Herzberg Theory
Herzberg
stated factors that influenced job satisfaction can be divided into two
categories as hygiene factors and, motivational factors. Hygiene factors, that were
related to avoid unpleasantness in doing the job, included company policies and
administration, relationship with supervisors, interpersonal relations, working
conditions and salary. The Motivation factors were achievement, recognition,
the work itself, responsibility and advancement (Alshmemri, Shahwan-Akl & Maude,
2017, Herzberg, 1966, Herzberg, 2003). Rogers (2005) stated, 'employees who lack
job satisfaction are likely to withdraw from job involvement and not be
motivated to make broader contributions or set higher goals'. Dissatisfaction
and, poor performance could be prevented by satisfying the hygiene needs however,
to bring in productivity improvements sought by organizations, satisfaction of
the motivational factors was required (Stello, 2011). Figure 5.0 depicts the
Herzberg theory explained in pictorial format.
(Source: OSH Academy)
Application of Herzberg Theory
Hygiene
and Motivation factors could be combined to define conditions that could
influence employees differently as portrayed in table 4.0 (Baah & Amoako,
2011).
Table
4.0 - Hygiene Motivation Combinations
|
Hygiene |
Motivation |
Employee Stance |
|
High |
High |
§ Highly
Motivated § Few
Complaints |
|
High |
Low |
§ Few
complaints § But
- Not highly motivated § The
job is perceived as a pay cheque |
|
Low |
High |
§ Motivated
§ But
- Lot of complaints. § A
situation where the job is exciting and challenging but salaries and work
conditions are not |
|
Low |
Low |
§ Unmotivated
employees § Lots
of complaints |
Taking these combinations into accounts, Herzberg (1987) suggested, organizations/managers can create an environment to eliminate job dissatisfaction and create conditions for job satisfaction as shown in table 5.0 (Baah & Amoako, 2011).
Table
5.0 – Eliminate Dissatisfaction and Create Satisfaction
|
Eliminate Job
Dissatisfaction |
Create Conditions for Job Satisfaction? |
|
§ Fix poor and obstructive company policies § Provide effective, supportive and non-intrusive
supervision § Create and support the culture of respect and
dignity for all team members § Ensure that wages and salaries are competitive § Provide job security § Build job status by providing meaningful work for
all positions |
§ Providing
opportunities for achievement § Recognizing
workers contributions § Creating
work that is rewarding and that matches the skills and abilities of the
employee § Give
as much responsibility to each team member as possible § Provide
opportunities to advance in the company through internal promotions § Offering
training and development opportunities so that people can pursue the
positions they want within the company |
(Source: Amoako, 2011, p. 3)
Relationship with Employee Engagement
Armstrong & Taylor (1977) suggested,
engagement to have 3 overlapping components as motivation, commitment
and organizational citizenship behavior. Institute for Employment Studies produced
a model with the 3 components for better understanding as indicated in figure
6.0.
Figure
6.0 – IES Model of Employee Engagement
(Source: Armstrong & Taylor, 1977, p.195)
Intrinsic motivation is the element considered in engagement. Macey et al (2009: 67) commented that, 'when the work itself is meaningful it is also said to have intrinsic motivation, meaning it is not the pay or recognition that yields positive feelings of engagement but the work itself’ (Armstrong & Taylor, 1977). Therefore, it could be suggested that there is a direct link from the Herzberg theory to engage employees.
Practical Application of the Herzberg Theory in an Organization
Hygiene
factors make dissatisfied employees satisfied but not motivated. To get
employees motivated, organizations need to focus on motivators. In this
paragraph, I will attempt to evaluate the practices in the organization I work with
Herzberg theory.
Hygiene
factors
The
organization has several premises which staff operate within Colombo and
outside Colombo. Currently, the theme of working arrangement is ‘the open
office’ concept. With implementation of the theme, all office premises were
converted providing all employees the same experience in physical
working conditions. With implementation of the theme, separate recreational
areas were created where employees could take a break with colleagues with a
cup of tea or an indoor game. The company has provided all employees with state-of-the-art
equipment and tools required to carry out the operations and always looking for
opportunities for improvement. Benefit structures are reviewed yearly considering
the concerns raised at the employee engagement surveys, revised accordingly and,
communicated to employees. These have
created an environment of overall satisfaction among the employees.
Salary
is a factor which raises dissatisfaction at almost all employee engagement
surveys where the feedback provided is diverse.
While some are happy with the salary and the total compensation package,
there is set of staff who are not satisfied with same. Although there is an
annual increment based on the performance evaluations and organization has
taken many initiatives to balance it, salary remains a factor that raises both
satisfaction and dissatisfaction.
Job
security wise, the company maintains a positive vibe with employees and especially
during this crisis of Covid -19, all employees have been assured of job
security and full salary paid as of now, while most organizations had to go
through salary cuts. This has resulted in high satisfaction among the
employees.
Motivators
To
ensure the work remains challenging and does not bore the employees, job
rotation is highly encouraged within the organization after a specific period,
with career development opportunities. All employees are given due
responsibility to carry out the job and this is monitored through the annual
engagement survey, where employees could voice any concerns, they have in performing
the job. High performers are recognized and rewarded through the annual
performance evaluation and other various rewards and recognition schemes within
the organization. Points stated have
made a positive impact on employee motivation and created an engaged workforce
within our organization. This is further solidified by our company winning the
Telecommunication Brand of the Year’ at the prestigious SLIM-Nielsen Peoples
Awards - 2020 for the record 9th year consecutively.
Conclusion
Even though I have not discussed all the controversies of the Herzberg Two factor theory in this blog post, the theory continues to thrive. This could because the theory is easy to understand, rather than academic abstractions. Herzberg was also an influencer in job enrichment movements which designed jobs to maximize opportunities to obtain intrinsic satisfaction from work and thus improve the quality of working life (Armstrong, 2010).
Smerek & Peterson (2007), stated “Testing a theory is not always an appropriate means to determine its value”. A theory that has stood the test of times, integrates to basic practices of Motivation and engagement has proven its value and Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation belong in this category (Stella, 2011).
Reference
Alshmemri, M, Shahwan-Akl
, L & Maude, P 2017, Herzberg’s
Two-Factor Theory , Life Science Jornal , Vol. 14, No. 5, PP. 12-6 , viewed 12th
Nov ember 2020,
<http://www.lifesciencesite.com/lsj/life140517/03_32120lsj140517_12_16.pdf>
Armstrong, M 2010, Armstrong’s Essential Human resource Management Practice – A guide to People Management, Kogan Page Limited, London
Armstrong, M & Taylor, S 1977, Armstrong’s Handbook of Human Resource Management Practice, 13th edn, Kogan Page Limited, London
Baah, KD & Amoako, GK 2011, ‘Application of Frederick Herzberg’s Two-Factor theory in assessing and understanding employee motivation at work: a Ghanaian Perspective’, European Journal of Business and Management, Vol 3, No.9, viewed 11th November 2020,
< https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/EJBM/article/view/642/535>
OSH Academy, Herzberg Two Factor Theory – digital image, viewed 11th November 2020,
<
https://www.oshatrain.org/courses/pages/700herzberg.html#>
Stello, CM 2011, ‘Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of Job Satisfaction : An Integrative Literature Review’, Department of Organizational Leadership, Policy, and Development College of Education and Human Development , University of Minnesota, viewed 10th November 2020,
Motivation Factors (Reward)
ReplyDeleteMotivation factors are what determines how a person performs at work. When employees are motivated, they extend discretionary effort and become emotionally invested. It is possible for an employee to be highly motivated but also dissatisfied. In fact, the theory holds that there are four possible combinations:
High Hygiene with High Motivation: This is the perfect recipe for employee retention and engagement.
High Hygiene and Low Motivation: This is a widespread situation in which employees are not complaining, but only doing what is necessary to keep their job.
Low Hygiene and High Motivation: This is the most frustrating situation for employees. They are challenged and want to engage, but baseline work conditions are not good enough.
Low Hygiene and Low Motivation: This is the worst-case scenario in which employee turnover can be expected to be rampant(Millard 2019).
Yes Janaka, from the four combinations, the most desirable is high hygiene with high motivational factors. Many managers do the mistake of assuming hygiene factors will motivate staff. Employers and managers must understand to not look at hygiene factors to motivate staff but rather look at them as factors to make staff happy about the workplace environment (Baah & Amoako, 2011).
DeleteHi Sonali, Moreover, extrinsic “maintenance” elements or hygiene wants, like, safety, wage, support through superiors plus juniors, working situations, rules, then management actions, while can perform as demotivators when they are not satisfied, after requirements are fulfilled, their needs will rapidly diminish (Herzberg, Mausner and Snyderman, 1959; Wiley, 2008)
ReplyDeleteHi Supun, yes agree with you. For example, money; even though it motivate employees to perform better, it is short lived. It mostly impacts negatively for motivation rather than positively. If a situation arise where an employee gets to know they are under compensated than the market rate or a new hire is paid more, this will create dissatisfaction (Marciano,2010).
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree, that salary remains a factor that raises both satisfaction and dissatisfaction, I do not agree with your statement during covid when some companies assure job security and pay the full salaries to its employee, this would result high employee satisfaction, as I believe physiologically they feel guilty as they are being paid while they do not contribute anything to bring income. So, even they are grateful and happy about this employer, they are certainly not satisfied as one could be satisfied only when they also contribute in return to the pay they take home.
ReplyDeleteHi Malika, the context in which I have described, full salary paid during this Covid crisis that kept employee satisfied while assuring the job security, was within the company I work. Our company had digitized and simplified many processes, which enabled all back office staff to work from home starting the next day the country went into lock down. Hence all employees did contribute the salary that was paid. According to Johnson (2000), there are 4 main categories that could motivate employees and one of which is “Organizations that demonstrate a genuine responsibility to their employees and the communities in which they operate”. I firmly believe the organization I work for has demonstrated this that has resulted in employee satisfaction during this crisis situation (Saji, 2014).
DeleteWhile I agree, that salary remains a factor that raises both satisfaction and dissatisfaction, I do not agree with your statement during covid when some companies assure job security and pay the full salaries to its employee, this would result high employee satisfaction, as I believe physiologically they feel guilty as they are being paid while they do not contribute anything to bring income. So, even they are grateful and happy about this employer, they are certainly not satisfied as one could be satisfied only when they also contribute in return to the pay they take home.
ReplyDeleteHi Malika, the context in which I have described, full salary paid during this Covid crisis that kept employee satisfied while assuring the job security, was within the company I work. Our company had digitized and simplified many processes, which enabled all back office staff to work from home starting the next day the country went into lock down. Hence all employees did contribute the salary that was paid. According to Johnson (2000), there are 4 main categories that could motivate employees and one of which is “Organizations that demonstrate a genuine responsibility to their employees and the communities in which they operate”. I firmly believe the organization I work for has demonstrated this that has resulted in employee satisfaction during this crisis situation (Saji, 2014).
DeleteYes that make very much sense. Dialog is a company which benefited out of Covid pandemic. So if you are referring to Dialog yes employees continued to contribute and was satisfied but satisfaction levels would not be the same for other companies where they are being paid on mercy.
DeleteEmployee engagement is a workplace approach resulting in the right conditions for all members of an organization to give of their best each day, committed to their organization’s goals and values, motivated to contribute to organizational success, with an enhanced sense of their own well-being (Macleod n.d).
ReplyDeleteEmployee engagement has many definition. Another such definition is where Truss et al (2006), explained engagement as , ‘creating opportunities for employees to connect with their colleagues, managers and organization. It creates an environment where employees are motivated to connect with their work and wants to do a good job (Armstrong, 2010).
DeleteResearch 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.
ReplyDeletePersonality is definitely a deciding factor for motivation for any individual. Understanding these different traits can help managers to get their teams to engage more effectively (Harter & Adkins, 2015).
DeleteAmerican psychologist, Fredrick Herzberg, conducted hundreds of employee interviews in 1964 to test his hypothesis that factors that motivated employees were different than those that dissatisfied them. Making employees less dissatisfied did not necessarily make them more motivated (Harry, 2013).
ReplyDeleteHerzberg called these the hygiene factors. Even if they are provided with them they did not tend to be motivated but absence of same resulted in dissatisfaction (Herzberg, 2002).
DeleteBesides the thriving nature of the Theory, it has few drawbacks which were much debated on over ages (Armstrong, 2014).
ReplyDeleteNo 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.
Organizational understanding of above shall help implement the components in the most ideal method to reap the best results (Wan Yusoff, Shen Kian and Talha Mohamed Idris, 2013, p. 19-21). Organizational culture plays a key role when it comes to decision making stage and appreciate your organization’s efforts towards winning its employees during crisis by the fairness depicted, which again is a clear manifestation of its balanced provision of both Hygiene & Motivating factors to the game.
The Herzberg Theory has it's fair share of criticism over the years. It has been tested among different industries and norms as you have stated in your post with much to debate. However the theory is still popular to-date due to the simplicity of the model (Stello, 2011).
DeleteAs noted by Weire & Berghe (2004), performance management involves creating motivation and commitment to achieve objectives. Further, the physical, psychological, social, or organizational features of a job that are functional in that they help achieve work goals, reduce job demands, and stimulate personal growth, learning, and development and Job resources, which initiate a motivational process, can come from the organization (e.g., pay, career opportunities, and job security), interpersonal and social relations (supervisor and co-worker support, and team climate), the organization of work (e.g, role clarity and participation in decision making), and from the task itself(Bakker & Demerouti, 2007).
ReplyDeleteWhile I do not see a relation to what you have stated to my blog post, in response to your comment, it could be stated to create an engaged workforce, 'The Chartered Institute of Personnel
Deleteand Development' says to take a 3 dimensional approach. They are: Intellectual , Affective and Social Engagement (The insights Group, 2014).
The detail study of employee engagement programs and motivational techniques adopted for junior middle level management in Delta One Software Division (R&D) Chennai , has identified 90% of the employees come to office not just because they are paid but because of the motivation programs in Delta includes factors such as challenging work with more responsibility, supportive superior, good work environment, high interaction with superior, pay hike, promotion, team building activities, counseling session, and appreciating good performance were considered good by majority of the employees, which has helped for creating the job satisfaction as well as led the cooperate to sustain among their competitors such as Honeywell, SKF, CTS, TCS, Bosch, IBM (Mohanan, 2012).
ReplyDeleteThis is a clear indication that having engaged employees benefits both the organization and the employee (Markos & Sridevi, 2010).
DeleteAccording to Herzberg et al (1959), hygiene factor is used in reference to ‘medical hygiene, which operates to remove health hazards from the environment’. Disease from health hazards or hygiene is preventable; similarly, employee dissatisfaction from hygiene issues at work is preventable. Hygiene factors are the variables correlated with reducing the level of job dissatisfaction, as opposed to motivation factors, which directly influence an employee’s motivation and satisfaction.
ReplyDeleteYes, Hygiene factors could differ based on the industry and if you consider the Health Sector, work conditions are of utmost importance especially during this period of time where the world is facing a pandemic. If they are not fulfilled will definitely lead to demotivate (The International Hospital Federation, 2020).
ReplyDeleteAccording to Dolquist and Matson (2013), motivation is an important factor in the high performance of employees, which helps to sustain the organization for a long time and in the end increase the reputation of the organization. Also, employees are more satisfied with opportunities, good working conditions, good policies, job security and loyal relationships.(Shaikh,S.H.et al.2019)
ReplyDeleteThe factors you have stated that satisfies employees can be segregated to two main components according to Herzberg theory as hygiene and motivational factors. While, Job security, loyal relationships and good working conditions are considered hygiene factors, policies and opportunities at work place could be considered as motivational factors (Alshmemri, Shahwan-Akl & Maude, 2017, Herzberg, 1966, Herzberg, 2003).
Delete