Herzberg's Two-Factor Theory
One of the people who contributed significantly to the development of motivation theory was Frederick Herzberg. Herzberg, just like Maslow and Alderfer, argued that needs are the basis of motivation.
Frederick Herzberg developed the Two-Factor theory in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Herzberg and colleagues interviewed a group of approximately 200 engineers and accountants in Pittsburgh, asking them to recall situations in which they felt particularly satisfied and motivated, and vice versa, from their job and work in the past. Then they asked them to describe what these good and bad feelings they felt were. The answers received were recorded and included in the content analysis. As a result, it has been determined that there are two different dimensions from the answers given by the employees in relation to job satisfaction and dissatisfaction (Moorhead and Griffin, 1989: 116).
Araştırmanın sonuçlarına göre “koruyucu (hijyen) faktörler” ve “motive edici faktörler” olmak üzere iki farklı faktör grubunun var olduğu ve işyerindeki insanları farklı şekillerde etkilediği belirlenmiştir (Tosi, Rizzo ve Carroll, 1990: 275).
1. Protective-hygiene factors
These factors were obtained as a result of the answers given by the employees to the questions about the reasons for the dissatisfaction and lack of motivation. These; wage, job security, working conditions, level and quality of supervision, company policy and management, interpersonal relations.
Accordingly, if the protective-hygiene factors are not present in the workplace, they represent the elements that create dissatisfaction for individuals. Providing these reduces dissatisfaction, but does not increase one's satisfaction. As a result, these factors are associated elements in a business context (Tosi, Rizzo and Carroll, 1990: 275).
2. Motivational factors
These factors are the findings obtained from the answers given by the employees to the questions asked about satisfaction and motivation. These are; sense of achievement, recognition, responsibility, work itself, and personal growth and promotion.
Motivational factors are those that employees specify as the main reason for motivation and satisfaction. Accordingly, the fact that employees clearly see and feel these factors at work causes them to be satisfied and motivated. However, unlike the hygiene factors, the absence of these factors does not give the feeling of dissatisfaction, although it does not give the feeling of satisfaction (Moorhead and Griffin, 1989: 116).
In this theory of Herzberg, unlike the other theories of Maslow and Alderfer, he did not show the requirements in a row, but expressed them by grouping them in two different factors. Accordingly, meeting the needs in hygiene factors does not create a sense of satisfaction in the individual, while not meeting them creates an element of dissatisfaction. On the other hand, the individual will not be satisfied when the needs in the “motivating factors” are not met; however, he will not feel dissatisfied (Süral Özer & Topaloğlu, 2008; 93).
Herzberg kültürel farklılıklara rağmen, motive edici ve hijyen faktörlerinin dünya genelindeki işgörenleri benzer şekilde etkilediğine inanmaktadır. Bununla ilgili gelişmiş ülkelerde (ABD, Japonya, Finlandiya, Macaristan, İtalya) yapılan bazı araştırmalar bu görüşleri doğrular niteliktedir. Bununla birlikte bu araştırmalarda görülen farklı bir bulgu da motive edici gereksinimlerin çalışanların büyük kısmında (%60-90 arası) tatmin sağlarken, olmaması ise çalışanların bir kısmında da (%18-40 arası) tatminsizlik hissi verdiğidir. Hijyen faktörlerinin yeterince olmaması çalışanların büyük kısmı için tatminsizlik sağlarken (%65-80 arası), olmasının ise çalışanların bir kısmında tatmin sağladığı (%10-30 arası) belirlenmiştir (Hellriegel vd., 2001: 143). Bu çalışmaların gelişmekte olan ülkelerde de yapılması çalışanların daha büyük bir kısmında hijyen faktörlerinin (özellikle de ücret gibi) daha çok motive edici faktörler olarak mı gösterileceği merak konusudur.
One of the most important contributions of Herzberg's work was that it had a powerful effect on motivation at work, stimulating empirical research and thought. In addition, the systematic language and style he used in his work was easily understood by the managers coming from the practice, and he offered specific suggestions to the managers in a way that could be used simply to motivate the employees. Although there are great criticisms of the model, Herzberg's theory still maintains its popularity among managers and maintains its international appeal (Porter et al., 2003:10).
