Tuesday, December 1, 2020

Implementing Motivation Theories



Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory 


   


 

Employees are the primary asset of any organization, speaks volumes on the interest about employee work motivation in this global competition and sprouting industry (Björklund, 2001). Work motivation is the first step in the process to achieve goals and enhance performance. According to Hoffman-Miller (2013), job satisfaction is the extent to which an employee is contented with their job roles, resulting in the willingness to perform at a top-notch level (Wakida and Lawther, 2014). This compels organization to identify the causes /factors affecting or are involved in regulating employee satisfaction or dissatisfaction. 



Herzberg’s research states about two primary factors affecting employee motivation as Hygiene factors and Motivating factors (Lee and Raschke, 2016). Two Factor theory further emphasize on the need of actual organizational understanding of employee Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction. Herzberg’s view on the latter identifies them as completely two different facets: as oppose to the traditional view of them as Satisfaction is the opposite of Dissatisfaction (Armstrong, 2013). 

 

Satisfaction and No satisfaction are caused by Motivation Factors and Dissatisfaction or No dissatisfaction are caused by Hygiene Factors (Lee and Raschke, 2016). Figure 03 below briefly shows the two ends of each Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction and the effect of Hygiene & Motivating factors. 


 

Figure 01: Herzberg's’ view on satisfaction & dissatisfaction 

 

Source: (Kogetsidis, n.d.) 

 


Motivation Factors are Intrinsic Factors that will increase employees’ job satisfaction; while Hygiene Factors are Extrinsic Factors to prevent any employees’ dissatisfaction. Herzberg furthered that full supply of Hygiene Factors will not necessarily result in employees’ job satisfaction. In order to increase employees’ performance or productivity, Motivation factors must be addressed (Armstrong, 2103). Table 01 demonstrate the summary of Factors and table 02 manifests the variation of satisfaction and dissatisfaction levels based on the absence or presence of the respective Factors. 

 

Table 01: Summary of the factors 

Motivation Factors 

Hygiene Factors 

Advancement 

Interpersonal relationship 

Work itself 

Salary 

Possibility of growth 

Policies and administration 

Responsibility 

Supervision 

Recognition 

Working conditions 

Achievement 

 

Source: (Alshmemri, Shahwan-Akl and Maude, 2017, p. 13) 

 

 

Table 02: Comparison of Two factors  

 

Motivation Factors  

Hygiene Factors 

Absent 

The outcome is no satisfaction 

The outcome is dissatisfaction 

Present 

The outcome is satisfaction 

The outcome is no dissatisfaction 

Herzberg’s description 

Intrinsic to the job 

Extrinsic to the job 

Effect on Job satisfaction 

Strong 

Poor 

 Source: (Alshmemri, Shahwan-Akl and Maude, 2017, p. 13) 


 

Whilst the mere absence or presence of Factors could determine the level of variance between satisfaction and dissatisfaction, the extent to which these Factors would oscillate will help organizations to apply the theory to best decide on measures to increase employee motivation. Table 03 helps to understand the four general states that any organization or team would face with the variance of Factors. 


Table 03: The four general states of the Factors in an organization 

High Hygiene & High Motivation 

  • Ideal situation 
  • All employees are motivated 
  • Every manager strives for this situation 
  • Employees have very few grievances 

High Hygiene & Low Motivation 

  • Employees have few grievances 
  • Not highly motivated 
  • Here the pay and working conditions are competitive but the work is not very interesting. Employees are there to simply collect salary. 

Low Hygiene and High Motivation 

  • Highly motivated 
  • Employees have a lot of grievances 
  • Here the work exciting and really interesting but the pay and conditions are behind competitors in the same industry 

Low Hygiene and Low Motivation 

  • Bad situation for an organization 
  • Employees are not motivated 
  • Lots of grievances 
  • Hygiene factors are not up to the scratch 

 Source: (Dartey-Baah and Amoako, 2011, p. 2-3) 

 

 

 

According to Hertzberg (1987), managers should not be preferential when considering the factors to motivate employees, but should critically observe and determine all factors to best suit employee needs. Below table 04 summarizes the combination of such for job enrichment.   


Table 04: Combination of job enrichment

Eliminates Job Dissatisfaction 

Create conditions for job Satisfaction 

Company policies: These should be fair and clear to every employee 

 

Supervision: Must be fair appropriate 

 

Relationships: A healthy and appropriate relationship should exist between peers, superiors and subordinates 

Creates culture of respect and dignity for all teams 

 

Work conditions: Equipment and work environment should be safe and hygienic  

 

Salary: The pay structure should be fair and should also be competitive with other organizations in the same industry 

 

Security: It is important that employees feel that their job is secure and they are not under the constant threat of being laid off 

Achievement: A job must give an employee a sense of achievement. This will build up a proud feeling of task accomplishment 

 

The work itself: The design itself should be of high variant, interesting and challenging in order to be motivated 

 

Responsibility: Employees should be empowered and let them feel they own the work. Not let them feel as they are being micromanaged 

 

Promotions: Carrier/Job advancement opportunities should be well established within the organization for employees to thrive  

 

Recognition: Praise and recognition from both superiors and peers for a work well done culture to be created within the organization 

 

Growth: Create opportunities for learning and development. 

   

Source: (Dartey-Baah and Amoako, 2011, p. 3) 


 

Practical application of Herzberg theory to organization 


Aviation industry mainly consists of living documents and constantly changing policies and procedures custom tailored to cater the evolving needs of customers and regulatory bodies. The organization I work for has established a portal with access to all employees to view those SOPs and receive alerts on any updates to those periodically. The convenient access method and even distribution of SOPs helps to improve informative culture within. New theme for the interior designs of all the offices network-wide, was introduced providing all employees with a common set up including conference cabins, pantries, and changing rooms. Aircraft operations involves ample risks and being on stand by for any emergency is crucial. Identifying the need for employee rest, sleeping facilities are introduced under the new theme for the benefit of staff, which indeed is a formation of favorable work conditions. 


Introducing Work-Well done program on a digital platform, under which anyone can praise anybody for a good work done irrespective of any hierarchy. The extent of variance and novelty when it comes to aircraft operations makes the job design considerably challenging and interesting. Constant online training sessions are carried out including annual refreshers to ensure employee growth is attended to, thereby acquire the best of the employee through job enrichment.     


 

Limitations of Herzberg Theory 


Based on the ground work associated by Herzberg to posit the theory many contemporary research and critics have raised objections encompassing the inapplicability of the theory in modern context. Below table 05 summarizes few such standpoints. 

 

Table 05: Limitations of Herzberg Two Factor Theory 

Limitations of Two Factor Theory 

 

Many objections through various criticisms have emerged against Herzberg’s theory, a few such as below. 

 

No comprehensive measure of satisfaction being used. An employee may find his/her job acceptable despite the fact he/she may object/hate part of his job. 

 

Herzberg assumed a correlation between satisfaction and productivity, but the research conducted had stressed upon satisfaction only ignoring productivity. 

 

The theory is not free from bias since it is dependent on the natural reactions of employees when they are inquired the sources of satisfaction and dissatisfaction at work. 

 

 

The varying of Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivation factors would vary among occupational groups of people. 

 

Not considering the demographic of the employees 

 

The theory ignores white color jobs. 

 

 

Source: (Wan Yusoff, Shen Kian and Talha Mohamed Idris, 2013, p. 19-21) 

 

Despite above objections the theory remains to thrive (Armstrong, 2013). Organizations could use this to mold their approach towards enhancing employee motivation at its different degrees. 

 

 

References  

 

Alshmemri, M, Shahwan-Akl , L & Maude, P 2017, Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory , Life Science Journal , Vol. 14, No. 5, p. 13 , viewed 30 November 2020, 

 

Armstrong, Michael 2013, Armstrong’s handbook of human resource management practice,13th edition, Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data, p.171-173., viewed 29 November 2020. 

 

Björklund, F., 2001. Defense Mechanisms and Morality: A Link between Isolation and Moralization. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 41(1), pp.55-62. 

 

Dartey-Baah, K. and Amoako, G., 2011,’ Application Of Frederick Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory In Assessing And Understanding Employee Motivation At Work: A Ghanaian Perspective, viewed 01 December 2020. 

 <https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/EJBM/article/view/642/535> 

 

 

Kogetsidis, H., n.d. School Of Business. Motivation - Online Presentation. [online] En.ppt-online.org. Available at: <https://en.ppt-online.org/89333> [Accessed 1 December 2020]. 

 

Lee, M. and Raschke, R., 2016. Understanding Employee Motivation And Organizational Performance: Arguments For A Set-Theoretic Approach. Viewed on 01 December 2020. 

<http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2016.01.004> 

 

Wakida, E & Lawther, W 2014,’ Job Satisfaction-A Literature review on Employee motivation, Attitudes and turnover: What is the relationship?’, University of Florida, p. 2-5. 

 

Wan Yusoff, W., Shen Kian, T. and Talha Mohamed Idris, M., 2013,’ HERZBERG’S TWO FACTORS THEORY ON WORK MOTIVATION: DOES ITS WORK FOR TODAYS ENVIRONMENT?’, Global Journal of Commerce & Management Perspective, volume 2(5), p.19-20. 

 

13 comments:


  1. ‘’The theoretical framework of SHRM and HRM suggests that student motivation to learn includes components such as 'effort', 'goal orientation', 'Focus of control', 'Self-efficacy', 'Sense of self as learner', 'Self-esteem', 'Self- regulation' and 'Interest’' (Muho and Kurani 2013).

    ReplyDelete
  2. According to Herzberg, in order to get rid of the causes of job dissatisfaction, a firm needs to consider the following: ensuring that wages are competitive, providing job security, creating a culture of respect and dignity for all team members. Herzberg reasoned that the opposite of satisfaction is no satisfaction and the opposite of dissatisfaction is no dissatisfaction (Mohamed, 2020).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes Ranga, one of the primary expressions inthe Theory is the organizational understanding of Satisfaction and No satisfaction are caused by Motivation Factors and Dissatisfaction or No dissatisfaction are caused by Hygiene Factors (Lee and Raschke, 2016).

      Delete
  3. Although Herzberg’s theory was generally accepted, there are some criticisms that it applies least to people with largely unskilled jobs or those whose work are uninteresting, repetitive, monotonous and limited in scope. He was also accused of assuming a correlation between satisfaction and productivity though his research stressed satisfaction and ignored productivity. Recent research indicates that employee satisfaction does not necessarily contribute directly to productivity. Satisfaction may be viewed as a passive attribute, while more proactive measures such as motivation levels are viewed as more closely linked to behavioral change and performance Hayday (2003). Despite such criticism, there is still evidence of support for the continuing relevance of Herzberg’s theory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes Janaka, it has its limitations, yet still continues to support organizations in identifying the types of needs of employees and is quite effective due to its simplicity(Waheed, A & Hong, T 2011).

      Delete
  4. Research has demonstrated that “attempts to empirically link personality characteristics to motivational variables have produced inconsistent results” (Gellatly, 1996, p. 474). An ex-ample of a recent study investigating the contribution of personality to Herzberg et al.’s (1959) theory of work motivation is that of Furnham et al. (1999). Results demonstrated that extraverts (identified by the Eysenck Personality Profiler) regarded motivator factors as more important than Introverts, thus confirming the contentions made by Furnham (1997) and Gray (1975). These findings mirror those of Gupta (1976) who found that in a sample of individuals performing a linguistic task, Extraverts responded more to reinforcement and Introverts more to punishment. Results also showed that neurotics placed more importance upon hygiene factors than non-neurotics.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Herzberg state that definite characteristics of a job are always related to job satisfaction while different factors are associated with job dissatisfaction (Ratzburg, 2003). With the expansion of the service industry, the issue of how companies strive to capture and retain the best staff becomes relevant. The attempts and commitment of employees is a key competitive advantage and is crucial to the success of the firm (Bent & Freathy, 1997). Mtivation and job satisfaction are not overly complex. The problem is, many employers and managers look at the hygiene factors as a way to motivate when in reality, beyond the very short term, they do very little to motivate (Hayday, 2003).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Organizations can induce an environment to eradicate job dissatisfaction and create conditions for job satisfaction (Baah & Amoako, 2011).Armstrong (2006) posits, that an employee’s job satisfaction level is visible from their attitude towards the work. Highly satisfied employees have a positive and favorable attitude towards their job role while those unsatisfied have a negative attitude (Abdallah et al., 2017). This attitude is mainly controlled by the different methods used by managers.As you have said the problem lies in managers look into the hygiene factors only to seek motivation, where in fact, much probe is required on Motivators to achieve efficacy in the process (Hayday (2003).

      Delete
  6. In the two-factor theory, motivation is the factor most strongly connected with job satisfaction and to increase the job satisfaction motivational factors should be improved. According to two – factor theory, motivation factors are essential to the job and gain positive attitudes to the job, because they satisfy the ‘need for growth or self-actualization’(Lam and Tang, 2003).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes Supun, again these are all integrated aspects, job satisfaction > motivation > performance.There are certain factors in the workplace that cause job satisfaction, while a separate set of factors cause dissatisfaction.Supporting motivators definitely satisfy need for growth( Zorova, S 2018).

      Delete
  7. Herzberg says best way to motivate the employees is to give challenging work that they can take responsibility (Leach and Westbrook, 2000). Management need to implement combination of Hygiene and Motivation factors to motivate employees (Dartey-Baah and Amoako, 2011).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes Thilini, ultimate positive usage of this theory lies in the process of combining the factors which needs to be consciously practiced by managers to gain best results as mentioned above in my post(Dartey-Baah and Amoako, 2011, p. 3).

      Delete
  8. According to the Koçel (2010), It has been suggested that hygiene factors do not have the ability to motivate workers, but that workers cannot be motivated when there are no hygiene factors that can be motivated by the presence of motivational factors.

    ReplyDelete