Critical Evaluation of Maslow and Hertzberg Motivational Theories - Coursework Example

Name Course Tutor’s Name 7th April 2010 Critical evaluation of Maslow and Hertzberg Motivational Theories Motivation is a goal oriented behavior activation or energisation or willingness to exert more effort (Gallagher & Einhorn, 1976). It is the urge that forces people to act and behave in certain ways. This can come from within or it can be as a result of external influence. If motivation originates from within, it is referred to as intrinsic while if it is as a result of external influence then it is called extrinsic motivation. High educational achievements and enjoyments by students are examples of intrinsic motivation (Lepper, Green, and Nisbett, 1973). Environmental factors such as being coerced to do something against your will are an example of extrinsic motivation. Work place conditions such as the amount of salary paid and management policies are also external motivators. Various theories agree that motivation may originate from the basic need to reduce physical pain and increase pleasure or it may involve specific needs (Lepper, Green, and Nisbett, 1973). These specific needs may include resting and eating, or object desired, goal, ideal, hobby or it may be due reasons which are less apparent such as morality, altruism, avoidance of mortality or selfishness (Gallagher and Einhorn, 1976). A number of motivational theories have been put forward by motivational theorist. They include Hertzberg, Erg, McClelland and Maslow motivational theories. These theories have roots from diverse ideologies and philosophies which make each of them to be unique. This paper gives an overview of Hertzberg theory and Maslow theory. It will also highlight theoretical and practical strengths and limitations of these two theories. The paper will finally discuss the application of these theories in modern organizations. Overview of Hertzberg and Maslow theories a) Hertzberg theory This theory was stated by Fredrick Hertzberg and it deals with two factors. It is also referred to as motivator hygiene theory. Hertzberg stated that the opposite of satisfaction is no satisfaction and the opposite of dissatisfaction is no dissatisfaction (Gallagher and Einhorn, 1976). Thus job enrichment (motivator) and de-motivation (hygiene) factors are required for people to move from dissatisfaction to satisfaction. Motivators are intrinsic factors while hygiene is extrinsic factors. Things like autonomy, recognition, freedom, achievements and advancements constitute motivators. Autonomy at work place usually creates confidence among employees. Recognition of accomplishments by employees motivates them to work even harder to be recognized in the future. Physical conditions at the work place constitute hygiene factors. They include things like administrative efficiency, relationship between employees, style of supervision and policies of the organization. An organization which fails to recognize employees’ efforts or achievements is most likely to demoralize or de-motivate the employees (Deci, 1972). b) Maslow theory Maslow motivational theory was postulated by Abraham Maslow. He postulated that human needs are hierarchical and that the behaviour of people is dependent on the lowest un-acquired need. In this hierarchy there are five levels of needs. These include physiological needs, security or safety needs, love or sense of belonging, self-esteem and self actualization need. Physiological needs are found at the lowest level of the hierarchy and they include sex, sleep and hunger (Lepper, Green, and Nisbett, 1973). Without the satisfaction of these needs, the behaviour of people will be directed and dominated by the effort to minimize internal discomfort. After the satisfaction of physiological needs, behaviour of people is dominated by security or safety needs (Buhler, (nd)). Thus safety or security needs are second in the hierarchy after physiological needs in the Maslow motivational theory. Security needs include the need for having predictable future which is characterised by less unfamiliar events but more of familiar ones. Thus, the assurance of having personal security, health, financial stability, safety against illness/ accidents and its adverse effects and well-being characterize the behaviour of people at this level of the Maslow hierarchy as people strive to achieve security (Lepper, Green, and Nisbett, 1973). People usually seek meaningful interpersonal relationships and affection once their security needs are attended. Thus the need love and sense of belonging are placed at third level in Maslow motivational theory (Lepper, Green, and Nisbett, 1973). People go out of their way to find emotional based relationships during this level. The sense of belonging may be sought in both large social connections as well as small social connections. For friendships large social connections such as office culture, clubs and religious groups may be of great help to establish such relationships. Small social connections such as mentors, family members and intimate partners also provide love and intimacy (Lepper, Green, and Nisbett, 1973). Therefore at this level the relationship sought is both nonsexual and sexual. It is agued that the need of belonging and control can sometimes overtake physiological and security needs (Halepola, 2005). The need for self-esteem, self-respect and to be respected is at the fourth level of Maslow hierarchy. This constitutes the belonging need and it has two dimensions. First, people often strive to be held in high regard by others. To achieve this need, strive to be recognised or to hold large prestigious positions in organizations. The second dimension of esteem is the desire to master and to be autonomous (Gallagher and Einhorn, 1976). Self-actualization need is found at the peak of the Maslow hierarchy. At this stage people have mature impulses which direct their personalities (Deci, 1972). People strive to become more and more of what they are and to become everything that they are capable of becoming (Gallagher & Einhorn, 1976). The components of this self actualization level are growth needs. Human nature is seen in all good and evil by the self actualized people although there is no distortion from false social norms (Gallagher and Einhorn, 1976). Self actualized people enjoy their lives fully and they tend to be both lusty and good. They have characteristics such as problem solving, spontaneity, morality, creativity, and lack of prejudice and they tend to accept things the way they are (Gallagher & Einhorn, 1976). Theoretical and practical strengths of Hertzberg and Maslow theories Hertzberg encourages rewarding of employees’ who make certain achievements in an organization. Studies have shown that rewarding the person immediately, increases the positive effect but the effect decreases as duration lengthens (Lepper, Green, and Nisbett, 1973). In the long run repeating action-reward combination makes the action to become habit (Wilkinson, 2001). Therefore, if an organization decides to reward its employees to motivate them it should do so immediately after the achievement to have a greater motivational effect. This is important in order to increase out put of each employee. Hertzberg motivational theory also advocates for provision of enabling environment in order to motivate employees (Gallagher and Einhorn, 1976). This reinforcement creates a measured increase in the rate of the behavior which is desired by the organization after the addition of the hygiene factor to the organization’s environment (Wilkinson, 2001). Thus to increase motivation of the employees, the organization should provide enabling external factors which motivates the employees. In Maslow motivational theory, employees at esteem and self-actualization stage derive pleasure from the exercise of personal skill, successful achievement and being responsible (Wightman, 2008). This attributes result in increased productivity of employees at these stages of Maslow hierarchy. This is in tandem with the organization’s mission of increasing the out put. Employees who lack or have little academic achievements are likely to be motivated by the need for physiological needs in the Maslow’s motivational theory. Thus many of them will tend to work hard (due to fear of loosing the employment) to realize these basic physiological need and hence increasing the productivity of a company. Theoretical and practical limitations of Maslow and Hertzberg theories In cases where a person has great academic skills, he or she is not likely to be motivated by the physiological needs and may be unwilling to work hard for a meagre pay. Thus Maslow theory has very little industrial applicability in such cases. Maslow motivational theory tends to emphasise motivation which comes from within and underscores the need for extrinsic motivation which is essential for increasing the productivity of a company (Weightman, 2008). Hertzberg theory advocates for autonomy at the work place to increase innovations (Wilkinson, 2001). However, employees who are unskilled or with little or no education, are unlikely to be innovative or even to be motivated by being left to work independently. Therefore, managers applying such theory in cases like these ones are likely to incur losses due to reduced productivity. Applicability of Maslow motivational theory in small start companies is questionable (Weightman, 2008). Very few employees can be motivated to work hard in such enterprises just to acquire their needs at different levels. However, Hertzberg theory may get some applicability here through provision of extrinsic motivators. The fact that Maslow is concerned with orderly satisfaction of needs makes it to be less empirical hence, its applicability is limited. The measurement of motivational outcome in Maslow is very difficult and therefore this also limits its applicability. Application of the Hertzberg and Maslow theories to modern organizations Leaders and managers use motivational theories in their companies to optimize on the human resource skills available (Weightman, 2008). Recognition of high achieving employees as proposed by Hertzberg motivational theory could be advantageous to start up companies which are characterized by few employees. Rewarding such employees encourages them to carry out several tasks which could be otherwise be performed by more than one employee (Weightman, 2008). This cuts on the costs of running business. This also bars the employees from migrating to well established companies or institutions. In addition, Hertzberg motivation theory is vital in the identifying and fixing extrinsic de-motivators in companies (Weightman, 2008). Without identification and subsequent fixation of these problems can result in reduced productivity of an organization. Thus the application of Hertzberg theory can result in an enabling environment which encourages innovation and constructive competition among employees. This is to the advantage of the organization in that it results in improved quality products and overall output. Hertzberg motivation theory can also find application in jobs, which are challenging. Since this theory encourages the need for autonomy, employees may be challenged to carry out challenging duties autonomously. This will make them to strive hard to solve the paradox involved. The employee may also be motivated further by being rewarded if he or she manages to solve the problem independently to encourage him or her to take more of such duties. Challenging duties may only motivate self actualized people if Maslow motivational theory is applied (Weightman, 2008). However, Maslow has some applicability in situations which are labour intensive. Here unskilled employees will work hard in the anticipation of achieving physiological needs such as food, shelter and clothing. Conclusion It is apparent from the discussion that no single motivational theory can be used in an organization to achieve all the set objectives. There is need for application of different theories depending on the prevailing situation of the company. Doing so can have enhanced productivity and employee satisfaction at the same time. However, Hertzberg motivational theory has more applicability in modern organization in comparison to Maslow motivational theory. This could be due to the empirical nature of Hertzberg theory which is not found in the Maslow. References Buhler, P.M. Managing in the new millennium: understanding the manager’s motivational tool bag. pp. 20-22. Deci, E. Intrinsic motivation, extrinsic reinforcement, and inequity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 22.1 (1972): 113–120. Gallagher, William & Einhorn, Hillel. Motivation theory and job design. Journal of Business, 49.3 (1976): 358-373 Halepota, H. A., 2005. Motivational theories and their application in construction. Cost Engineering, 47.3 (2005): 14-18. Lepper, M. R., Greene, D. & Nisbett, R. E. Undermining children's intrinsic interest with extrinsic rewards: A test of the over justification hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 28, 1, (1973): 129-137. Weightman, Jane. The Employee Motivation Audit. London: Cambridge Strategy Publications, 2008. Read More