در این نظریه چنین فرض می شود که آدمی با عوامل مؤثر بر رضایت شغلی خویش، برخوردی دوگانه دارد. گاهی در اثر فقدان برخی از عوامل، احساس عدم رضایت می کند و در صورت فراهم آمدن عوامل و شرایط مذکور احساس عدم رضایت وی کاهش می یابد؛ به طوری که بتدریج به بی تفاوتی وی نسبت به موضوع مورد نظر می انجامد.
این مجموعه از عوامل را ((حافظ وضع موجود)) یا ((نگهدارنده)) یا ((تأمین کننده بهداشت روانی)) می نامند؛ برای مثال، تشنگی از حالتهای غیر قابل تحملی است که به شدت موجودات زنده را تحت تأثیر قرار می دهد و هرگاه بروز کند، سایر نیازهای آدمی تحت الشعاع آن قرار می گیرد؛ ولی اگر با نوشیدن آب فرونشیند، نیاز به آب کاهش می یابد؛ به طوری که انسان نسبت به اهمیت آن بی تفاوت می شود؛ ولی عدم وجود آن فرد را به تکاپو وامی دارد. افراد رفع این گونه نیازها را جزء حقوق طبیعی و مسلم خود می دانند، این نیازها معمولاً به عوامل خارج از شغل مربوط می شوند. نظیر نیاز به غذا یا امنیت که عدم ارضاء آنها، انسان را ناراضی می سازد، ولی ارضای آنها وی را به فعالیت بیشتر بر نمی انگیزد(افراد نسبت به ارضاء آنها بی تفاوتند). در کنار این نیازها، نیازهای دیگری وجود دارند که افراد نسبت به عدم ارضاء آنها بی تفاوتند (ناراضی نمی شوند)، ولی در صورت ارضاء آنها برانگیخته می شوند و به حد مطلوبی از رضایت دست می یابند. این نیازها معمولاً به وسیله عوامل درونی شغل رفع می گردند؛ نظیر مسئولیت بیشتر، پیشرفت در کار، کسب موفقیت و شناسایی و تحسین به خاطر حسن انجام کار. اگر این گونه رضایتمندیها به نحو مطلوبی از طریق عوامل داخلی شغل حاصل گردند، تثبیت خواهند شد. با توجه به این تفکیک بین عوامل ایجاد رضایت و عوامل ایجاد نارضایتی، مدیر می تواند برای کاهش نارضایتی و افزایش انگیزه و رضایت شغلی اقدام کند. بدین ترتیب بهسازی محیط کار برای حفظ وضع موجود مفید است، ولی برای انگیزش کارکنان در جهت تحقق وضع مطلوب، کفایت ندارد. برای نیل به وضع مطلوب، باید کارکنان را با استفاده از انگیزنده هایی نظیر کسب موفقیت ترغیب کرد. چنین برخوردی با کارکنان می تواند منجر به تحول شگرفی در بهره وری نیروی انسانی گردد
Frederick Herzberg (1923-2000), clinical psychologist and pioneer of ‘job enrichment’, is regarded as one of the great original thinkers in management and motivational theory. Frederick I Herzberg was born in Massachusetts on April 18, 1923. His undergraduate work was at the City College of New York, followed by graduate degrees at the University of Pittsburg. Herzberg was later Professor of Management at Case Western Reserve University, where he established the Department of Industrial Mental Health. He moved to the University of Utah’s College of Business in 1972, where he was also Professor of Management. He died at Salt Lake City, January 18, 2000.
Frederick Herzberg’s book ‘The Motivation to Work’, written with research colleagues Bernard Mausner and Barbara Snyderman in 1959, first established his theories about motivation in the workplace. Herzberg’s survey work, originally on 200 Pittsburgh engineers and accountants remains a fundamentally important reference in motivational study.
Herzberg expanded his motivation-hygiene theory in his subsequent books: Work and the Nature of Man (1966); The Managerial Choice (1982); and Herzberg on Motivation (1983).
Significantly, Herzberg commented in 1984, 25 years after his theory was first published:
“The original study has produced more replications than any other research in the history of industrial and organizational psychology.” (source: Institute for Scientific Information)
The absence of any serious challenge to Herzberg’s theory continues effectively to validate it.
Herzberg was the first to show that satisfaction and dissatisfaction at work nearly always arose from different factors, and were not simply opposing reactions to the same factors, as had always previously been (and still now by the unenlightened) believed.
See the Herzberg hygiene factors and motivators graph diagram, and the Herzberg diagram rocket and launch pad analogy diagram, (both require Acrobat free reader).
The rocket analogy diagram, which incidentally is my own interpretation and not Herzberg’s, is also available as a doc file and a powerpoint slide: Herzberg rocket diagram doc (MSWord) format, and Herzberg rocket diagram ppt (MSPowerpoint) format.
I am sorry that the source and figures for the Herzberg graph diagram are not well referenced. The diagram actually dates back some years when I interpreted information published in 1978 by BACIE (British Association for Industrial and Commercial Education Handbook of Management Training Exercises), which in turn BACIE referenced to Herzberg’s Work and the Nature of Man, Staples Press 1966. As stated already, Herzberg first detailed his research in The Motivation To Work, Wiley 1959 (written with Barbara Snyderman and Bernard Mausner). The percentages in my diagram are approximations based on the BACIE representation (which did not show the exact figures either). I am sorry that I do not have the exact figures from Herzberg’s study. If anyone has please let me know.
The purpose of the diagram is to illustrate how Herzberg’s research showed that certain factors truly motivate (‘motivators’), whereas others tended to lead to dissatisfaction (‘hygiene factors’).
According to Herzberg, Man has two sets of needs; one as an animal to avoid pain, and two as a human being to grow psychologically.
He illustrated this also through Biblical example: Adam after his expulsion from Eden having the need for food, warmth, shelter, safety, etc., – the ‘hygiene’ needs; and Abraham, capable and achieving great things through self-development – the ‘motivational’ needs.
Certain parallels can clearly be seen with Maslow.
Herzberg’s ideas relate strongly to modern ethical management and social responsibility.
Many decades ago Herzberg, like Maslow, understood well and attempted to teach the ethical management principles that many leaders today, typically in businesses and organisations that lack humanity, still struggle to grasp. In this respect Herzberg’s concepts are just as relevant now as when he first suggested them, except that the implications of responsibility, fairness, justice and compassion in business are now global.
Although Herzberg is most noted for his famous ‘hygiene’ and motivational factors theory, he was essentially concerned with people’s well-being at work. Underpinning his theories and academic teachings, he was basically attempting to bring more humanity and caring into the workplace. He and others like him, did not develop their theories to be used as ‘motivational tools’ purely to improve organisational performance. They sought instead primarily to explain how to manage people properly, for the good of all people at work.
Herzberg’s research proved that people will strive to achieve ‘hygiene’ needs because they they are unhappy without them, but once satisfied the effect soon wears off – satisfaction is temporary. Then as now, poorly managed organisations fail to understand that people are not ‘motivated’ by addressing ‘hygiene’ needs. People are only truly motivated by enabling them to reach for and satisfy the factors that Herzberg identified as real motivators, such as personal growth, development, etc., which represent a far deeper level of meaning and fulfilment.
Examples of Herzberg’s ‘hygiene’ needs (or maintenance factors) in the workplace are:
relationship with supervisor
relationship with subordinates
to what extent is money a motivator?
This question commonly arises when considering Herzberg’s research and theories, so it’s appropriate to include it here.
People commonly argue that money is a primary motivator.
For most people money is not a motivator – despite what they might think and say.
For all people there are bigger more sustaining motivators than money.
Surveys and research studies repeatedly show that other factors motivate more than money. Examples appear in the newspapers and in other information resources every week.
For instance, a survey by Development Dimensions International published in the UK Times newspaper in 2004 interviewed 1,000 staff from companies employing more than 500 workers, and found many to be bored, lacking commitment and looking for a new job. Pay actually came fifth in the reasons people gave for leaving their jobs.
The main reasons were lack of stimulus jobs and no opportunity for advancement – classic Herzberg motivators – 43% left for better promotion chances, 28% for more challenging work; 23% for a more exciting place to work; and 21% and more varied work.
Lots of other evidence is found in life, wherever you care to look.
Consider what happens when people win big lottery prize winners.
While many of course give up their ‘daily grind’ jobs, some do not. They wisely recognise that their work is part of their purpose and life-balance.
Others who give up their jobs do so to buy or start and run their own businesses. They are pursuing their dream to achieve something special for them, whatever that might be. And whatever it means to them, the motivation is not to make money, otherwise why don’t they just keep hold of what they’ve got? Why risk it on a project that will involve lots of effort and personal commitment? Of course the reason they invest in a new business venture is that pursuing this sort of plan is where the real motivators are found – achievement, responsibility, personal growth, etc – not money.
The people who are always the most unhappy are those who focus on spending their money. The lottery prize-winners who give up work and pursue material and lifestyle pleasures soon find that life becomes empty and meaningless. Money, and spending it, are not enough to sustain the human spirit. We exist for more.
Money is certainly important, and a personal driver, if you lack enough for a decent civilised existence, or you are striving for a house or a holiday, but beyond this, money is not for the vast majority of people a sustainable motivator in itself.