To better understand the motivations and attitudes of the employee, Frederick Herzberg performed studies to determine which factors in an employee work environment caused satisfaction or dissatisfaction. He published his findings in the 1959 book the Motivation to work.
The studies included interviews in which the employees when asked what pleased and displeased them about their work. Herzberg found that the drivers of satisfaction at work (and presumably motivation) were different from those causing dissatisfaction at work. He developed the motivation-hygiene theory to explain these results. He called motivators segmenting and factors of hygiene factors of discontent, by using the term 'hygiene' in the sense that they are considered as factors of maintenance needed to avoid dissatisfaction, but by themselves do not give satisfaction.
The following table presents the top six factors causing dissatisfaction and the top six factors causing satisfaction, listed in the order of more than reduce the importance.
Factors influencing on work Attitudes
Leading to dissatisfaction
Leading to Satisfaction
Enterprise policy
Supervision
Relationship w/Boss
Working conditions
Salary
Relationship w/peers
Realization
Recognition
Work itself
Responsibility
Promotion
Growth
Herzberg concluded that, because the drivers of satisfaction are different from those causing dissatisfaction, the two feelings simply cannot be treated as opposites of one another. The opposite of satisfaction is not dissatisfaction, but on the contrary, no satisfaction. Similarly, the opposite of dissatisfaction is no dissatisfaction.
Even if at first glance, this distinction between the two opposites may look like a play on words, Herzberg argued that there are two men separate needs portrayed. First of all, there are physiological needs that can be met by money, for example, for the purchase of food and shelter. Secondly, there is the psychological need to reach and to grow, and this need is satisfied by the activities that cause growth.
Of the above results table, it notes that the factors that determine whether there is dissatisfaction or no dissatisfaction are not part of the work itself, but are instead external factors. Herzberg often referred to as these hygiene factors "KITA" factors, where KITA is an acronym for Kick In The a..., the process of delivery of incentives or threat of punishment to bring someone to do something. Herzberg says that these provides only a short term success, motivational factors that determine whether there is satisfaction or satisfaction is inherent in the job itself and do not result from carrot and stick incentives.
Implications for management
If the motivation-hygiene theory holds, management not only must provide hygiene factors to avoid employee dissatisfaction, but must also provide factors intrinsic to the work itself, so that employees are satisfied with their jobs.
Herzberg argued that the job enrichment is necessary to intrinsic motivation, and that it is a continuous process of management. According to Herzberg:
The work should have a sufficient challenge to use the full capability of the employee.
Employees who demonstrate increasing levels of capability should benefit from the increasing levels of responsibility.
If a job cannot be designed to exploit the full capabilities of the employee, the company should consider automating the task or the replacement of an employee by one who has a lower level of competence. If a person cannot be fully used, then there is a problem of motivation.
Critics of Herzberg theory argue that the result of two factors is respected because it is natural for people to take credit for satisfaction and dissatisfaction to blame on external factors. In addition, the job satisfaction does not necessarily imply a high level of motivation or productivity.
Herzberg theory was widely read, and despite its weaknesses, its historical significance is that it recognizes that the true motivation comes from within a person and not from KITA factors.
0 comments:
Post a Comment