The next step in understanding motivational mechanisms labor activity made by Frederick Herzberg. His work had a huge impact on management practice.

Herzberg took a different path than Maslow and Alderfer. He was not interested in the content of individual motives (needs). He was interested in the result that the difference in the motivation of workers leads to - the productivity and effectiveness of their work. Herzberg assumed that job satisfaction underlies high productivity, so he tried to understand what determines whether workers are satisfied or dissatisfied with their work. "The attitude of people towards their work can determine the success or failure of any industrial concern, no matter whether its capacity is 50 or 100% utilized. In fact, in difficult times, it may turn out that the line separating whether a concern survives or not will depend on the morale within collective," wrote Herzberg.

Under Herzberg's leadership different countries world, including socialist ones, in the 60s and 70s it was carried out big number studies in which respondents were asked: “Describe a period of time or event during which you had particularly positive or particularly negative feelings towards your job. This could be the job you are currently doing or any other . Can you remember moments of such ups and downs in your attitude towards work? Please tell us about them. The responses received were analyzed and subjected to factor analysis.

The results showed that the factors responsible for professional satisfaction (motivation) differ from the factors causing professional dissatisfaction (lack of motivation). Herzberg argued that since different factors are responsible for job dissatisfaction and job satisfaction, the two conditions are not poles of the same scale. The opposite of professional satisfaction will not be dissatisfaction with work, but the absence of satisfaction, and the opposite of dissatisfaction will not be satisfaction with work, but the absence of dissatisfaction. At first glance, everything seems very confusing. Isn't it the same thing - "dissatisfaction" and "lack of satisfaction"? How to understand such expressions: “not satisfaction, but the absence of dissatisfaction” or “not dissatisfaction, but the absence of satisfaction”? However, in essence, Herzberg’s ideas are very simple, the confusion here is purely linguistic: for us, dissatisfaction and lack of satisfaction are synonymous, Herzberg found out that these are completely different states. Herzberg believed that behind the responses of survey participants were two different sets of human needs. One series can be attributed to the “animal nature of man - the innate desire to avoid pain plus all acquired aspirations that are determined by basic biological needs. These factors are the avoidance of dissatisfaction, and for them Herzberg borrowed the concept of hygiene from medicine. “Hygiene,” according to Herzberg, “is intended for human health. It is not a cure, but rather a prevention. Modern methods waste recycling, water and air purification do not cure diseases, but without them there would be more diseases." Likewise, hygiene factors do not create satisfaction (and internal motivation), they only eliminate dissatisfaction. Hygiene factors are external to the work (describe the external aspects of the work, the work situation) and include company policies, management practices, control, interpersonal relationships, working conditions, salary, status and security.

Table Hygiene factors according to Herzberg.

According to Herzberg, all these elements, if unfavorable, can cause a person to feel dissatisfied or dissatisfied with work. At the same time, the good state of these factors will not lead to high motivation of workers, but will only cause a lack of dissatisfaction.

Another set of needs (which, according to Herzberg's research, were behind the factors determining people's satisfaction with their work) is associated with the unique human characteristic- the ability for self-actualization, achievement and psychological growth. It is common for a person to look for ways of self-realization in all areas of his life, and work is one of the most important areas. The conditions in which he performs his work cannot provide him with high satisfaction. Opportunities for growth appear only when there are growth factors in the work environment. Growth factors (which are internal to work), or motivators, are:

1. Achievements. The achievement factor was most often found in descriptions related to the experience of high satisfaction (41%). The stories in this group are centered on facts. successful completion work assignment, solving new labor problems, introducing new systems. The achievement factor can serve as a source of positive feelings regardless of recognition.

2. Recognition is the second most frequently mentioned factor, appearing in a third of the stories associated with a positive attitude towards work (33%). Sources of recognition can be: management, colleagues, clients or subordinates. An important aspect the effectiveness of recognition in creating positive attitude in work is the presence of some kind of achievement, that is, recognition associated with the experience of high satisfaction is rarely found without an accompanying achievement.

4. Responsibility. These included topics such as being able to work without constant supervision from superiors, being able to take responsibility for one's own actions, becoming responsible for the work being done by others, and taking on more responsible work without formal promotion. career ladder.

5. Promotion up the career ladder. Promotion in terms of increased satisfaction is often associated for respondents with a feeling of professional and personal growth, recognition, success and responsibility.

Herzberg showed that of all the factors contributing to job satisfaction, 81% were motivators, and of all the factors contributing to employee dissatisfaction with their jobs, 69% were hygiene factors.

Summarizing the results of his research, Herzberg made a number of conclusions:

1. Poor hygiene factors lead to job dissatisfaction.

2. A good state of motivators can only partially and incompletely compensate for the unfavorable state of hygiene factors.

3. Under normal conditions, a good state of hygiene factors is perceived as natural and does not have a motivating effect.

4. The maximum positive motivational impact is achieved with the help of a good state of motivators with a satisfactory state of hygiene factors.

Unlike Maslow's theory, Herzberg's two-factor theory does not imply a hierarchical organization of motives (needs), that is, true (internal) motivation, the desire of an employee to work with full dedication, according to Herzberg, does not depend on the satisfaction of hygienic needs. Herzberg writes: “It must be remembered that two groups of factors work to satisfy the employee’s needs, but it is the “motivators” that are the main sources of job satisfaction and cause the very improvements in productivity and quality of work that industry is trying to achieve from work force. By satisfying the hygiene needs of the employee, we can only hope to eliminate the possibility of disappointment in work and a decrease in the quality of work performed."

Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation allowed us to draw the following conclusions for management practice:

1. Many organizations, concerned about making fuller use of the human resources at their disposal, go to great expense in order to create good conditions for work, believing that in this way they can increase employee satisfaction with their work in the organization and increase their motivation. However, it should be borne in mind that such a policy can only achieve a reduction in employee dissatisfaction with their work, eliminating sources that can cause this dissatisfaction.

2. To effectively influence the motivation of workers, to increase their willingness to work hard in the interests of the organization, it is necessary not only to address hygiene factors, but also to influence workers through factors related to the group of motivators, creating better conditions to recognize achievements, professional and job growth, offering more responsible, promising and meaningful work.

Herzberg proposed a way to move from "hygiene" to motivation through a process he called "job enrichment." He assumes that the only way to motivate workers is to make work more meaningful and interesting for workers. If the work they do is boring and uninteresting, then it needs to be enriched.

The approaches of Maslow, Alderfer and Herzberg essentially have a single basic structure: the main elements of each theory are based on the same questions, but grouped differently.

Herzberg's two factor theory:

According to Herzberg's two-factor model, there are:

• hygiene factors- these are the factors that force employees to stay in this particular job rather than look for another. In other words, these are the factors that force an employee to wake up in the morning and go to our company, and not think about where to find a better job.
• motivating factors - these are the factors that directly motivate the employee, i.e. they force you to do your job better, faster, they force you to come up with something, modernize it, optimize it.

Herzberg's most paradoxical discovery is that money (salary, bonuses) is a hygienic factor! That is, according to Herzberg’s motivational model, money does not motivate people.

What then motivates?

Herzberg's two-factor model

So, salary is not a motivating factor. Motivating factors are recognition, interesting tasks, professional growth, learning opportunities, and responsibility.

On the other hand, hygiene factors are salary, convenience workplace, relationships in the team.

Herzberg's theories in practice

In practice, when building a motivation system or simply when setting tasks for an employee, knowledge of Herzberg’s theory of two factors can be very useful. For example, if you want your sales manager to show more initiative, it is better to send him to courses or give him more responsibility. Simply raising his salary will not increase his motivation.

Two-factor (motivational-hygienic) theory of F. Herzberg

Herzberg's theory was derived from a study involving 200 engineers and accountants. They were all asked two questions: “Can you describe in detail a time when you feel exceptionally good at work?” and “Can you describe in detail when you feel exceptionally bad at work?”

Herzberg found two clearly distinguishable groups of needs in the responses.

He called the first hygienic or supporting factors. This group included those factors or conditions in the absence of which employees did not receive job satisfaction. These hygiene factors include company and management policies, relationships with superiors, working conditions, size wages, relationships with colleagues, personal life, status and security. These factors are only valuable if the employee also receives an additional reward upon completion of the job.

Herzberg called the second group of factors motivators or satisfiers. These are working conditions under which a high level of employee motivation and job satisfaction is achieved. In the absence of these conditions, it is impossible to obtain any effective motivation, no satisfaction. Motivators include goal achievement, recognition, work itself, responsibility, promotion and opportunities for personal growth.

So, Herzberg's works provide evidence that there are two completely various types factors that can cause the desired goal-directed behavior:

1. Hygiene factors, at best, can produce only a satisfactory level of motivation.

2. Motivators can be used to stimulate more high level motivation if hygiene needs, in turn, sufficiently satisfied.

The main implication of the two-factor theory is that managers must be very careful not to emphasize hygiene factors as primary ones when satisfying needs when lower-level needs have already been sufficiently satisfied. Conversely, managers should not waste time and money offering their employees various motivators before hygiene needs are satisfied.

Perhaps the most surprising and unexpected discovery obtained as a result of Herzberg's research was the fact that money was clearly classified as a hygiene factor, and not at all a motivator. Money has important for most employees, both because of their purchasing power and because of the status that their owner has. However, managers do themselves and their organizations a disservice when they perceive money as the perfect means to satisfy all the needs that employees may have.

Managers who are trying to develop a job enrichment program should keep in mind six conditions necessary for their success:

1. People should regularly learn about the positive and negative results of their work.

2. They must set their own work schedule.

3. They need to be given opportunities for psychological growth.

4. They must bear a certain financial responsibility.

5. They should be able to communicate openly and pleasantly with superiors at all levels of management.

6. They must be accountable for the performance of the area they control.

Motivation according to Herzberg should be perceived as a probabilistic process. What motivates this person in a particular situation may have no effect on him at another time or on another person in a similar situation. Therefore, Herzberg's theory does not take into account many variables that determine situations related to the motivation of work activity. In order to explain the mechanism of motivation, it is necessary to consider numerous aspects of people’s behavior in the process of activity and parameters environment. The implementation of this approach led to the creation of process theories of motivation.

Herzberg's two-factor theory

Herzberg's theory suggests a strong relationship between job performance and job satisfaction. Herzberg believed that a person's attitude towards his work is determined by two groups of factors. The first group includes hygiene factors, in the second - motivating. Hygiene factors relate to the external environment in which work is performed; motivating - with the content of the work itself.

According to the two-factor theory, negative hygiene factors cause job dissatisfaction in a person. However, if these factors are positive, then by themselves they do not cause a state of satisfaction and cannot motivate a person to productive work. Research conducted by Herzberg allowed him to establish that the main hygienic factors are: favorable working conditions; stable salary; a good relationship with your boss, colleagues and subordinates; openness of information about the state of affairs in the organization; flexible pace and work schedule; lack of strict current control; availability of social benefits.

Unlike hygiene factors, the absence or inadequacy of motivating factors does not lead to job dissatisfaction. But their presence causes job satisfaction and motivates workers to improve the efficiency of their work. According to Herzberg, the main motivating factors are: the opportunity for career growth; connection of rewards with labor results; creative nature of the work; complexity of the problems being solved; participation in decision making; high degree responsibility.

For effective use Herzberg's theory in practice, the manager must first find out whether employees have a feeling of dissatisfaction. If there is such a feeling, then the manager needs to eliminate the sources of dissatisfaction, making every effort to ensure the proper level of hygiene factors. Then, to motivate subordinates to work productively, the manager must put in place motivating factors that increase the person's job satisfaction.

All 4 considered theories of motivation focus on the analysis of the factors underlying motivation, but a person’s motivation depends not only on these factors, but also on the motivational process itself, on time, and the duration of the motivational impact. Thus, theories of motivation were complemented by theories of the motivation process.

1. Theory of Justice (Stacy Adams)

According to this theory, employees always compare the remuneration received for their work with the remuneration of other people doing similar work. The prerequisite for such a comparison is a person’s desire for social equality.

If an employee believes that his work contribution is valued approximately in the same way as other people who have achieved similar results, then he develops a feeling fair treatment towards yourself and a feeling of satisfaction. Equality of remuneration is determined by the employee subjectively based on the ratio of labor costs and a generalized assessment of one’s labor contribution. IN labor costs an employee usually includes not only direct work in the workplace, but also previous labor efforts associated with obtaining education and advanced training, work experience, social status, abilities, age, etc. In its turn, assessment of labor contribution contains both a material part in the form of salaries, bonuses, profit sharing, and an intangible part - in the form of official position, recognition of merit, trusting relationship, respect and other similar positive reinforcements.

If an employee comes to the conclusion that his labor contribution is undervalued in comparison with the labor contribution of the people whom he has chosen as an object of comparison, then he experiences a feeling of injustice and psychological stress.

To relieve this tension, people use the following methods: reducing labor effort; an attempt to increase remuneration; adjusting ideas about justice; reassessment of one's capabilities; moving to another job.

Research shows that in most cases, when people perceive their work to be undervalued, they reduce their effort. A third option is also possible - when the employee considers that his labor contribution is overvalued. In this case, he can increase the intensity of labor efforts and the quality of work, try to get additional education and even take steps to reduce the amount of rewards you receive.

The theory of justice allows us to draw several important conclusions for management practice:

· the remuneration system must give each employee a clear idea of ​​the connection between wages and the quantity and quality of labor at various workplaces;

· information about one-time remunerations must be complete and accessible;

· evaluation of rewards by people is subjective, so managers must find out to what extent certain rewards correspond to the employee’s ideas about their value;

· remuneration amounts must be balanced with the labor contribution of individual employees.

2. Expectancy theory (Victor Vroom)

The author of the theory believed that the presence of an active need is not a determining condition for motivating an individual to achieve a certain goal. The individual must also expect that the type of behavior he chooses will lead to the result he desires.

Expectations reflect a person’s ideas about the likelihood of a certain event occurring.

For example, students typically expect that graduating from university will enable them to get a good job.

According to expectancy theory, a person is motivated to work productively if he expects three relationships to be realized:

· Labor inputs - labor results. A person expects that a certain level of effort will lead to certain work results.

· Labor results - reward. A person expects that the results of work will contribute to receiving rewards.

· Reward - satisfaction with reward. A person expects that the reward for the results of his work will have a certain value for him.

An individual's expectations depend on his life experience, education, analytical skills, self-confidence, qualifications and a number of other factors. The probabilistic nature of expectations has a direct impact on the behavior of employees in the organization. Almost every one of them asks themselves the following questions:

· how intensely does he have to work to achieve certain results?

What is the probability of achieving them?

· what reward is he likely to receive if he achieves these results?

How attractive is this reward for him?

By answering these questions, the employee assesses the probability of the occurrence of the corresponding event and determines for himself how intensively he must work for this event to occur. If he feels that there is no direct connection between the intensity of the effort expended and the occurrence of desired events, then, according to the theory of expectations, his motivation to work will weaken.

A feature of expectancy theory is its emphasis on individuality human perception. The level of labor effort of an individual is determined by him on the basis own assessment the likelihood of achieving the desired work results and his own ideas about the desired reward within the framework of his existing personal scale of values. Therefore, managers must:

· Firstly, achieve compliance between the expectations of subordinates and the requirements of specific work assignments;

· Secondly, introduce remuneration systems that encourage workers to achieve the required results.

Control function

The concept of control comes from the French language and there is no complete semantic analogue in the Russian language. The translation allows for the following interpretation of the concept of “control”: 1. Checking someone or something to ensure compliance with something; 2. Supervision, observation for verification purposes; 3. Testing knowledge or properties to determine their suitability in practice.

Control is carried out through special structures endowed with special control powers.

From a management point of view, control is the privilege of the subject of management, i.e. control subsystem. The control effect of control is manifested primarily in the fact that under its influence the behavior of the controlled subsystem changes within the framework of a given goal, the requirements of standards, and programs.

During historical development control as a management function, a certain category of people gradually formed - social layer those who were professionally involved in control activities. In Russia, the first mentions of control as a special type of management activity date back to the 50s of the 16th century, when the Order of Secret Affairs was created; this order was given the role of monitoring the implementation of job responsibilities, checking their activities. And at the beginning of the 17th century, the position of controller first appeared in Russia; the position was established in the St. Petersburg port customs office to control the collection of trade duties. Interesting fact is that Peter I, when establishing the forest guard, ordered the controllers’ salaries to be minimal, because the position of a thief. Today, a huge number of civil servants perform the control function, however, it is known from real management practice that the implementation of any legal norms, for example legislation, leaves much to be desired.

Essential features of control or why it is needed.

There are several reasons that determine the emergence, need and development of control in various areas of life. These reasons primarily include uncertainty external environment and risks, Related further development and the functioning of the control system. The very explanation of the phenomenon of uncertainty in the management environment may include factors such as scientific and technical progress, development legislative framework, various random fluctuations in people's life. The situation of uncertainty is expressed very pessimistically in Murphy's laws: if something bad can happen, it will certainly happen. Thus, the reason for the appearance of control is:

1. Environmental uncertainty(factors: laws, competition, state of social and cultural values). Uncertainty factors constantly influence plans and programs for the development of any management system. In order to promptly respond to changes in the external environment and take adequate measures, management needs the necessary analysis of the influencing variables and assessment of these variables.

2. Uncertainty associated with the operation of other control systems. Competitive influence always puts pressure on the management system, forcing it to constantly monitor its development.

3. Uncertainty of people's values ​​and behavior. Development plans and programs are adopted and developed by people. A person always adheres to the behavior that is preferable for him and does not always meet the requirements of labor discipline, instructions, etc.

Control in a management system is the process by which managers monitor the activities of the management system and ensure that these activities comply with specified goals and plans.

Control in the control system is carried out using direct and feedback connections between the subject and the control object.

 Direct connections exert direct control over the control object.

 Feedbacks carry certain information about the validity of the measures and control procedures taken, about the behavior and interests of the control object.

Establishing standards and criteria for the management system, which are selected at the planning stage from numerous goals and development strategies; Standards are measurable indicators that can be used to determine how far the management system has progressed in achieving the planned goal;

Collection, processing and analysis of information about the actual state of affairs. The method can be applied here scientific observation for employees, collection of statistical information reflecting the dynamics of controlled indicators, oral and written reports;

Comparison of the obtained data with planned indicators, regulations and standards;

Identification of deviations, violations and analysis of the reasons for their occurrence;

Development of a system of corrective actions and measures in order to change the behavior of an object within a given goal. Based on an analysis of actual results with established standards, the manager chooses one of 3 options for corrective actions: do nothing; take measures to bring actual indicators in accordance with standards (such measures may be: reorganization of the structure of the management system, redistribution of work assignments, modernization of production, retraining of personnel); review standards.

Effectively organized control is, first of all, aimed at efficiency, which means that its main features should be the following:

 compliance with the work performed;

 timeliness;

 profitability;

 simplicity;

 result orientation;

 it is people’s voluntary compliance with certain restrictions that regulate behavior. M. Weber believed that people voluntarily observe certain restrictions on freedom of action because they believe in the legitimacy of the existing system of power.

 Interrelation of control and responsibility. This relationship suggests the existence of 2 types of control: negative - comes down only to the detection of errors and the requirement to correct them, and positive - a system of control activities aimed at preventing possible deviations from given standards.

As a category of management theory, control is a special type of management relations that begin to form at the moment of legal consolidation of the subject of management and includes: collection and processing of information about the trajectory of the controlled object, comparing it with given parameters, identifying deviations, analyzing the causes of deviations and adopting corrective measures. influences.

Based this understanding essence of control, we can distinguish the following types of control according to the form of implementation in the management system:

1. Preliminary control is carried out before the actual commencement of actions and focuses on:

Human Resources ( professional knowledge, skills, qualifications, health status),

Material resources(establishing quality standards for materials used in the production of goods or services);

Financial resources(budgeting, setting cost limits for specific types activities).

2. Current control is carried out during the work. There are 2 types: directing current control - allows you to constantly monitor and manage the progress of actions or various operations; filtering current control – allows you to install intermediate “filters”, after passing which the action can be stopped or continued.

3. Final control – control based on results. Carried out when the work is completed based on a comparison of its results and various characteristics With existing standards control. This type of control provides management with information about the degree of realism of the plans they have drawn up, allows them to analyze problems and make adjustments to new plans; assess the degree of efficiency of various departments and distribute rewards based on the results of work.

In management practice, formal and real control are also distinguished.

Formal control - is carried out to maintain external form, order, is focused on private, individual elements in the structure of the object of control, evaluates completed activities.

Real control is control of genuine conditions of reality, facts, focused on the entire object of control as a whole and its development in the future.