as jackasses chasing the carrot. This attitude can place severe strain on management/employee relations and lead to employee inefficiency and low productivity. Executives should change their attitudes toward subordinates in order to ensure effective job performance.

The fundamental psychological conflict that plagues family businesses is rivalry, compounded by feelings of guilt. Company founders feel rivalry when they unconsciously sense that subordinates threaten to remove them from their center of power. For the founders the business is an extension of themselves which they have great difficulty giving up. By confronting and discussing their feelings of hostility and rivalry, possibly in the presence of a neutral third party, family members begin to resolve their problems.