Fredirick Herzberg's Theory Of Motivation

Herzberg’s two factor theory of motivation at the workplace shows the difference between two factors of motivation. The two factors being satisfiers, which are the main causes for job satisfaction (motivation), from hygiene factors which are the main causes for job dissatisfaction (demotivation to stay in the job). Examples of motivating factors are achievement, recognition, responsibility and the work itself. Hygiene factors include: working conditions, salary, relationship with colleagues, supervision, etc. An organisation needs to influence satisfiers through performance management using range of tools such as: job descriptions, supervision, performance appraisals, continuous development/training, rewards and career development.

Herzberg showed that to truly motivate an employee a business needs to create conditions that make him or her feel fulfilled in the workplace.

Herzberg did a job satisfaction study of accountants and engineers, after that he developed this theory. He found that there are two groups of factors affect to an employee’s job satisfaction or job dissatisfaction. Herzberg's two-factor theory is probably the most widely known and accepted approach relating directly to job satisfaction. Herzberg addressed, the problem of job satisfaction in terms of those factors which cause satisfaction (motivators) and those which cause dissatisfaction (hygiene). This information then becomes the basis for evaluating an individual's job and making the changes necessary to increase worker motivation. Herzberg's two-factor theory of job-satisfaction is not new, as a matter of fact; it dates back to 1959 and is the outgrowth of a research study project on job attitudes conducted by Herzberg, Mausner and

According to Herzberg two factor theory there are “two issues that play an important role in the workplace experience: hygiene factors and motivational factors”( Fischer and Baack, 2013 ). Hygiene factors contains wages, hours, working conditions and relationships with supervisors. Motivational factors consist of achievements, recognition, actual work or job, responsibility, and the chance for advancement or growth, and relationships with peers. Herzberg states that a person is either satisfied and driven or unfulfilled and

Job satisfaction can be defined as psychological state of how an individual feels towards work, in other words, it is people‟s feelings and attitudes about variety of intrinsic and extrinsic elements towards jobs and the organizations they perform their jobs in. The elements of job satisfaction are related to pay, promotion, benefits, work nature, supervision, and relationship with colleagues. Employees‟ satisfaction is considered as all-around module of an organization‟s human resource strategies. According to Simatwa (2011) Job satisfaction means a function which is positively related to the degree to which one‟s personal needs are fulfilled in the job situation. Kuria (2011) argues that employees are the most satisfied and highly productive when their job offers them security from economic strain, recognition of their effort clean policy of grievances, opportunity to contribute ideas and suggestions, participation in decision making and managing the

According to Herzberg, individuals are not satisfied with lower-order needs at work, for example, those associated with minimum salary levels or safe and pleasant working conditions. Theses individuals look for the gratification of higher-level psychological needs such as achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, and the nature of the work itself. Motivation-hygiene theory, based on the presence of one set of job characteristics or incentives lead to worker satisfaction at work, while another and separate set of job characteristics lead to dissatisfaction at work. Moreover he found that job characteristics related to what an individual does is the nature of the work he performs, having the capacity to gratify such needs such as achievement, competency, status, personal worth, and self-realization, leading to satisfaction. However, the absence of such gratifying job characteristics does not lead to dissatisfaction. Instead, dissatisfaction results from unfavorable assessments of such job-related factors as company

Intrinsic factors, such as achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibility, advancement, and growth seem to be related to job satisfaction. When respondents questioned felt good about their work, they tended to attribute those factors to themselves. On the other hand, when they were dissatisfied, they tended to cite extrinsic factors such as company policy, administration and supervision. Herzberg deduced from these experiments that the opposite of satisfaction is not dissatisfaction, as was believed. He found that removing dissatisfying characteristics from a job does not necessarily make the job satisfying. He thus proposed a dual continuum, where the opposite of satisfaction would be no satisfaction and the opposite of dissatisfaction would be no dissatisfaction (Robbins,1993) According to Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation, organizations cannot begin to motivate employees until that which dissatisfies them has been removed. Hygiene Factors such as salary, working conditions and supervision are not motivators even when they are being met. Other types of hygiene factors include, company policy, poor interpersonal relations and job security. The meeting of lower-level needs of employees is not motivating, but can have a de motivating impact if not met. True motivation only kicks in when an employee’s higher-level needs are met (La Motta,

Employee equality, job security, and fair wages are considered some of the hygiene factors that exist in a workplace environment (O. Ferrell, Hirt, & L. Ferrell, 2009). Frederick Herzberg used these elements along with motivational factors to create a theory of motivation, known as Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory.

It is often claimed that the theory applies least to unskilled workers and these tend to be the hardest to motivate.

(1959). According to Herzberg, individuals are not content with the satisfaction of lower-order needs at work; for example, those needs associated with minimum salary levels or safe and pleasant working conditions. Rather, individuals look for the gratification of higher-level psychological needs having to do with achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, and the nature of the work itself. (Figure 1) This theory suggests that to improve job attitudes and productivity, administrators must recognize and attend to both sets of characteristics and not assume that an increase in satisfaction leads to decrease in unpleasurable dissatisfaction. Herzberg concluded that these factors not only cause job satisfaction, but to have a positive and lasting influence on motivation, if they are present. Therefore these factors became known as “motivators”. Dissatisfaction on the other hand was caused by factors in the job environment that did not directly contribute to the work itself, Herzberg, Mausner, Boch Snyderman (1959). The positive handling of these factors, according to Herzberg, could have only a short-term effect on motivation, while these factors caused severe dissatisfaction with the job, if they were handled badly. Herzberg referred to these factors as “hygiene”.

Frederick Herzberg first published his motivational theory in his book, The Motivation to Work which was authored in 1959. His theory focus’s around the idea that “satisfaction and dissatisfaction at work nearly always arose from different factors” (Businessballs, 2016). He cites several motivating factors for both satisfaction and unhappiness with a particular job. These factors include achievement, recognition, growth, the actual work itself, pay, benefits and relationships. In short, Hertzberg observed that factors which lead to satisfaction usually are centered on those that directly result from doing the job or task, while factors that led to dissatisfaction were more closely tied to what he deemed “Hygiene Factors”. As an example, a sense of achievement, recognition within the organization, personal growth and the quality of the actual work itself are what he refers to as motivators. Consequently, interpersonal relationships with superiors or peers, company policies, working conditions and a balance with personal life

On the other hand, Frederick Herzberg claimed in his two-factor theory (motivation-hygiene) that 81% of the contributing factors for job satisfaction are intrinsic factors and are related to motivation. These factors include achievement, recognition for achievement, the work itself, responsibility and growth or

According to Herzberg, the factors leading to job satisfaction are distinctly different from those that lead to job-dissatisfaction. Therefore, the managers who seek to eliminate factors that create job-dissatisfaction can bring about peace at the workplace but cannot motivate the employees. These factors are termed as hygiene factors comprising administration, supervision, working conditions, salary and wages etc. While absence of hygiene factors will lead to dissatisfaction, mere presence of these factors will not satisfy (i.e. motivate) the employees. In order to motivate the employees, managers must resort to ‘motivators’ (those factors that motivate the employees towards better performance) such as recognition, challenging assignment, responsibility, opportunities for growth and self-fulfillment etc.

Herzberg’s two-factor theory Psychologist Frederick Herzberg developed a ‘two-factor’ theory for motivation based on ‘motivators’ and ‘hygience factors’. Hygience factors are basic human needs at work. It do not motivate but failure to meet them causes dissatisfaction. The hygience factors

Herzberg (1987) believed that there are factors that led to job satisfaction and job dissatisfaction. The factors that led to job satisfaction are labeled as motivators and they included: achievement, recognition for an achievement, the work being done by the employee, responsibility, and the opportunity for growth or advancement. These are all internalized factors that