Herzberg Theory - Two factor theory
Herzberg
Theory
Frederick
Herzberg conducted an interview study of over 200 professional employees.
Herzberg closely analysed the answers of the respondents and came to the
following conclusion. There were two measures of motivational factors in each
employee state of affairs - Motivators and Hygiene factors. And logically he
named his theory as Two-Factor Theory
(Megginson, et al., 1984) .
Figure
01
Comparison
of satisfiers and dissatisfiers. (Connor, 1982, p. 317)
As
per the general understanding absence of a satisfaction is call
dissatisfaction. But Herzberg, clarifying his hypothesis stated “the opposite
of the job satisfaction would not be job dissatisfaction, but rather no job
satisfaction; and similarly the opposite of job dissatisfaction is no job
satisfaction – not job satisfaction” (Herzberg, et al., 1959) . In his theory he put
forward, to increase the performance level of an employee an organisation
should emphasis on Motivator factors. Factors to the right side such as achievement,
recognition, responsibility, work itself and advancement on figure 01 have led employees to a
satisfied attitude. Those factors only have a diminutive contribution to
dissatisfaction. Conversely Factors to the left on the figure have made
employees dissatisfied (Connor, 1982) . The theory further argued that Hygiene
factors in fact are extrinsic. Meeting those will not satisfy an employee
rather those factors will only prevent employees been dissatisfied (Yousuf, et al., 2013) . Extrinsic factors
in the job context address the issues of a person for staying away from an
undesirable incidence. Such as showing more focused on the job when the person
is supervised. He is motivated to do so to avoid a future complication with his
supervisor. The Motivators which now
consider as intrinsic factors, when met employees are encouraged to shown a significant
increment in their performance and productivity. (Megginson, et al., 1984) . When an employee is
given an additional responsibility he tends to perform better since he has a
feeling of a high self-esteem.
One
should not overlook the liaison between these two breeds of factors. An
employee would never be satisfied though he has given an additional responsibility,
an advancement or even a recognition until his basic needs or Hygiene factors
are met. An Organisation should always bear out the extrinsic factors to keep
employees away from dissatisfaction then provide with motivators to gain the
maximum output (Yousuf, et al., 2013) .
(Updated on 10th September 2019)
Motivators are
incorporated within the job itself and Hygiene factors have no direct
relationship with the job within itself but surround the job (Kaplan
& Owings, 2017) . Abstracting from
the previous literature author was able to built-up of four states from the
Herzberg theory out of which one state will be the any organisation’s current
situation.
1. High
Hygiene and High Motivation
· The Ideal State, what every manager
or a leader should strive for.
Motivators are
incorporated within the job itself and Hygiene factors have no direct
relationship with the job within itself but surround the job (Kaplan
& Owings, 2017) . Abstracting from
the previous literature author was able to built-up of four states from the
Herzberg theory out of which one state will be the any organisation’s current
situation.
1. High
Hygiene and High Motivation
I am working for a one of the leading airlines in south Asian
region. Asia pacific region has identified to be the most developing
market for Air travel (IATA,
2019) . It predicts more
than half of the new passenger will be from this region. China, India,
Indonesia and Vietnam would be among the top 5 fastest growing markets. And the
centre of gravity for global aviation market is shifting over south Asia towards east (Yusof,
2018) . According to the above predictions,
seemingly the airline I’m working for has a good chance of generating much
higher profits. The major reason for a low financial performance is appeared to be the
employees’ job dissatisfaction. (Anon.,
2018) . From the report it can be identified that
the airline is in State 3 according to the above classification. Due to the
high interest employees are showing towards their job role, Airline appears to
have found significant professional employee recruitment, but due to the low
hygiene high employee turnover have observed throughout the last decade.
I am working for a one of the leading airlines in south Asian
region. Asia pacific region has identified to be the most developing
market for Air travel (IATA,
2019) . It predicts more
than half of the new passenger will be from this region. China, India,
Indonesia and Vietnam would be among the top 5 fastest growing markets. And the
centre of gravity for global aviation market is shifting over south Asia towards east (Yusof,
2018) . According to the above predictions,
seemingly the airline I’m working for has a good chance of generating much
higher profits. The major reason for a low financial performance is appeared to be the
employees’ job dissatisfaction. (Anon.,
2018) . From the report it can be identified that
the airline is in State 3 according to the above classification. Due to the
high interest employees are showing towards their job role, Airline appears to
have found significant professional employee recruitment, but due to the low
hygiene high employee turnover have observed throughout the last decade.
How to apply the Theory.
The main key point which considered
as the universal integration of the Herzberg theory is considering job itself
as a motivational factor (Ghodrati & Tabar, 2013) . Further the article
highlights though the theory is much suitable for managers at the beginning it
will not be effective through a complex situation because of its simplicity. Hygiene factors are to be dealt with initially
so a manger can have an environment where employee motivation is even considered
possible (Syptak, et al., 1999) .
Salary
– Most primitive and a significant hygiene factor. They work for what they are
paid for. Compensating fairly for the work done by an employee can easily make
an employee not dissatisfied (Syptak, et al., 1999) .
Supervision
– Context on current leadership of the organisation. Every employee expects
them to be treated fairly. And they presumes the leader is competent and qualified
enough to lead them. Poor leadership will only make dissatisfied employees (Alshmemri, et al., 2017) .
Working
Conditions – The physical environment in which an employee is working have a
tremendous impact on his/her mental condition. If an employee has to carry out
his day to day work with an old and outdated equipment he or she will always be
dissatisfied. If the work place is too crowded, too hot and humid and also if
they are not provided with enough necessary equipment to work with, employees
are in a mental condition where they cannot be satisfied (Syptak, et al., 1999) .
Interpersonal
relations – Socialization can make an employee feel comfortable and occupied.
But if an employee’s peer group is not compatible, not qualified or over
qualified and disruptive then the employee will never be feel satisfied (Syptak, et al., 1999) .
If the above working
conditions are fairly met then an employee can be considered as in a situation
where by using motivators he or she can be satisfied. If the management neglects
the hygiene factors and tries to satisfy through motivators, the employees will
only stay with the company only a short period of time (Herzberg, et al., 1959) . Organisation will
lose its talented and hardworking employees whom can find opportunities
elsewhere. Only the mediocre employees would stay and compromise the success of
your organisation (Syptak, et al., 1999) . If the afore
mentioned factors are met then an employee can be motivated through motivator
factors.
Recognition – giving a
person what he deserves, always considers as an attempt to build up the
employees self-esteem. Thus creating an environment where the employee is
motivated to give more than what is expected. Establishing a proper recognition
system such as the employee of the month or an appreciation letter would be a catalyst
for the employee’s personal motivation build up (Syptak, et al., 1999) .
Responsibility – Giving
the chance to take own decisions and act upon the self-authority is related to
a higher satisfaction level (Alshmemri, et al., 2017) . Further elaborating
his argument he states “Gaps between responsibility and authority negatively impact job
satisfaction leading to dissatisfaction”. Thus the responsibility should always
be given only within the pre-stipulated company policies. (Syptak, et al., 1999) .
Work itself – The most important extract of the Herzberg theory is the
job itself considers as a motivator (Hackman & Oldham, 1976) . Further the article
explains the fact that if an employee had chosen or given the best fit job then
he is likely to be satisfied at all times, provided the hygiene factors are
met.
Conclusion
While there is no perfect approach to manage individuals, every one
of whom have various needs, foundations and desires, Herzberg's hypothesis
offers a sensible approach on how to keep employees satisfied. By making a
situation that advances work fulfilment, you are creating employees who are
motivated, empowered and satisfied. This will give the organisation a competitive
advantage by absorbing the maximum output from the employees and minimising the
competent employee turnover (Syptak, et al., 1999) .
If the above working
conditions are fairly met then an employee can be considered as in a situation
where by using motivators he or she can be satisfied. If the management neglects
the hygiene factors and tries to satisfy through motivators, the employees will
only stay with the company only a short period of time (Herzberg, et al., 1959) . Organisation will
lose its talented and hardworking employees whom can find opportunities
elsewhere. Only the mediocre employees would stay and compromise the success of
your organisation (Syptak, et al., 1999) . If the afore
mentioned factors are met then an employee can be motivated through motivator
factors.
Recognition – giving a
person what he deserves, always considers as an attempt to build up the
employees self-esteem. Thus creating an environment where the employee is
motivated to give more than what is expected. Establishing a proper recognition
system such as the employee of the month or an appreciation letter would be a catalyst
for the employee’s personal motivation build up (Syptak, et al., 1999) .
Responsibility – Giving
the chance to take own decisions and act upon the self-authority is related to
a higher satisfaction level (Alshmemri, et al., 2017) . Further elaborating
his argument he states “Gaps between responsibility and authority negatively impact job
satisfaction leading to dissatisfaction”. Thus the responsibility should always
be given only within the pre-stipulated company policies.
Achievement – enrolling an employee in a job which suits to his/her
abilities, competence and willingness will improve the chance of achieving set
targets. Hence creating a satisfied and motivated employee who will look
forward to achieve more (Syptak, et al., 1999) .
Work itself – The most important extract of the Herzberg theory is the
job itself considers as a motivator (Hackman & Oldham, 1976) . Further the article
explains the fact that if an employee had chosen or given the best fit job then
he is likely to be satisfied at all times, provided the hygiene factors are
met.
Conclusion
While there is no perfect approach to manage individuals, every one
of whom have various needs, foundations and desires, Herzberg's hypothesis
offers a sensible approach on how to keep employees satisfied. By making a
situation that advances work fulfilment, you are creating employees who are
motivated, empowered and satisfied. This will give the organisation a competitive
advantage by absorbing the maximum output from the employees and minimising the
competent employee turnover (Syptak, et al., 1999) .
References
Abdulkadir, N.,
2016. Herzberg two factor theory. s.l.:s.n.
Alshmemri, M., Shahwan-Akl, L. & Maude, P., 2017.
Herzberg's two-factor theory. Life Science Journal, 14(5), pp. 12-16.
Anon., 2018. Internal Report, Katunayake:
SriLankan Airlines.
Connor, P. E., 1982. Dimensions in management. 3rd
ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Ghodrati, H. & Tabar, R. G., 2013. A study on
effective factors on employee motivation. Mangement Science Letters, Volume
3, pp. 1511-1520.
Hackman, J. R. & Oldham, G. R., 1976. Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory. Organizationla behaviour and Human performance , 16(2), pp. 250-279.
Hackman, J. R. & Oldham, G. R., 1976. Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory. Organizationla behaviour and Human performance , 16(2), pp. 250-279.
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B. & Snyderman, B., 1959. The
Motivation to work. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
IATA, 2019. iata.org. [Online]
Available at: https://www.iata.org/about/worldwide/asia_pacific/Pages/Asia-Pacific-20-Year-Forecast.aspx [Accessed 9 Spetember 2019].
Available at: https://www.iata.org/about/worldwide/asia_pacific/Pages/Asia-Pacific-20-Year-Forecast.aspx [Accessed 9 Spetember 2019].
Kaplan, L. S. & Owings, W. A., 2017. Organizational
Behaiour For School Leadership. 1st ed. New York: Routledge.
Megginson, L. C., Trueblood, L. R. & Ross, G. M.,
1984. BUSINESS. 1 ed. Houston: D. C. Heath and Company.
Syptak, J. M., Marshland, D. W. & Ulmar, D., 1999.
Job Satisfaction: putting theory into practice. Family Practice Management,
6(9), pp. 26-30.
Yousuf, W. F., Kian, T. S. & Idris, M. T., 2013.
Herzberg’s two factors theory on work motivation: does its work for todays
environment. Global Journal of Commerce and Management Perspective, 2(5),
pp. 18-22.
Yusof, A., 2018. New Straits Times. [Online]
Available at: https://www.nst.com.my/business/2018/12/443501/iata-south-asia-be-centre-gravity-airlines-2036 [Accessed 9 September 2019].
Available at: https://www.nst.com.my/business/2018/12/443501/iata-south-asia-be-centre-gravity-airlines-2036 [Accessed 9 September 2019].
Agree with the blog content. Herzberg developed the two factor theory. This theory is closely related to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs but relates more specifically to how individuals are motivated in work place. Herzberg argued that meeting the lower -level needs (hygiene factors) of individuals would not motivate them to exert effort, but would only prevent them from being dissatisfied. Only if higher level needs (motivator factors) were met the individuals would be motivated (Safdar et al, 2013).
ReplyDeleteThank you for the comment. I agree with you, that is why i have elaborated the importance of satisfying hygiene factors through out my post. A manger should always bear in his mind that all his efforts will result nothing if he cannot exert effort from his subordinates. His primary goal should be satisfying employee hygiene factors thus creating an environment where motivation is considered possible (Yousuf, et al., 2013).
DeleteLeonina et al. (2013) has also studied that influence performance appraisals have on employee satisfaction with the usage of expectancy theory, which relays the importance of employees understanding the value of their skills and contribution to the organization, which in turn is linked to a good opinion of themselves and increased motivation.
ReplyDeletePerformance appraisal considers a strategic approach to align individual goals with organisational goals (Bowra and Nasir, 2014). More often than not leaders use this approach to reward employees and to achieve organisational excellence at once. When an employee see his work is appreciated he will be intrinsically motivated and further he will be extrinsically motivated due to the reward he gets. It's like killing two birds from a single stone.
DeleteAgreed and while looking at the two factors theory, motivators analyzing the non-financial approach, Such as giving employees significant more responsibilities in the job role and also recognizing achievement when the employee is performing well and supporting to the business success, If hygiene factors are not met there is a high chance of demotivating the employee. Two factors theory use to maximize job performance through higher job satisfaction (Yusoff, Kian and Idris, 2013).
ReplyDeleteHowever, Yusoff, Kian and Idris (2013) argued this theory has been found less practical in for today’s employees’ motivation studies.Since most of the research finding concluded that extrinsic factors should be accepted to have direct impact on employees’ job satisfactions.
ReplyDeleteWhen it come to motivation.Non-financial motivators are more common than financial motivators and can take managers ' innovation to the forefront.If a manager truly needs to inspire his employee, they have to care about the worker and consider what non-financial rewards a particular employee should get (Burton,2012)
ReplyDeleteA strategical combination of the financial and non-financial benefits will definitely bring vast amount of advantages to the organisation (Syptak, et al., 1999). As an example rather than a hefty once off bonus as an appreciation token, a promotion with a small pay raise will indirectly fulfil the employee's higher level of needs regularly. Hence the organisation can have a motivated employee for a longer time.
DeleteAccording to (George and Jones, 2005) employers are advised create jobs mainly focusing on nourishment so the employees will be more focused and task oriented, increment in their responsibility as well.
ReplyDeleteHelpful information, thank you for sharing! According to Armstrong (2014), Herzberg's two-factor theory has been criticized for the methodology used by the interviews involved in the study and the small and specialized sample used yet, it's also a highly regarded theory due to it's easy to understand nature. Another thought I would like to add is that sustained extrinsic motivators can in the long term spark intrinsic motivation in an employee. I have observed this at my current workplace where graduates from a variety of fields join the organization (which is in a field that is unrelated to what they studied in college - there are no degree programs in Sri Lanka teaching anything even closely related to what we do) mainly due to extrinsic motivation of an above average salary and after a few months, embrace the culture and show signs of intrinsic motivation.
ReplyDeleteThis is not a surprise for me. In Sri Lankan educational system i have seen so much of subjects that are been neglected by the authorities. But due to the high demand in global scale people chose a profession that they are not trained or educated enough. The are not dissatisfied because due to the demand the salary is high. But since there is no intrinsic motivators, they only do what they are asked to do (Syptak, et al., 1999). Without a proper counter measurement such as a dedicated training programm,e will result a negative tendency of organisational development.
DeleteHi Kalum, I would like to mention that Herzberg's two factor theory is not without its flaws: the theory overlooks situational variables (Kunchala, 2017). In addition, even though the theory assumed a connection between satisfaction and productivity, it focused heavily on satisfaction and overlooked the latter (Armstrong, 2014). Moreover, it overlooks blue collar workers and is not free from prejudice (Kunchala, 2017).
ReplyDeleteAgree with you Jehan. As mentioned in the conclusion to this article this is not a perfect theory. But the sensible approach it gives to the organisation has much higher advantages over the flaws you mentioned. This theory, if applied correctly can minimise the blue collar employee turnover significantly (Syptak, et al., 1999).
DeleteHerzberg theory is one which the Human Resource personnel have used to identify employee satisfaction. However, questions have been raised with relevant to the fact if it suit's today's world. As Yusoff, Kian and Idris (2013) mentions that the "Two-Factor theory" should be re-evaluated and implemented on employees to maximize their productivity.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the feedback. The re-evaluation of this theory has done by many scholars in recent past. However the inherited flaw of lack of situational applicability have made theory to re-evaluate every time before it is used. So rather than a generalised re-evaluation a situational approach is preferred when using the theory (Abdulkadir, 2016)
DeleteHi Kalum, I agree with the above post. The absence of motivational factors doe not prove highly dissatisfying but when present, they build strong levels of motivation that result in good job performance ( Baah & Amoako, 2011).
ReplyDeleteHerzberg (1959) himself has highlighted the fact you have observed. Motivational factors can be seen as insignificant until it is applied. But the influence it can have on personal motivational level is evident from all the studies that has been conducted to verify Herzberg theory.
DeleteAdding up to the above , training and development is of dual advantage where individual’s thought process is stimulated and in turn effective team work possibility is enhanced and ultimately results in enhancement of leadership qualities as found out by previous researchers and the most important aspect is employees are self-driven to achieve organizational goals (Rowold, 2007; Switzer et al. 2005).
ReplyDeleteThank you for adding a valuable comment on my blog post. Kitching and Blackburn (2002) has conducted an interesting study regarding the subject. Further they elaborate on how to motivate employees to get a training and to get desired outcome from the training. Motivation is a very powerful weapon if used correctly.
DeleteHi! Very much agree with the content. Job satisfaction is strongly interlinked with motivation. Many employers and managers focus on the short term and address hygiene factors as a way of motivation. But when seeking to motivate people, management must first identify and address what makes works unhappy about the workplace. Furthermore, management has a responsibility to help employees grow within the job and treat them fairly (Dartey-Baah & Amoako, 2011).
ReplyDeleteThank you. As explained hygiene factors merely are stoppers of dissatisfaction and not motivators (Yousuf, 2013). Making a happy workplace by identifying the flaws in the management strategies and adjusting them will significantly enhance the level of motivation throughout the organisation.
Delete