Improving motivation using Herzberg’s Two-Factor theory



Overview

The two-factor theory speaks on the factors associated with an employee that will either leads to the satisfaction of the employee or dissatisfaction of the employee (Baah and Amoako, 2011). As per Owler and Morrison (2015), these factors can be broken into 2 main categories in the form of Hygiene Factors and Motivation factors. They also explain, While the fulfillment of Hygiene factors will minimize employee dissatisfaction, the lack of it will create employee dissatisfaction, at the same time while the fulfillment of Motivation factors will improve employee satisfaction and motivation, the lack of it will reduce motivation. However, the Hygiene factors and Motivation factors are mutually independent of each other, in terms of addressing the Hygiene factors will not increase Employee satisfaction it will just reduce employee dissatisfaction and vice versa (Ghazi, Shahzada and Khan, 2013). The Hygiene factors align as extrinsic factors focusing on the context of the job than its content focusing on salary fulfillment, company policies, administration and logistics, work environment, and interpersonal collaboration. Hygiene factors align with the Intrinsic side of the Job content, focusing on the employee's experience on performing work such as the quality of work, responsibilities which are assigned, fair recognition and reward, achievements (Owler and Morrison, 2015).

Figure:1
Different views between traditional motivation and Herzberg’s two-factor theory



Source (Chu and Kuo, 2015)

The above diagram by Chue and Kuo (2015) explains how Hygiene and Motivation factors work on an employee with different state transitions, from Dissatisfied to Not Dissatisfied and Satisfied to Not satisfied. As an example, an employee will get motivated and will be in a satisfied mindset when he is presented with challenging meaningful work where his achievements are well recognized. He will be not satisfied when the work is monotonous, and no proper recognition is in place. At the same time, the same employee can be dissatisfied when he is underpaid working in an environment with lack of facilities and hindered by strict organizational policies. However, providing a good environment to work in will only result in not dissatisfied employees but will not guarantee satisfied employees.

Applying the theory to the organization which I work for

The organization which I work has an inserting scenario when it comes to aligning with the principals of the 2-factor theory. While the organization scores highly on Motivational factors, it still lacks some fundamentals of hygiene factors.  So, employees in my organization can be categorized as motivated bur still dissatisfied with certain items. Below is an evaluation of this scenario.

Motivational Factors

Been a digital organization with a millennial workforce, the organization I work for focusses highly on employee engagement and their motivation. We have the following practices in place as a motivational framework to support this.

There is an initiative called “REPS” which functions as a point-based system where every employee has equal opportunity to gain or lose points. For example, when an employee completes his work within the targeted timeline, he will receive a certain amount of points. At the same time, if he completes work ahead of the target timeline or does more work, he will get additional points. On the other hand, when an employee fails to complete work, he will lose points. The quarterly assessments and bonuses will be based on this points scheme. This concept has created a highly engaged culture, where not only employees are focused on gaining more points, but also they have clear visibility on the rewards associated with gaining them. This motivation has led to a high level of productivity and quality at work.

There is another initiative called “Career Compass” that concentrates on every employee's career path. The initiative will personally coach every employee on his training needs and skill development, guiding them on their path to get promoted in the organization hierarchy. At the same time, every employee has been provided by an automated assessment in terms of current job role readiness, which focuses on the competencies required to perform the current role and next role readiness, which focuses on the competencies that need to be acquired to be promoted to next level. This automated initiative has guided employees to accelerate their career paths achieving high employee satisfaction.

At the same time, the use of concepts such as gamification and leaderboards has also helped to increase employee engagement.

Hygiene factors

The organization has mixed success when it comes to Hygiene factors. The organization has provided basic needs such as state of the art, work environments, enough platforms to collaborate and build positive interpersonal relationships, facilities to take part in sports and leisure activities and enough supervision. While this has contributed to reducing employee dissatisfaction, certain organizational policies and compensation-related concerns have driven employees to a certain level of dissatisfaction.


Our organization averages low in comparison with competitor standards when it comes to salary packages offered for employees. Due to this there is a continuous cycle of employees complaining about their salary and eventually get dissatisfied, and sometimes even leaven the organization due this issue. So far the organization has not been able to successfully handle this problem.

At the same time, there is an increase in employee dissatisfaction due to some security policies recently implemented, where employees feel their freedom is limited at work. For example, certain policies require you to switch off  the mobile phones all day while at work. While these policies have been implemented to strengthen the physical and data security, it has also contributed to employee dissatisfaction.

Conclusion

Herzberg’s two-factor theory is a powerful concept where Organizations in the modern digital era can still use its application with high success to create a culture where employees are highly motivated. However, it will always be a balancing act between hygiene and motivation factors where each organization needs to find its optimized formula to achieve the desired sweet spot when it comes to ideal motivation and no dissatisfaction.

References


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. European Journal of Business and Management, [online] 3(9), pp.1-7. Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8120/9583968b25d38e08f353aef4004be7cd099c.pdf [Accessed 18 Sep. 2019].

Chu, H. and Kuo, T. (2015). Testing Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory in Educational Settings in Taiwan. The Journal of Human Resource and Adult Learning, [online] 11(1). Available at: http://www.hraljournal.com/Page/10%20HuichinChu&TsuiYangKuo.pdf [Accessed 18 Sep. 2019].


Ghazi, S., Shahzada, G. and Khan, S. (2013). Resurrecting Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory: An Implication to the University Teachers. Journal of Educational and Social Research, [online] 3(4), pp.445-450. Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a49f/86fcea51dc67d89c1a5ae4401062bcfa4242.pdf [Accessed 18 Sep. 2019].

Owler, K. and Morrison, R. (2015). What makes work enjoyable and motivating for Learning Advisors in Aotearoa-New Zealand?. Association of Tertiary Learning Advisors Aotearoa/New Zealand Journal, [online] 1(1), pp.16-33. Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/99a5/eea366617653d0e957e4bbb3cce0b93c6d7b.pdf.





Post a Comment

12 Comments

  1. Although more than 60 years ago Herzberg's theory was developed, it still remains influential. As a result, an employer that wishes to have a genuinely motivated workforce must not only provide reasons for psychological development, but must also address hygiene factors (Katt & Condly, 2009). Thank you for bringing this theory to our attention.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The question of what specifically motivates an employee is said to be one which is rather difficult to answer (Vroom & Deci, 1970). In this respect, Herzberg’s two factor theory does offer a lot of food for through, as it considers a wide array of internal and external factors affecting an individual’s level of motivation.

      Delete
  2. It is believed that Herzberg's two-factor theory might bring various outcomes depending on various backgrounds, such as place, income and nations (Gokce et al., 2010; Lundberg et al., 2009; Ruthankoon, & Ogunlana, 2003). Mainly as the individuals are brought up with different attitudes, it becomes a major problem when it comes to changing it depending on the work environment and to drive towards motivation (Ozsoy, 2013).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for highlighting the need to consider demographic and social aspects as well, in determining the impact a certain factor would have on individual motivation. Certainly, a useful point to explore.

      Delete
  3. Nice article and it's helpful to know about some of the best practices used at your current workplace, thank you for sharing! One of the points I would like to highlight is that Herzberg does not list leadership as a motivational factor. In contrast, Armstrong (2009) lists leadership as one of the five key areas of focus that should be included on a strategic plan to increase employee engagement. Specifically, the line managers can play a vital role in increasing employee engagement levels as explained by Armstrong (2009).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. According to a 2015 Gallup poll, employees supervised by highly engaged managers are 59 percent more likely to be engaged. This shows the value of leadership in defining and rewarding key behaviors which can be practiced at every level of the organization.

      Delete
  4. Every organisation is depending on its workforce performance. Every organisation’s desire is to get the 100% output from the employees. If to obtain the desired outcome as you have highlighted throughout the blog, employees should work with full throttle. Two factor theory can have a major influence on driving employees to the full throttle state. Though the direct impact of motivators are easily recognisable, the impact of Hygiene factors are mostly indirect hence hard to identify the problem at an earlier stage (Kaplan and Owings, 2017). The best solution is the proper and clever usage of this theory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Definitely. Dartey-Baah and Amaoka (2011) identifies that absence of hygiene factors when absent can lead to dissatisfaction in the work place but when fully catered for in the work environment on their own are not sufficient to satisfy workers. On the other hand, the motivators referring to the nature of the job provide satisfaction and lead to higher motivation.

      Delete
  5. Dear Kanchana, the theory of two factors is widely used, but with it there are a few issues. One issue is the fact that, once things are going well, people tend to look at the parts of their job they like and project them on themselves. External factors appear to play a larger role when times are bad.
    Another critical point is that the Two Factor Theory assumes that higher productivity is equal to job satisfaction. There are many reasons for disagreement, such as external factors that may affect productivity. This was not taken into account in Herzberg's research and development of his theory.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, Herzberg's theory is not without controversy. It has even been argued that the theory neglects to assess the interaction effects of hygiene and motivators (Bockman 1971).

      Delete
  6. Hi Kanchana,Agree on the post. It is correct that a balance between hygiene and motivation factors reflect the optimal level of motivation in an organization. But which element the organization should give prominence differ on the type of the organization and the internal situation (Dartey-Baah, & Amoako, 2011).

    ReplyDelete