A happy worker is a productive worker. Or, is a productive worker a happy worker? What motivates productivity in the workplace? And what can be done to affect these parameters? This article will explore some of the prevailing theories of motivation and develop a framework to effect job enrichment to increase employees’ satisfaction and productivity.
Herzberg Motivator – Hygiene Theory or Two-factor Theory of Motivation
One theory that has generated much discussion and debate is Herzberg’s Motivator – Hygiene Theory (Gardner, 1977). Whitsett and Winslow provided an analysis of the more than 2,000 articles written on this theory by 1967 (Whitsett, & Winslow, 1967), and it continues to generate debate today. The idea behind the theory can be broken down into two parts. Part one states that job factors can be divided into two distinct sets: motivators and hygiene (Gardner, 1977). Motivators are factors that lead to job satisfaction and rarely affect job dissatisfaction (Gardner, 1977). Hygiene are factors that lead to job dissatisfaction and rarely affect job satisfaction (Gardner, 1977). Thus, the theory is also referred to as the Two-factor Theory of Motivation.
The second part of the theory can also be divided into two parts. Concentrating efforts on Motivators will increase satisfaction but will not affect factors that cause dissatisfaction (Gardner, 1977). And conversely, concentrating efforts on Hygiene will decrease job dissatisfaction but will not affect factors that cause satisfaction (Gardner, 1977). The conclusion of this is that factors of job satisfaction and those that cause dissatisfaction are separate dimensions rather than being opposite ends of the same spectrum.
Challenging Herzberg
Over the years there have been many arguments supporting and rejecting Herzberg’s theory. For example, there is considerable argument over what the theory actually says and means (Gardner, 1977). Some have interpreted the theory to address overall job satisfaction while others argue that the theory purposely does not address overall job satisfaction (Whitsett, & Winslow, 1967).
There are also arguments that the form of data gathering and analysis was flawed or that subsequent research challenging the theory employed incorrect techniques thus negating the findings (Gardner, 1977). According to Gardner, more than half of the evidence that has been published has been contradictory (Gardner, 1977). My personal take to this debate, regardless of the accuracy or completeness of the theory, it makes a significant contribution: understanding what effects the job satisfaction of employees is a complex issue. There are factors that contribute to the individual’s satisfaction and dissatisfaction. There are times when these individual factors represent dual dimensions. Arguably, there are times when the individual factor does represent a single dimension with satisfaction and dissatisfaction at the opposite ends of the spectrum. The theory gives us a way of thinking about and understanding these aspects.
Job Enrichment
Current constructs for increasing employee performance in the workplace have been inspired by concepts stemming from Herzberg’s theory. Job Enrichment programs are programs where employees are given a higher level of responsibility and autonomy to have more control over the execution of specific tasks (Pan, & Werblow, 2012). Applying the concepts brought to attention through Herzberg’s Motivator – Hygiene Theory, when designing a job enrichment program, the first step is to identify and document the factors that are currently affecting both satisfaction and dissatisfaction. Having identified these factors, steps can be put into the plan that will enable employees to amplify the items identified as Motivators, thereby increasing job satisfaction while simultaneously addressing items that drive dissatisfaction, thereby removing job dissatisfaction. And while Herzberg’s theory may not explicitly correlate the combination of these factors into an overall assessment of job satisfaction, it stands to logical deduction that increasing items of satisfaction while decreasing items of dissatisfaction will result in a higher overall job satisfaction rating.
Survey
To ascertain what areas specifically drive the satisfaction and dissatisfaction of the employees of Company X, a survey will be conducted. The results of the aggregation of this survey will be used to define what factors can be addressed by the job enrichment project. A subsequent analysis of the likelihood of impact versus risk of enablement will be used to finalize what items will finally make it into the official program. Based on prior research, we can expect that some of the areas will include productivity and quality of work, salary, advancement/ career path, coworkers and supervisors (Sypniewska, 2014) as well as other factors.
Proving Impact
In order to evaluate the effectiveness of the Job Enrichment program, we need to establish a baseline. There are numerous metrics available that can be used to infer job satisfaction such as average employee tenure, rate of absenteeism as well as direct surveys. Prior to implementing the job enrichment program, this data will be collected to establish the baseline for Company X.
Once the job enrichment program is in place, two groups of workers will be created that represent the same skillsets and type of workers. Who is placed in each specific group will be randomly determined in an effort to prevent unintentional bias. One group will act as a control group and will not participate in the job enrichment program. The other group will act as the test group and will participate in the job enrichment program. The program will conduct for six months. At the end of the testing period, the data will be collected from both groups again. Results can then be compared and contrasted between the groups as well as the baseline. This will enable drawing conclusions about the effectiveness of the job enrichment program. By using random selection techniques as well as using an experiment methodology helps to ensure the internal validity of this research. However, due to the targeting of specific parameters established by employees as well as the unique scenarios and culture that represent Company X, the external validity of this research can be called into question. This is irrelevant to Company X however, as the primary purpose of this study is to increase the job satisfaction and thereby performance of the employees of Company X.
Summary
The concepts of job satisfaction, factors of satisfaction and dissatisfaction on the job and the impact of these on performance are complex in nature. There are many theories that attempt to explain these causations and correlations. Herzberg, expanding on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs Theory (Vatsa, 2013) established the Two-factor Theory of Motivation also known as the Motivators – Hygiene Theory. While there are many well documented arguments that question the totality of the theory, it nevertheless provides some thoughtfulness into the complexity of what constitutes factors of satisfaction and dissatisfaction in the workplace and what leads to overall job satisfaction (Gardner, 1977).
For Company X to implement a job enrichment program to enhance individual performance, a framework was established. This framework will define what areas of concern exist within the workforce with respect to job satisfaction and dissatisfaction. By tailoring the program to these specific needs through the use of experimental methods, we will be able to ascertain the validity and effectiveness of the measures. This will enable management to make data driven decisions to lead to more fulfilling uses of resources and gaining a competitive edge.
References
Gardner, G. (1977). Is there a valid test of Herzberg’s two-factor theory?. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 50(3), 197-204.
Pan, W. Y., & Werblow, J. (2012). Does Good Job Enrichment Policy and Practices Impact Employee’s Job Satisfaction?. Journal of Global Business Issues, 6(1), 1-5.
Sypniewska, B. A. (2014). Evaluation of Factors Influencing Job Satisfaction. Contemporary Economics, 8(1), 57-71.
Vatsa, N. (2013). Review of Job Satisfaction Theories. International Journal of Educational Administration, 5(2), 95-106. Whitsett, D. A., & Winslow, E. K. (1967). An analysis of studies critical of the motivator-hygiene theory. Personnel Psychology, 20(4), 391-415.
