Herzberg’s Two Factor Theory

Frederick Herzberg, a behavioral scientist, established Herzberg's two-factor theory, also known as motivation-hygiene theory or Herzberg's dual-factor theory, in 1959 with the purpose of discovering and understanding the phenomena of job satisfaction (Bassett-Jones et al., 2017). This is one of the most commonly used theories in job satisfaction research, and it claims to be the most repeated study in this field since it has been employed in a number of studies as a theoretical framework for evaluating worker satisfaction (Dipboye, 2018). 

Figure 04: Herzberg's Two Factor theory

Source: (McPherson, 2021)

This theory is regarded as one of the most influential content theories in the field of job satisfaction at the time it was published and the contrast between motivation and hygiene factors as shown in the above diagram is the core premise of this theory (Alshmemri et al., 2017). Both of these factors have an influence on job satisfaction; however, hygienic considerations are regarded to be less important than motivational factors. Motivational variables are the most important factors that might influence job satisfaction (Alshmemri et al., 2017).

Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman developed this two-factor theory after being influenced by Maslow's hierarchy of needs. First, Herzberg and his colleagues hypothesized that job satisfaction and dissatisfaction were impacted by two different sets of factors, and that satisfaction and dissatisfaction could not be measured reliably on the same continuous scale. Herzberg's fundamental idea was that certain variables cause people to have favorable attitudes about work, while others cause them to have unfavorable attitudes (Alshmemri et al., 2017). The Theory is explained further in the below Video clip.

Video 04: The Two Factor theory

Source: (Greggu, 2018)

The Two factors are being discussed in more detail below, along with examples of the Satisfiers and Dis-satisfiers in the Banking Institution I work for which is a leading Bank in Sri Lanka.

1.     Motivators (Satisfiers) are intrinsic job factors that meet higher-order needs and contribute to job satisfaction (Nickerson, 2021). They are inherent to the profession. Therefore, motivation variables only function to improve and boost job satisfaction. Job satisfaction may be induced by the existence of motivational variables, but it cannot be induced if motivational variables are absent. The motivating elements which were the first group, was connected with "the urge for growth or self-actualization" and achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibility, progress, and the opportunity of growth were all the motivating aspects (Alshmemri et al., 2017).

 While the employees themselves become motivated by their own achievements, the bank also provide sufficient recognition regarding the same during meetings, communications to other staff via email, display the name and/or picture of the employee on notice boards, host award ceremonies and give tokens of appreciations.

 Further, the superiors delegate their authority giving certain responsibilities to subordinates resulting in Advancement of their personal growth.

 Since the work itself is a motivating factor, the bank arranges Job rotation and extend on the scope and the depth of a particular Job role. Such as enabling a particular staff member to do the teller function and also the credit function in a Branch of the Bank.

 

2.     Hygiene Factors (Dis-satisfiers) are the extrinsic factors of a job that must be met to prevent job dissatisfaction but that do not contribute to job satisfaction (Nickerson, 2021). They are external to the employment. Therefore, hygiene elements work to lessen job discontent. Poor hygiene variables can lead to work discontent, whereas higher hygiene factors can reduce dissatisfaction but not cause satisfaction. The other group of elements, known as hygiene factors, was concerned with 'the urge to avoid discomfort' and company rules and administration, relationships with managers, interpersonal ties, working environment, and compensation were all considered as hygiene elements (Alshmemri et al., 2017).

 A clear and a transparent Company policy and a Code of conduct is maintained by the bank, where employees could rise and speak of any misconduct or ill-treatment. Bank Employees are provided with salary plus additional forms of cash incentives and non-cash incentives in their Remuneration packages.

 Moreover, they are provided with Job security at any given time which is secured by a lawful agreement signed by the employee when he/she joins the bank. Further, the bank holds the responsibility of the employees while inside the office and follows all required safety measures including fire drills and they even provide transport to and from work subsequent to the break out of the Covid 19 pandemic so that the employees are safe guarded minimizing their association with outside personnel while travelling in public transport. Furthermore, the bank has facilitated Working from Home Arrangements, BCP- Business Continuity Plans and Split Operations to safe guard the employees.

 In addtion, an Administration department has been established to maintain healthy work conditions to all employees including air conditioning, ventilation, sufficient work spaces, required work-stations and fulfilling other basic human needs.

 Maintaining Healthy relationships are also entertained at the bank where team engagement activities are held such as parties, multi-cultural events, trips and even foreign tours. Further, the Bank hosts trainings, meetings, knowledge/ experience sharing sessions and certain work and non-work challenges as well.

 Supervisors are encouraged to be unbiased and transparent during supervision, especially during Performance appraisals. The bank has educated all employees about the platform where any employee can raise any grievances and ill-treatment. Poor Management and Leadership will lead to a drop in the Job satisfaction levels (Alshmemri et al., 2017).

 

In studies in a number of foreign settings, Herzberg's two-factor theory is still employed to measure and define the level of job satisfaction (Alshmemri et al., 2017).

 

References

Alshmemri, M., Shahwan-Akl, L. and Maude, P. (2017) Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory. Life Science Journal. 14(5). pp. 12-16. [Online]. Available at http://www.lifesciencesite.com. Accessed on 3^rd May 2022.

Bassett‐Jones, N. and Lloyd, G. C. (2005) "Does Herzberg's motivation theory have staying power?", Journal of Management Development, 24(10), pp. 929-943. [Online] Available at https://doi.org/10.1108/02621710510627064. Accessed on 3^rd May 2022.

Dipboye, R. L. (2018) "Work Motivation", The Emerald Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Emerald Publishing Limited, Bingley, pp. 103-174. [Online]. Available at https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78743-785-220181006. Accessed on 3^rd May 2022

Greggu (2018) The Two Factor theory. [Online]. Available at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kX1AtLazt6k&t=11s. Accessed on 3^rd May 2022.

McPherson, A. (2021) Motivating Millennials. The journey to project success. [Online] Available at https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Herzbergs-Two-Factor-Theory-EPM-2018-Herzbergs-two-factor-theory-shown-in-fig-4_fig3_348555191. Accessed on 3^rd May 2022.

Nickerson, C. (2021) Simply Psychology. Herzberg’s Motivation Two-Factor Theory. [Online] Available at www.simplypsychology.org/herzbergs-two-factor-theory.html. Accessed on 3^rd May 2022.