MPA 8002 Organization Theory-1-
The rise of humanistic psychology and the application of its theories to the industrial workplace in the mid-20th century alerted some organizational theorists to an unintentional but deleterious consequence for human beings resulting from the industrialization of the workplace. Writing one decade after the end of World War II, Frederick Herzberg and his colleagues at the University of Pittsburgh offered a sober analysis, suggesting that “[a]lthough the machine liberated much of humanity from the necessity for direct physical toil, it condemned its new slaves to an entirely different kind of bondage” (1959, p. 128).
What is this “bondage”?
Reflecting upon this phenomenon, Herzberg noted:
An individual living in such a world is debarred from seeking real satisfaction in his work. Interpersonal relationships outside work are overloaded, the hobby often becomes a substitute for the job. But the hobby cannot give the complete sense of growth, the sense of striving towards a meaningful goal, that can be found in one’s life work. (1959, p. 130)
Herzberg directed his attention away from functional theories that treat human beings as if they are cogs in a wheel (1959, p. 117) and toward human beings as workers who need to be treated with dignity as well as with an awareness of their unique personalities (p. 108). Herzberg’s rationale was that work could be a meaningful and did not have to be accepted as a dreaded consequence of misfortune or sin. Invoking biblical imagery, Herzberg asserted that human beings are “determined to be determiners.” Through their work, women and men can express their nature as “conforming determiners” who—like Adam—possess certain basic needs requiring satisfaction as well as “transforming determiners”—who, like Abraham—possess a psychological disposition to strive for a complete sense of growth and strive toward meaningful goals (p. 113).
The challenge facing Herzberg, then, involved identifying those factors that motivate human beings as workers, formulating a theory of human motivation that could be applied to the workplace and, lastly, prescribing a method of managerial practice.
Factors affecting workers’ motivation...
Herzberg and his colleagues posited that motivation (M) is a combination of factors (F) that coalesce into attitudes (A) which, in turn, are made evident in and can be measured by their effects (E). Thus, M manifests itself in the F->A->E complex; or, to describe motivation in reverse, the effects that can be observed in the workplace emerge as a consequences of attitudes which result themselves from various factors.
Motivation, then, is influenced by factors that occur at two levels.
The first level are those “elements of the situation in which the respondent finds a source for good or bad feelings about the job” (Herzberg et al., 1959, p. 44). The second level, the subjective feelings the respondents report about the events, are those “elements where an individual looks at himself and tries to figure out what is his own attitude toward the job at the time of the events described” (p. 49).
These two factors, the objective events and the subjective feelings engendered by the events, coalesce into attitudes (F->A) about oneself as well as about one’s colleagues, profession, and company. These attitudes, in turn, influence the way in which workers complete their jobs (p. 87). Thus, effects such as employee performance, turnover, mental health, interpersonal relations are, in reality, a manifestation of a dynamic interaction of more complex of factors and attitudes (F->A->E).
A theory of motivation...
Herzberg’s data suggest that attending to extrinsic factors—what Herzberg called “hygiene factors”—only serves to remove impediments to positive job attitudes (p. 113). Thus, while improving the hygiene factors associated with extrinsic work conditions does increase the probability that workers will be satisfied and failure to attend to these factors willlead to greater dissatisfaction, Herzberg asserted that hygiene factors only “satisfy needs, prevent dissatisfaction and poor job performance but do not motivate” (p. 115).
What, then, motivates workers?
Because F->A, Herzberg and his colleagues isolated four highly interrelated factors responsible for the good feelings about a job that motivate workers.
The first factor, achievement, consists of those events wherein workers are able to complete their jobs successfully, to design solutions to problems that workers encounter in the course of completing one’s tasks, the opportunity to vindicate one’s judgments, as well as to see the results of one’s work (p. 45).
The second motivator, responsibility, focuses specifically upon the ability to do one’s work, to supervise others, and to engage in new ventures (p. 47). Responsibility, then, includes being able to self-schedule, to communicate with others without interference, to control necessary resources, and to be held accountable (p. xv).
Work itself—the actual doing of the job or associated tasks—is the third motivator (p. 48). Workers value the relationships they are able to form with their clients as well as the ability to perform a complete job (p. xv). Client relationships are important for they allow for workers to self-correct in the process of completing a job. The ability to see a project through from inception to successful completion motivates workers because it provides them with a sense of self-efficacy.
The fourth motivator, advancement, involves a formal change in status within the organization (p. 46) as well as new learning that provides workers with unique expertise (p. xv).
Managerial practice and human motivation...
Because motivation is a consequence of the F->A->E complex, Herzberg maintains that managers must learn to concern themselves with workers’ attitudes and the factors that motivate workers. Herzberg’s theory of human motivation suggests three considerations for those whose responsibility involves managing workers.
First, good workplace hygiene is primary (p. 115). However, leaders should not envision the maintenance of good hygiene as a motivational technique but rather as a means to decrease worker dissatisfaction.
Second, leaders must provide workers multiple opportunities to expand or enrich their jobs so that workers will feel that they are part of a worthwhile project and that this project succeeded because the workers’ abilities were absolutely necessary (p. 119).
Third, leaders must recall that salary functions as a hygiene factor, meaning that an inadequate salary will increase dissatisfaction. But, salary increases also increase dissatisfaction if they are given in the form of an across-the-board wage pay raises. If leaders are to use salary increases to motivate workers, salary increases must be a direct reward for individual performance that reinforces recognition and achievement (p. 117).
When leaders give the worker primary consideration, staffing organizational positions becomes a much more complex and intricate endeavor, challenging leaders to utilize interpersonal skills that probe more deeply into the factors motivating candidates. For example, leaders must evaluate the degree to which the work itself motivates each candidate. Likewise, leaders must make discrete inquiry into whether salary and benefits function as a hygiene factor or motivator because, if the latter is the case, the probability of worker dissatisfaction will increase as the salary remains flat or periodic cost-of-living adjustments are given across-the-board to all employees. Because salary—a hygiene factor—functions for this candidate as a motivator, leaders would be ill-advised to hire this individual.
Ultimately, the most important managerial task illuminated by The Motivation to Work concerns the leaders organizational and planning function. A leader must focus upon developing high morale, first, by recognizing good work and, second, by rewarding it appropriately (p. 136). In this way, work will be organized and distributed throughout the organization so as to increase the possibility for successful achievement on the part of subordinate workers (p. 136) because they are motivated to develop their own ways of achieving the ends presented by those occupying positions of authority (p. 137).