Week 2: Motivation

Week 2 : Motivation

Objective:

This post will be looking into motivational theories and how they have affected me. It will also be looking to challenge, compare and contrast aspects of the theories.

Hertzberg

Hertzbergs theory of motivation is a two-factor theory. This theory states that there are Hygiene & Motivational factors, for the motivational factors to come into play Hertzberg believes that you must have the hygiene factors fulfilled. The hygiene factors are not in the context of hygiene in the term of health and hygiene as we know today but they are there to prevent dissatisfaction.

	MOTIVATORS
	Achivement
	Recognition
	Work itself
	Responsibility
	Advancement
	Growth
HYGIENE
Salary
Security
Working Conditions
Supervision
Company Policy & Admin
Relationships

This is a basic diagram of Hertzbergs theory. Note the hygiene factors below the motivators to show that to move up to motivators you have to complete the hygiene factors. The contents In the factors where taken from (ref: Mullins L, 2010, Management & Organisational Behaviour, Ninth Edition, Essex CM20 2JE, Pearson Education ltd.)

Background

“Herzberg's survey work, originally on 200 Pittsburgh engineers and accountants” (ref: Alan Chapman,[n.d], Leicester LE7 7FN, [s.n] available from:   http://www.businessballs.com/herzberg.htm). This evidence indicates that its believed that Hertzberg originally used a group of 200 engineers and accountants to conduct his survey in which he built his theory. At the time of this survey (20th century) these people would have been higher educated. In the 20^th century higher education was not as easily accessible as today which resulted in fewer people being higher educated. This indicates that hertzberg survey would have been on a narrow field of people’s views of work, motivation and would not take into consideration views from all people across all jobs and all social classes. Due to the poor background hertzbergs theory often becomes questioned as to how relevant the theory is to people in all situations and jobs.

I would challenge the theory as I believe that in certain situations the two-factors can work in the reverse, for example I have had a personal experience in sport where a team and I had the skills to play at a higher level so we used our achievements of winning and advancement through the leagues to get to a level where the conditions were better and the we had better qualified supervision i.e. coaching which then made our sport more enjoyable and motivated us more.

My Motivation

My motivation for studying a degree in Accounting & Finance is that I believe that the degree is the foundations to progress onto professional qualification which then opens the door to well paid and challenging job where I can have a lot of influence on people and a business. My motivation to have a challenging job with a high salary is so I can have a enjoyable and interesting career and also can live a good lifestyle. A key factor to me wanting to get here was in my year out of education where I quickly realised the difficulty in getting into a organisation that can provide high levels of training and can offer security and a successful future. This relates to hertzbergs hygiene factors as I have experienced a life without security, a good salary, poor training offers i.e. Company admin/ policy and working conditions. Not having these factors resulted in me not being motivated to carrying working and resulted in me making the decision to use university as a new option.

De-motivation

During my studies in 6^th form I was de-motivated due to too much time and found the work not challenging which resulted in becoming board. This relates to hertzberg's theory as the working conditions were not challenging and the supervision became slack which made it easier for me to fall behind, dissatisfied and left me with no motivation to reach my potential grades.

This also relates to Maslows hierarchy theory as he believes that you have to full fill one level to move onto the next. Due my lack of interest and boredom I could not move onto a level of esteem and the achievement of my potential grades. This resulted in me being stuck at a social level and was interested in friendships, social activities, instead of my A levels. As the Maslow and Alderfers theory are similar my situation in 6^th form also fits to Alderfers hierarchy theory as in his theory suggests I would have relatedness needs and was concerned with affiliation with friends, social environment/ groups and could not move onto the next level of growth which would been me being motivated to stud for my A levels in order for my personal growth and reach my potential.

Me not reaching my potential and realising I had to move on from 6^th form and feeling dissatisfied with my performance then became my motivator to go back to college and gain qualifications I needed to move on higher education. This challenges the 3 theories I have referred to as I did not have all the hygiene factors and had not full filled all the levels but still become motivated to go back to college. This has also given me the experience of feeling dissatisfied with myself which I believe will be a positive to use in the future to help me stay motivated in order not to be in the same situation.

Conclusion

My findings is that the three motivation theories are relevant and co inside with each other but I also believe they have there floors. These floors may be a result that times have changed from when the theories were written too today and the working world is constantly changing. Another factor to take into consideration is the way people work and their motivations change with time. The biggest variable to take into consideration when applying the theories is the personality of the individual and there situation. I do believe when Hertzberg, Maslow, Alderfers wrote their  theories they were to designed to be used as a foundation to work on, which is also why I believe  they can come across vague and categorise people and the theories are all about building onto of a previous layer in hierarchy and building from one set of factors to another.