Buffs In Chucks

„Success is neither magical nor mysterious. Success is the natural consequence of consistently applying basic fundamentals.“ – Jim Rohn

Anyone who occasionally reads employer reviews on platforms like Kununu or Glassdoor will, in addition to the usual complaints about the incompetence of leaders, also stumble upon such statements.

"Great Christmas parties and team building events! Unfortunately, the salary is often late and incorrect. Not recommended." 

The CEO is surprised by this review, after all, they spent 100,000 euros on the Christmas party, and everyone had so much fun at the go-kart event during the last team building! It is known that the external payroll processing at the tax consultant does not always run smoothly. But when the salary is not on time, it's usually only a maximum of three days late. That's really not dramatic... or is it? 

Curtain up for Frederick Herzberg! 

The Two-Factor Theory

The 1950s were a goldmine of leadership and management research. Many things that are presented today in a new form by Simon Sinek & Co were already known in the 1950s. Frederick Herzberg, Peter Drucker, Elton Mayo, they all dealt with the question of how to lead people in order to significantly influence work motivation.

In this buff, we focus on Frederick Herzberg, but we will definitely revisit Peter Drucker in the future. Herzberg is known for two things: the term "Job Enrichment" and the "Two-Factor Theory". Less known is the fact that he was part of the group of soldiers who liberated the Dachau concentration camp during World War II. This profound experience is said to have significantly contributed to Herzberg's later dedication to the topics of mental health and motivation.

We are also dealing with this topic today. And as is usual with Buffs, we will draw a diagram for better visualization:


When discussing employee motivation, the immediate question that comes to mind is what needs to be done to motivate them. Admittedly, this is an important question, yet it is only of secondary interest. When dealing with employee motivation, we must first address what needs to be done to avoid demotivating the workforce. -- 

Hygiene Factors

When the focus is on identifying potential demotivators, hygiene factors come into play. Hygiene factors are elements that cannot motivate, even if they are abundantly available. However, they can have a strong demotivating influence if they do not meet expectations. On a "motivation axis," they have a ceiling and cannot go beyond a certain level. Even with perfect implementation, they do not have the potential to motivate. But when looking in the opposite direction, they can bring motivation down to zero. 

Herzberg thought of a hospital when naming these factors. Especially good hygiene cannot heal a patient, but a lack of hygiene can make patients sick or even cost lives. 

I personally prefer the comparison with a hotel: Imagine someone has booked a hotel room for their vacation. As a hotel guest, one expects hygiene in a hotel. One expects the bed linen to be clean and the bathroom to be tidy. Few people will excitedly report after their vacation that these standards were met. Conversely, if the standard of a fundamentally clean hotel room is not met, the issue of cleanliness quickly becomes much more significant and the feedback will accordingly be negative. 

In this case, it doesn't matter how large the pool is or whether the hotel offers tennis courts and a spa area. All the investments made by the hotel operator in these amenities are nullified if there is a fundamental flaw in the organization of housekeeping. Mistakes can happen, but like with a plane crash, it's not a single error that leads to disaster, but a chain of errors. Was there cost-cutting in housekeeping, resulting in overwhelmed staff, or was there negligence in staff selection? Perhaps the mishap could have been prevented with investments in better planning software, or maybe this part of the organization should not have been outsourced to an external staffing service.

From this fictional example back to the world of work, where we encounter hygiene factors everywhere. Some of the most well-known include: 

• Salary
• Job Security (in terms of risk of job loss)
• Physical Work Safety
• Cleanliness at the Workplace
• General Organization (e.g., Payroll Processing)
• Work-Life Balance

And these are just a few examples; there are many more. 

The aspect of "Salary as a Hygiene Factor" is particularly interesting. When considering "Compensation & Benefits," the discussion usually revolves around base salaries, bonus systems, and fringe benefits. While bonus systems and fringe benefits are intended to have a motivating role, it is the base salary that must meet long-term expectations. 

A brief excursion into salary negotiations for employers (Extra buff!):
If the base salary of a person is set too low at the time of hiring or promotion, that person will either not accept the job or become highly dissatisfied after a short period. The likelihood is high that they will start looking for new employment or accept another offer as soon as the next headhunter approaches. 

Offering more than what the person has defined as a fair salary will not make them more motivated. With a "too high" salary offer, you merely raise their threshold for discomfort. Such an employee will think five times before changing jobs, even if they are dissatisfied with their work. In HR terminology, often macabre, such employees are referred to as "Dead Wood." Like a dead part of a tree, they are still present but no longer useful to the tree. While a too high salary can retain employees in the long term, it does not lead to increased performance or output. Therefore, a "too high" salary is not only inefficient but also carries the additional risk of binding poor performers to the company long-term. 

The best strategy is actually quite straightforward: Ask what salary the person would be satisfied with for the job. Asking what people need to get by and what salary they consider fair for the task often works wonders. The occasional "It could always be a bit more" can be met with a smile. Those who maintain a good relationship with their employees and are careful in personnel selection will likely receive a fairly realistic salary expectation. I have started to always ask this question directly. If the expectation seems unjustified, it can be rejected. The resulting demotivation would manifest itself in the long run anyway. Goals can also be set that need to be achieved to receive the desired salary. Most people will appreciate being asked, and it gives the employer an opportunity to explain why they do not share the expectation. If no good reason can be found why the salary expectations are too high, perhaps they aren't *wink*. End of the extra buff and back to the hygiene factors.

Even seemingly trivial matters, such as the proper execution of payroll, carry more weight than one might think. In addition to concerns about long-term job security, it's one of the main reasons people leave startups. I've heard it multiple times in job interviews as a reason why applicants, after just a few months at a startup, are already looking for new employment. The salary was not paid regularly, often it was miscalculated, or in some cases, it was not paid at all for 2-3 months. 

So, when sitting in a meeting pondering over "Employee Retention," one should first discuss the hygiene factors. It's essential to ensure that these aspects are in order, that they meet a standard with which the workforce is satisfied. By maintaining this standard, I typically retain a good portion of my employees. However, if I "overinvest" in these areas, I act inefficiently, wasting time and money, because as hygiene factors, they have a ceiling of motivation they cannot surpass.

Motivators

When we talk about motivators, they are indeed more abstract and can vary from person to person. In the context of your hotel example, motivators for a good review could include the wonderful pianist, the exceptional SPA area, the unique amenities like the aroma saunas and complimentary beverages, the exciting 100-meter waterslide, and the convenient free shuttle service with luxury buses to the airport. These are the things that guests might enthusiastically share with their friends after a great vacation experience. While cleanliness may also be mentioned by someone (depending on "personal expectations" - more on that later), it might not trigger the same level of excitement.

Herzberg defined the following motivators:

• Success
• Recognition
• Work Content
• Responsibility
• Career Opportunities
• Personal Growth

Observing my two-year-old son and what motivates and excites him has led me to choose the topic of motivation for this buff. These observations have prompted me to ask myself what would inspire the child within me. 

It's exactly the same things that Herzberg describes as motivators and that make my child's eyes light up: discovering new things, mastering challenging tasks, receiving attention and praise, as well as genuine recognition from the most important people around us. And sometimes, it's simply motivating to have a bit of fun. 

When we apply these points to the workplace, it becomes self-evident what needs to be done to motivate employees, and also oneself, to perform better, generate more output, and achieve more. 

Personal growth, career advancement, and similar topics deserve their own buffs. Therefore, today, we'll focus on success and recognition.

Success is a positive upward spiral and almost magically leads to further successes. This applies to entire companies as well as individual people. Expressions like "success breeds success" and similar sayings have their basis in reality. It's a positive momentum, a wave of success. In such moments, as a leader, you are not highly challenged. Like being "happy," it's a sequence of short "highs," brief endorphin boosts that motivate us and give us a good feeling. However, it becomes more challenging when successes are scarce, or when working on a large project whose potential success is far off. In many jobs that involve a strategic component or focus on long-term quality improvement, these short "highs" are often absent. In such cases, it's up to the leader to ensure that successes can be achieved. 

The easiest way to achieve this is by setting milestone goals. Alternatively, you can assign smaller side tasks alongside the main task, as long as the workload doesn't distract too much from the core project. For employees in higher management with strategic responsibilities, it's advisable to always retain a certain level of operational involvement or temporarily take on a team member's task as a substitute. For someone in higher HR management, this could involve creating a new report that saves colleagues time or provides new data. Or even simpler, taking responsibility for filling an open position, even if it's no longer part of the primary duties. It not only shows the team that you're not too proud to engage in their work, but it also prevents you from getting rusty in the operational aspects of the business. The real highlight, though, is the feeling of success when you've successfully completed this small project.

We don't just want to explain the Two-Factor Theory in this buff; we also aim to expand on the theory. The topic of recognition will assist us in doing that. 

 

The Three-Factor Theory

Recognition often isn't about money; it's about visibility. It's about being seen by the supervisor, the company, and colleagues. People with reasonably healthy self-esteem know when they've done something well. Some people may not always appreciate the work of others in the team enough, while others need to be reminded that their own contribution was essential. Deep down, however, one usually knows it. And this is where the Two-Factor Theory faces a dilemma: 

Recognition, in my opinion, is not only a motivator; it can also become a hygiene factor. According to the Two-Factor Theory, motivators cannot demotivate, and hygiene factors cannot motivate. However, can we really subscribe to this statement in practice? Can the lack of recognition not be demotivating in the long run? This makes recognition a "hybrid" factor. 

The crucial factor is personal expectations, graphically represented by the "we good" line.

This line is not static. Personal expectations can move flexibly up and down on the motivation axis. To make the story even more complex, it can also be set at different heights depending on who you're dealing with. For example, one person may place great importance on receiving recognition from their supervisor, but the significance of recognition for their achievements in their personal life may be much lower. 

However, time plays the most significant role. For hybrids, time gradually pushes the "we good" line upward. If the lack of recognition was not a demotivating factor at the beginning, it can increasingly lead to demotivation over time. Recognition now exhibits characteristics of a hygiene factor because its absence leads to a decrease in the quality of work compared to before. Personal expectations are crucial. If someone works significantly more than their colleagues and consistently delivers above-average results, their personal expectations for recognition can increase. Praise or a bonus payment can then have a motivating effect, but the absence of these rewards carries the risk of demotivation. 

We've described motivators as small "highs" that provide short-term motivation. According to the Two-Factor Theory, I could use these motivators infinitely if the budget allows, to keep people constantly highly motivated. However, there's the variable "we good" line, which shifts due to personal expectations. And that's precisely what happens with the inflationary use of motivators.

Each time we use a motivator too frequently, it shifts the expectation. The motivator runs the risk of taking on characteristics of a hygiene factor. If exceptional performance is not rewarded with the expected bonus or recognition next time, it can be demotivating. 

The existence of hybrids adds complexity, making the Two-Factor Theory essentially a Three-Factor Theory when we incorporate a time axis and consider the resulting shift in expectation.

Still reading? Good!

Summarized, we take three insights from this Buff: 

Master the fundamentals:  The timeline must always be taken into account. Motivators can achieve short-term highs and can encourage people to perform above average for a limited period. If motivators are used too frequently, expectations shift and they run the risk of becoming hybrids that take on the characteristics of hygiene factors. From this moment, I, as an employer, am in a position of obligation. Therefore, the use of motivators should be carefully considered and applied situationally and effectively.

The time factor always needs to be considered:With motivators, we achieve short-term highs, and they can encourage people to deliver above-average performance for a limited period. When motivators are used too frequently, the expectation shifts, and they risk becoming hybrids that take on characteristics of hygiene factors. From that moment, as an employer, I am in a position of obligation. Therefore, one should carefully consider the use of motivators and deploy them situationally and effectively. 

One should listen to the child within more often: It is often a better guide than we give it credit for.