The paper "Frederick Herzberg’ s Two-Factor Motivational Theory " is a great example of management coursework. The purpose of this essay is to examine if Frederick Herzberg’ s two-factor motivational Theory still works almost fifty years after it was initially applied. The statement that will aid in acquiring this information is what makes the Theory to be such an exceptional specimen amongst a variety of motivational theories as well as what inspires employees to give ideas? Aspects like organizational rationalization and supported assurance to personnel empowerment, and fresh communication around managerial knowledge and learning organization led to the question of whether the theory of motivation to work by Herzberg continues to be valid.
This research analyses the question of what has made this theory to be successful up to date and the reasons that inspire the employees in adding suggestions in their workplaces. The Two-factor Theory stipulates that there are some aspects in the place of work that lead to job contentment, while a different set of aspects lead to discontent. Frederick Herzberg who was a psychologist built up this theory and he put it in theory that work satisfaction as well as work dissatisfaction act separately from each other.
According to Frederick Herzberg, people are not satisfied with the fulfillment of lower-order requirements at the workplace, for instance, individuals connected with least amount levels in salary or pleasant and safe working states. Strengths and Weaknesses of the Article The findings of this research on the Two-factor theory of Motivation suggested that human beings have two sets of wants: his wants as an animal to shun pain as well as his wants as a man to develop psychologically.
Since then, this theory has caught notice of both psychologists and industrial managers. Work-motivation plans and administration training have been put in founded on the theory of dual-factor. Psychologists have conducted a considerable study on the dual-factor theory of motivation. While other theories were founded on informal assumptions of the individual formulating them as well as presumptions based on their own experiences and insights, Herzberg’ s theory of motivation was conditioned from research on the satisfaction of needs and the stated effects of motivation on these fulfillments. In this article, the interviewees were initially asked to remember a time when they had considered themselves useful in their places of work.
The researchers further inquired on the causes that led to their fulfillment and whether those feelings of fulfillment had any impact on their work, their individual relations with other people as well as their interests. Lastly, the series of proceedings that served to get back the employees mindset to usual was brought out. In another set of interrogations, the similar interviewees were required to describe circumstances when they had developed negative attitudes towards their jobs that were connected to their places of work.
Herzberg's study employed an original approach, supported on open questions and a small number of theories, to collect and analyze information of vital events as remembered by the study respondents. He initially employed this method throughout his doctoral lessons at the Pittsburgh University with John Flanagan who afterwards was the executive at the American Research Institute, who enhanced the Critical Incident Technique in the Army Air Corps personnel selection in World War 11. Herzberg's intelligent open questioning technique gathered far extra meaningful outcomes than the conservative application of asking closed questions which are yes, no or extent-based questions/multiple-choices.
This prompts or assumes a particular kind of reaction, and which by the way remain the main convenient and popular method of analyzing even nowadays - particularly amongst individuals having an exacting publicity aim or agenda.
Bassett-Jones, N & Lloyd, G. C., 2005. Does Herzberg's motivation theory have staying power? Emerald Publisher, vol. 24, no. 10, pp. 929 – 943
Herzberg, F. 1966. Work and the Nature of Man. Cleveland: World Publishing
Herzberg, F., Lausner, B., Snyderman, B. B., 1993. The Motivation to Work. New Jersey: Transaction Publishers
Jones, B., Lloyd, N., Geoffrey, C. 2005, Does Herzberg’s motivation theory have staying power? The Journal of Management Development, p.929
Lawler, E. 1970, Job attitudes and employee motivation: Theory, research, and practice. Journal of Personnel Psychology, vol. 23, no. 2, pp 223-237.
Lodahl, T. 1964 Patterns of job attitudes in two assembly technologies. Administrative Science Quarterly, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 482-519.