Herzberg's Theory: A Common Law Not So Common
Ever since I first learned about Herzberg’s Theory it only reaffirmed my belief that both hygiene factors and motivating factors define the sustainability and success of any organization. An organization cannot buy into part of this theory and fulfil either hygiene factors or motivating factors. Both aspects are equally important and only together the purpose could be accomplished.
The theory lists following as hygiene factors:
- Working conditions
- Salary
- Personal Life
- Relationships at work
- Security
- Status
If not all of the above mentioned factors, a significant majority could be directly affected by employer. Irrespective of size of organization and the immediate team, hygiene factors play a crucial role in ensuring that employees are not dissatisfied. The factor of relationships with colleagues is mentioned here but I believe soft skills determine or at least play a significant role in shaping up relationships among peers. This holds weight especially in a multi-cultural and international set up.
In an organization that lacks hygiene factors or plainly ignores them, it would become quite difficult for employees to not lose motivation. Herzberg defines that hygiene factors on their own will only help sustain given motivation levels but not further them. So, it is quite clear what the end result would be in an organization that does not attend to hygiene factors, if not all at least to majority of them. Not all employees get affected by all hygiene factors and in the same way. Few employees do not even notice few missing hygiene factors such as working conditions and relationships at work, especially the level of soft skills of team members in general. But the problem arises with the other set of employees who do get affected by the same set of hygiene factors. Hence, it is imperative on the organization to ensure that all hygiene factors are well taken care of.
Sometimes, organizations fall behind on these hygiene factors owing to business environment and operational compulsions, which are all quite understandable. But, in order to keep up the motivation and sustain it, the onus is on the management to at least regularly interact and communicate with employees and buy them into the larger organization plans for immediate and long term future. These interactions should be in form of one-to-one meetings and addressing of employees in general to discuss status of organization and the path ahead. Employees have to be made to feel responsible for and integral into larger plans of the organization. An assurance for professional growth would be inculcated and eventually it could be expected to be lead to self-actualization.
In the pressures of market competition, challenging financial and macro economic conditions and industry specific constraints, management gets engrossed into pure business aspects and it is easy to lose focus on hygiene factors first and also on motivating agents, gradually. But, adhering to Hergberg’s theory should be integral part of strategy for any organization. Ignoring aspects that affect motivation of team members could be equated as management totally occupied with steering through pot holes and losing sight of road ahead.
Comments
Post a Comment