Premium
HERZBERG'S DUAL‐FACTOR THEORY OF JOB SATISFACTION AND MOTIVATION: A REVIEW OF THE EVIDENCE AND A CRITICISM
Author(s) -
HOUSE ROBERT J.,
WIGDOR LAWRENCE A.
Publication year - 1967
Publication title -
personnel psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 6.076
H-Index - 142
eISSN - 1744-6570
pISSN - 0031-5826
DOI - 10.1111/j.1744-6570.1967.tb02440.x
Subject(s) - criticism , job satisfaction , citation , dual (grammatical number) , psychology , management , sociology , social psychology , philosophy , law , political science , economics , linguistics
In. 1959, Herzberg, Mausner and Snyderman reported research findings that suggested that man has two sets of needs: his need as an animal to avoid pain, and his need as a human to grow psychologically. These findings led them to advance a "dual factor" theory of motivation. Since that time, the theory has caught the attention of both industrial managers and psychologists. Management training and work-motivation programs have been installed on the basis of the dual-factor theory. Psychologists have both advanced criticisms and conducted substantial research relevant to the dual-factor theory. The purpose of this paper is to review the theory, the criticisms, and the empiric investigations reported to date, in an effort to assess the validity of the theory. Whereas previous theories of motivation were based on causal inferences of the theorists and deduction from their own insights and experience, the dual-factor theory of motivation was inferred from a study of need satisfactions and the reported motivational effects of these satisfactions on 200 engineers and accountants. The subjects were first requested to recall a time when they had felt exceptionally good about their jobs. The investigators sought by further questioning to determine the reasons for their feelings of satisfaction, and whether their feelings of satisfaction had affected their performance, their personal relationships, and their well-being. Finally, the sequence of events that served to return the workers' attitudes to "normal" was elicited. In a second set of interviews, the same subjects were asked to describe incidents in which their feelings about their jobs were exceptionally negative—cases in which their negative feelings were related to some event on the job.