in file
1. Imagine you work as the head lifeguard at the local pool. One of your employees – a junior lifeguard - asks you to review the process for calling 911 in case of an emergency. Describe how you would approach answering this question using each of the following leadership styles and goals: · Laissez – Faire, Transformational (1pts) · Democratic, Transactional (1pts) · Autocratic , Transformational (1pts) 2. Explain any two (2) of the following perceptual errors and how they might impact the relationship between a manager and a new employee: (2pts each) · Selective perception · Attribution theory · Priming effect · Contrast effect · Halo effect · Projection 3. We used the term ‘cognitive dissonance’ to describe a challenge in the way people perceive and process information, and discussed several mechanisms people use to resolve their dissonance. Explain the term ‘cognitive dissonance’ as simply as you can (2pts) and give an example of how it can impact the relationships between members of a team or group (2pts). 4. We explored several common tools organizations use to assess the personalities of their employees. Choose one of them and explain how it might help a team or group better understand their teammates (1pts). Then, explain at least 2 limitations of using that tool (2pts). 5. Amaya is the manager of a small gym where all employees are paid a straight salary. In reviewing her month-end numbers she notices that one of her longest serving personal trainers is seeing fewer and fewer clients, while most of her newest trainers seem to be growing their client base. After speaking with the senior trainer they tell her they feel they should be getting paid more money since they have been there longer. Amaya agrees and gives the senior trainer a 5% annual raise. Using Herzberg’s 2-Factor Theory of motivation, do you think Amaya’s decision was a good one? (2pts) Does your analysis of Amaya’s decision change if you use Expectancy Theory as the basis for your understanding of motivation? Why or why not? (2pts) 6. Imagine a team of women ranging in age from 40 to 60 years old that have been working for at least 5 years each at a small clinic that provides counselling for people living with addictions. The clinic owner, who started the clinic with them, is an older nurse who is retiring, and decides to sell the clinic. The man who purchased the clinic is from Sri Lanka, and prior to moving to Ontario was an investment banker. He feels mental health services is a great growth industry and will be able to make a lot of money providing these services. Assuming he decides to operate the clinic as the new owner and manager, what might Hofstede's cultural dimensions suggest are some challenges we can anticipate transitioning the team to this new leadership. (4pts) 7. With respect to conflict resolution, we discussed the concept of ‘compromise’. We agreed that compromise was a better resolution than several other approaches, but that it was not usually the optimal approach. Explain the concept of ‘compromise’ as it relates to conflict resolution (2pts). Then discuss at least two other approaches to conflict resolution, using compromise as a means of comparison. (2pts) 8. Imagine you are starting a new job, and your new boss asks you to propose a starting salary. Using the concepts of ‘zero-sum’ and ‘non-zero sum’ negotiation frameworks, explain how you might respond to that request. (3pts) Life Science Journal 2017;14(5) http://www.lifesciencesite.com 12 Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory Mohammed Alshmemri; Lina Shahwan-Akl and Phillip Maude School of Health Sciences (Nursing and Midwifery), RMIT University, Melbourne Australia.
[email protected] Abstract: Background: Motivation-hygiene theory is also known as Herzberg’s two-factor theory or Herzberg’s dual-factor theory (1959). The main concept of this theory is the difference between motivation factors and hygiene factors. These two factors that have an effect on job satisfaction are divided into two sets of categories. Hygiene factors are considered less important to job satisfaction than motivation factors. Hygiene factors are related to ‘the need to avoid unpleasantness’. Motivation factors lead to job satisfaction because of ‘the need of the individual for self-growth and self-actualisation’. This theory is one of the most commonly used theories in job satisfaction research (Dion, 2006). Many studies in nursing research have used this theory as a theoretical framework in testing job satisfaction among nurses (Kacel et al., 2005; Mitchell, 2009; Jones, 2011). The results of those studies support Herzberg’s motivation-hygiene theory, and assert that the hygiene factors are less important to job satisfaction; however, the motivation factors are most important and can lead to job satisfaction. This theory seemed to identify and explain the phenomena of job satisfaction. [Mohammed Alshmemri, Lina Shahwan-Akl and Phillip Maude. Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory. Life Sci J 2017;14(5):12-16]. ISSN: 1097-8135 (Print) / ISSN: 2372-613X (Online). http://www.lifesciencesite.com. 3. doi:10.7537/marslsj140517.03. Keywords: Job dissatisfaction, job satisfaction, Herzberg’s Motivation-Hygiene Theory, Herzberg’s two-factor theory. 1. Introduction In 1959, Herzberg, Mausner and Snyderman published the two-factor model of work motivation and developed the motivation-hygiene theory, which was influenced by Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (Jones, 2011). Herzberg created a two-dimensional paradigm of factors influencing people’s attitudes towards work. Initially Herzberg and his colleagues developed a hypothesis that satisfaction and dissatisfaction with a job were affected by two different sets of factors and thus satisfaction and dissatisfaction could not be reliably measured on the same continuum (Herzberg et al., 1959; Stello, 2011). Studies on job satisfaction were conducted to decide which factors in an employee’s work environment caused satisfaction or dissatisfaction. After two pilot studies, the first involving 13 labourers, clerical workers, foremen, plant engineers and accountants, and the second involving 39 middle-managers, his theory was further developed and expanded (Herzberg et al., 1959). Herzberg, 1966; Subsequently, Herzberg et al. (1959) studied more than 203 accountants and engineers working in nine factories in the Pittsburgh area of the United States to determine which factors influence the worker’s work environment and cause satisfaction or dissatisfaction (Herzberg et al., 1959). The main hypothesis of Herzberg’s theory was that certain factors lead to positive attitudes towards work, and others lead to negative attitudes. The other hypotheses stated that the factors and effects involving long-range sequences of events and short-range sequences of events, respectively, were distinct (Herzberg et al., 1959; Stello, 2011). According to their research data, the original hypothesis of the Herzberg study was restated and then changed to the two-factor theory of job satisfaction. The two factors that had an effect on job satisfaction were divided into two sets of categories. The first category was associated with ‘the need for growth or self- actualisation’, and became known as the motivation factors. Motivation factors included achievement, recognition, the work itself, responsibility, advancement and the possibility for growth (Herzberg, 1966; Herzberg, 2003). The other category of factors was related to ‘the need to avoid unpleasantness’, and was known as hygiene factors. Hygiene factors included company policies and administration, relationship with supervisors, interpersonal relations, working conditions and salary (Herzberg, 1966; Herzberg, 2003). Motivation factors led to positive job attitudes and hygiene factors surrounded the ‘doing’ of the job (Herzberg et al., 1959; Stello, 2011). At the heart of the two-factor theory is the difference between motivation and hygiene factors, or intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Herzberg described motivation factors as intrinsic to the job and hygiene factors as extrinsic to the job. Thus, motivation factors operate to only increase and improve job satisfaction; whereas hygiene factors work to reduce job dissatisfaction. According to Herzberg et al. (1959). Among the factors of hygiene, when the factors deteriorate to a level below that which the employee Life Science Journal 2017;14(5) http://www.lifesciencesite.com 13 considers acceptable, then job dissatisfaction ensues. However, the reverse does not hold true. When job context can be characterised as optimal, we will not get dissatisfaction but neither will we get much in the way of positive attitudes. It is primarily the ‘motivators’ that serve to bring about that kind of job satisfaction (pp. 113–114). The presence of motivational factors can produce job satisfaction, but their absence leads to no job satisfaction. Therefore, poor hygiene factors can cause job dissatisfaction, while better hygiene factors can reduce dissatisfaction but cannot cause job satisfaction (Herzberg et al., 1959). Herzberg explained that the opposite of job dissatisfaction is no job dissatisfaction. Likewise, the opposite of job satisfaction is no job satisfaction (Herzberg, 1966; Herzberg, 2003). Herzberg’s theory is one of the most significant content theories in job satisfaction (Dion, 2006). Further, Herzberg’s two-factor theory was noted by many researchers to be the most effective needs satisfaction model used in healthcare organisations (Timmreck, 2001 Cahill, 2011). Herzberg’s two-factor theory has also been used widely by researchers evaluating nursing job satisfaction (Best & Thurston, 2004; Kacel et al., 2005; Rambur, Mclntosh, Palumbo, & Reinier, 2005; Hegney et al., 2006; Lephalala, 2006; Russell & Gelder, 2008; Mitchell, 2009; Jones, 2011; Mc Glynn et al., 2012). The following tables are summaries of Herzberg’s two-factor theory. Table 1 displays the motivation and hygiene factors. Table 2 provides comparisons between the motivation and hygiene factors. Table 1: Summary of the Factors in Herzberg’s Theory Motivation Factors Hygiene Factors Advancement Interpersonal relationship Work itself Salary Possibility of growth Policies and administration Responsibility Supervision Recognition Working conditions Achievement Table 2: Comparisons between the Two Factors of Herzberg’s Theory Motivation Factors Hygiene Factors Absent The outcome is no satisfaction The outcome is dissatisfaction Present The outcome is satisfaction The outcome is no dissatisfaction Herzberg described Intrinsic to the job Extrinsic to the job Important to job satisfaction Strong Poor The main concepts behind the two-factor theory are the difference between the motivation and hygiene factors. Motivation factors The word ‘motivation’ comes from the Latin word mover or ‘to move’. The definition of motivation is ‘how to