Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory of Motivation in Office Space
Analysis by. Mustapha Hasnain
Part 1
“So, where’s the motivation?”, Peter Gibbons – Office Space
The first theory I am using is Herzberg’s Two-Factor Theory found in Chapter 5, and is one of many theories that describe how employees are motivated. This theory states that “job satisfaction results from the presence of intrinsic motivators and that job dissatisfaction stems from not having extrinsic factors”. Intrinsic motivators, also called satisfiers, are related to the job content and are comprised of “feelings of achievement, meaningful work, opportunities for advancement, increase in responsibility, recognition, and opportunities for growth”.
According to Herzberg, if these conditions are present in a work environment and in employees, “they build strong levels of motivation that result in good job performance”. The more these factors are present, the higher is an employee’s job satisfaction. Extrinsic motivators, also called dissatisfiers or hygiene factors, are related to “the job context” and include “pay, status, job security, working conditions, fringe benefits, policies and procedure, and interpersonal relations.” Although the presence of these conditions does not necessarily motivate an employee, their absence results in dissatisfaction. Thus, the less of these factors present, the higher an employee’s job dissatisfaction.
This theory is considered to be the “most criticized” out of all the other motivation theories. Some of the reasons being: a limited sample of professions was used in developing it; oversimplification of the causes of job satisfaction; and it “requires people to look at themselves retrospectively”. Nonetheless, this theory is still used by academics and researchers. I find the theory to be very useful due to its simple and logical application in describing job satisfaction.
Part 2
“Human beings were not meant to sit in little cubicles staring at computer screens all day, filling out useless forms and listening to eight different bosses drone on about mission statements.”, Peter Gibbons – Office Space
The plot description taken from Yahoo Movies tells us: “Peter Gibbons is an office drone like many others, and he hates his routine life. One day, the occupational therapist who was hypnotizing him keels over dead, leaving him with a permanently altered attitude. Asked to come in on weekends, he responds by coming in only when he wants to, playing games on his computer and moving furniture to give himself a better view. But instead of firing him, the company takes this oddness as evidence of his managerial potential.”
The critical part of the movie required to watch starts approximately 33 minutes into the movie and ends when the scene completes with Peter leaving. In the scene Peter is being interviewed by the consultants who are going to decided whether or not Peter should be fired. Due to his hypnosis, Peter very honestly and openly answers any questions about this job. Just to further understand the context, its worth mentioning Peter’s job. In another scene in the movie he says that he is a programmer who’s “updating bank software for the 2000 switch.” He sits in a cubicle all day and is usually required to come in on weekends to work. Although you do not need to watch the whole movie to understand the analysis, I would recommend it because it will help create a much clearer sense of my application of the theory.
Part 3
“So I was sitting in my cubicle today, and I realized, ever since I started working, every single day of my life has been worse than the day before it. So that means that every single day that you see me, that's on the worst day of my life.”, Peter Gibbons – Office Space
Herzberg’s motivation theory can clearly be seen in the interview scene. Our lead character can be categorized as having high job dissatisfaction, stemming from a lack of extrinsic factors, and low job satisfaction stemming from a lack of intrinsic factors. In other words, he rates negatively on both scales.
In terms of intrinsic factors, Peter does not have meaningful work. His job requires him to go through mundane data and is very boring. The fact that he “spaces out” constantly during his job, and only does about 15 minutes of “real actual work” in a week, definitely points to a lack of meaningful work. The type of work that Peter does, making TPS reports and looking through codes of data, we can tell that he has no real feeling of achievement, responsibility, or recognition. Although there are factors from Herzberg’s theory that we can not directly see, we can definitely infer that they are not present or are weak such as opportunities for advancement and growth. Even if they were there, from Peter’s attitude it seems he believes that he is doomed to sit in a cubicle for the rest of his life.
In terms of extrinsic factors, although we do not know about Peter’s pay, it’s most likely not very high. One of the key points that Peter makes is that he “works his ass off” and if the organization “ships a few extra units” due to it, he doesn’t “see another dime”. Then he asks, “so where’s the motivation?” Thus, in line with Herzberg’s theory, Peter is dissatisfied because of a lack of an extrinsic factor. Also, job security is fairly low, considering that these consultants are going to decide Peter’s fate; he knows that he could be easily fired. Ironically he says that his only motivation to work is the fear of losing his job. Policies and procedures, and interpersonal relations are also clearly very poor, as Peter says that whenever he makes a mistake, he has 8 bosses who come and tell him about it. All of these factors lead to a poor status and working conditions at the job. Initech is really presented as one of the worst places to work.
Despite the criticisms of Herzberg’s theory, we can clearly see that this simple approach can in fact give a deep understanding of what can motivate employees. One of the criticisms is that the theory “requires people to look at themselves retrospectively”. In Peter’s case, he does have a good understanding of himself and what would motivate him. One could argue that its Peter’s personality that makes him hate the job, and that it is not really related to intrinsic or extrinsic motivators. To some extent this is probably true. However, from Peter’s answers to the interview, we can infer that intrinsic and extrinsic motivators play a very strong role in an individual’s perception of their work and organization. Thus regardless of Peter’s personality, intrinsic and extrinsic motivators greatly affect his perception of Initech and his work. Overall, Peter’s situation greatly helps in understanding Herzberg’s Two-Factor theory of motivation.