Theories on job satisfaction

2.2.2.1 Herzberg’s two-factor theory

The two-factor theory was first introduced by the psychologist Frederick Herzberg in 1959. The theory is based on the assmption that the link between a person and his/her job is the essential factor and success can be determined by that person’s attitude toward his/her job. A question raised by Herzberg was “What do people want from their jobs?”. Herzberg asked people to describe in detail the situations in which they felt particularly good or bad about their jobs. Then, Herzberg sorted their answers into different categories.

From the results of his interviews with people, Herzberg managed to construct categories of people behaviors toward works depending on whether they felt good or bad about their jobs.

According to Herzberg’s theory, there are certain factors linked to job satisfaction and there are also other factors linked to job dissatisfaction. The internal factors such as achievements, recognition and work itself, responsibility and advancement seem to be related to job satisfaction. People who felt good about their jobs usually proposed these factors for themselves. On the other hand, people dissatisfied with their job usually mentioned external factors such as policies and rules, relations and working conditions.

11

Herzberg claimed that these results mean that the opposite of satisfaction is not dissatisfaction as our usual thinking. Thus, the removal of dissatisfaction elements does not necessarily lead to higher job satisfaction. Thus, he concluded that satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not on the same continuum.

According to Herzberg, satisfaction factors are independent to dissatisfaction factors. Therefore, even if managers can remove dissatisfaction factors, the satisfaction of employees may not be increased. Herzberg considered factors such as human relations, working environment and pay, policies and rule, supervisions as conditional elements. If these elements are ensured, people do not feel dissatisfied; however, they also do not feel satisfied. Herzberg suggested that it is more practical for managers to emphasize on delivering satisfaction elements which make people feel internally awarded such as recognition, achievement, responsibility, work itself and advancement.

The two-factor theory of Herzberg is shown in Figure 2.1

Figure 2.1 Herzberg's two-factor theory

2.2.2.2 Theory of David Mc. Clelland

David Mc. Clelland (cited by Robbins, 2002) said that human has three basic needs: the need for achievement, the need for authority and power, the need for affiliation.

(1) The need for achievement Employees

Achievement motivated people always seek to do their job better. They want to overcome difficulties and challenges. They feel that success or failure come from the results of their actions. It means that this type of person like challenging works. High achiever are always desired to do things better. They often display the following behaviors

- Seeking personal responsibility in their works - Setting high goals for themselves

- Requiring rapid feedbacks on their performance - Quickly mastering their jobs

(2) The need for affiliation

Like Maslow’s social need, affiliation motivated people seek friendly relationship and interaction with other people. This type of person is strongly motivated to do works that create friendship and social relationship.

(3) The need for authority and power

Authority motivated people have strong need to control and influence other people and their working environment. Researchers pointed out that authority motivated people tend to become managers. There are also arguments that successful managers are people who have strongest need for authority, then need for achievement and need for affiliation.

2.2.2.3 Maslow’s theory of hierarchy of needs

The theory of hierarchy of needs was introduced by Maslow (1943). It is one of the most popular theories explaining the satisfaction side of human. According to Maslow (1943), there is a hierarchy of needs consisting of 5 levels: physiological needs, safety needs, social needs, self-esteem needs and self-actualization needs. This hierarchy displays the essential needs of human on different level. When one level of need is satisfied, people will seek to satisfy the next level of the hierarchy. This theory suggests

13

that managers should pay attention to which level of needs the employees are on and satisfy those needs.

Based on the theory of hierarchy of needs, employees only display job satisfaction when their needs are met. The human needs in Maslow’s theory can be interpreted into different variables. For example, physiological needs and safety needs can be described through variables of payment and welfare satisfaction. Similarly, social needs and self-esteem needs can be displayed through variables of satisfaction with relationship with colleagues and superiors as well as variable showing certain authority of employees at work.

The theory of hierarchy of needs is displayed in Figure 2.2

Figure 2.2 Maslow's hierarchy of need

Self-expression

Respected

Social relations

Physiology Safety

14

2.2.2.4 Vroom’s expectancy theory

Vroom (1964) said that people will be motivated to work to achieve their job outcomes if they have beliefs on the value of those outcomes, and they can see that what they are doing are necessary to reach those outcomes. Vroom (1964) stated that the motivation of work is decided by the value people put into their effort multiplied by their valance. In other words, the motivation is a result of the expected value of job outcomes and the opportunity to reach those outcomes. Unlike Maslow and Herzberg, Vroom emphasizes on the importance of outcome itself.

Vroom’s theory of motivation can be shown through the following formula:

Motivation = Valance x Expectancy

Vroom (1964) suggested if people work without valance or expectancy, they will not be motivated to complete their works. Thus, it is critical to create a perception in employees that their efforts would be worthwhile and bring them expected awards. Only by the are employees motivated to fully engage in their job. The expectancy theory is shown in Figure 2.3

Figure 2.3 Vroom’s expectancy theory