SA4 - Two-Factor Profile
1. What were your results?
Instructions:
On each of the following dimensions, distribute a total of 10 points between the two options. 1. Very responsible job ( 6 ) . ( 4 ) Job security
2. Recognition for work accomplishments ( 7 ) . ( 3 ) Good relations with co-workers
3. Advancement opportunities at work ( 7 ) . ( 3 ) A boss who knows his/her job well
4. Opportunities to grow and learn on the job ( 5 ) . ( 5 ) Good working and conditions
5. A job that I can do well in ( 6 ) . ( 4 ) Supportive rules, policies of employer
6. A prestigious or high-status job ( 1 ) . ( 9 ) A high base wage or salary
Scoring:
Summarize your total scores for all items in the left-hand column and write …show more content…
This shows how important job content is to you.
The “HF” score indicates the relative importance that you place on hygiene or dissatisfier factors in Herzberg’s two-factor theory. This shows how important job context is to you.
2. Do you agree with the assessment? Why or why not?
Motivators create positive satisfaction by the job’s ability to provide recognition and achievement (positive reinforcement), while hygiene factors are described as the working conditions and interpersonal relations within an environment. With this being said, I agree with the assessment because although these two factors are independent from each other, I value a fairly balanced scale of importance on both factors. I can see criticism that may arise due to the subjectivity of perception regarding an individual 's emotions, moods, and behaviors, especially within a work environment. Also, another key realization I kept in mind while writing this assessment was that how the two-factor theory must assume that a cheerful worker or employee is a more productive one, yet in the previous chapter the book states, “Even though some evidence exists for the satisfaction-causes-performance relationship among professional or higher-level employees, the best conclusion is that job satisfaction alone is not a consistent predictor of individual work performance.
1. What were your results?
Instructions:
On each of the following dimensions, distribute a total of 10 points between the two options. 1. Very responsible job ( 6 ) . ( 4 ) Job security
2. Recognition for work accomplishments ( 7 ) . ( 3 ) Good relations with co-workers
3. Advancement opportunities at work ( 7 ) . ( 3 ) A boss who knows his/her job well
4. Opportunities to grow and learn on the job ( 5 ) . ( 5 ) Good working and conditions
5. A job that I can do well in ( 6 ) . ( 4 ) Supportive rules, policies of employer
6. A prestigious or high-status job ( 1 ) . ( 9 ) A high base wage or salary
Scoring:
Summarize your total scores for all items in the left-hand column and write …show more content…
This shows how important job content is to you.
The “HF” score indicates the relative importance that you place on hygiene or dissatisfier factors in Herzberg’s two-factor theory. This shows how important job context is to you.
2. Do you agree with the assessment? Why or why not?
Motivators create positive satisfaction by the job’s ability to provide recognition and achievement (positive reinforcement), while hygiene factors are described as the working conditions and interpersonal relations within an environment. With this being said, I agree with the assessment because although these two factors are independent from each other, I value a fairly balanced scale of importance on both factors. I can see criticism that may arise due to the subjectivity of perception regarding an individual 's emotions, moods, and behaviors, especially within a work environment. Also, another key realization I kept in mind while writing this assessment was that how the two-factor theory must assume that a cheerful worker or employee is a more productive one, yet in the previous chapter the book states, “Even though some evidence exists for the satisfaction-causes-performance relationship among professional or higher-level employees, the best conclusion is that job satisfaction alone is not a consistent predictor of individual work performance.