Last updated: July 11, 2019
Topic: BusinessCompany
Sample donated:

According to Fincham and Rhodes (2005), Maslow believed that motivation was mostly an unconscious process. Human beings tend not to be aware of what motivate them and would find it hard to describe motivation by answering questions, for instance. As Kelly (1982) said, Herzberg was more interested in motivation than satisfaction. He argued that what determined motivation fell into two classes, those that are extrinsic to the individual including pay, supervision and company policy. He went on by saying that these could reduce dissatisfaction.

The second class of determinants of motivation was those that are intrinsic to the individual, including feelings of responsibilities, recognition which promoted satisfaction. He went on by adding that the second class of determinants were associated with effective job performance and were highly motivating. According to Fincham and Rhodes (2005), both Herzberg’s and Maslow’s motivation theory are part of the content theories. These are based on the assumption that a similar set of needs can be attributed to all individuals.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

Though, they differ in their accounts of what these needs are. Fincham and Rhodes (2005) said that Maslow’s hierarchy included the physiological, security, social, self-esteem and self-actualization needs. Therefore the hierarchy is based on five different set of needs. Kelly (1982, p. 40) stated that, Herzberg believed that “man has two basic set of needs – his animal needs, which relate to the environment, and his distinctive human needs, which relate to the tasks with which he is uniquely involved”. Therefore, unlike Maslow, Herzberg believed there was two set of needs.

As Fincham and Rhodes (2005) stated, Maslow came up with the concept of a hierarchy of needs. Like Maslow, Herzberg adopted a form of hierarchy theory to underpin the hygiene-motivator distinction (Kelly, 1982). Cartwright et al. (1993), report that, under Maslow’s theory, the first level of need refers to the basic ones, such food and shelter. The next level of needs is that of security, being away from harm, pain and danger. Social needs refer to belonging to a group, being accepted and having supportive relationship with others. Herzberg’s hygiene factors correspond to Maslow’s first three levels of needs.

According to Kelly (1982), the hygiene factors include working conditions, thus employees need to work in a heated environment, away from potential harm and with appropriate uniforms. It is clear that there is a connection between Maslow’s physiological and security needs with one of Herzberg’s hygiene factor, environment. As Kelly (1982) said, Herzberg’s hygiene factors include interpersonal relation; that is one’s relationship with the environment in which the job takes place. This undeniably correspond with Maslow’s social needs level.

Fincham and Rhodes (2005) highlights that social need refers to a satisfactory and supportive relationship with others. As Fincham and Rhodes (2005) stated, Maslow’s and Herzberg’s theories on self-actualization, growth needs and motivators considerably influenced management theory.

Reference

Fincham, R. Rhodes, P (2005) Principles of Organizational behaviour 4th edn. New York: Oxford University Press. Cartwright, R. Collins, M. Green, G. Candy, A. (1993) Managing people: a competence approach to supervisory management: NVQ/SVQ level 3/ foreword from MCI.

Oxford: Blackwell. Rennie, D. L. (2008) ‘Two Thoughts on Abraham Maslow’ :Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 8(3), pp. 143-153. Greenberg, J. Baron, R,A. (2003) Behavior in Organiszations 8th edn. New Jersey: Upper Saddle River inc Kelly, J, E. (1982) Scientific Management, Job Redesign and Work Performances. London: Academic Press Inc Pugh, D,S. (1984) Organization Theory 2nd edn. Suffolk: Cox & Wyman Ltd Shoura, M, M. Singh, A. (1999) “Motivation Paramaters for Engineering Managers Using Maslow’s Theory”: Journal of Management in Engineering 15(5), PP. 44-45.