HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT IN

EDUCATION

Assignment 1 – Literature Review

Intrinsic and extrinsic factors that contribute to teachers’

motivation and job satisfaction

29th October 2017

Word count: 1992 words
Abstract

This paper examines the factors that trigger motivation and lead to job satisfaction and
work performance in the educational context. A review of the most important findings
on the literature on content approaches of motivation theories are presented and
discussed.

The findings attained from the study show that both hygiene and motivator factors
were found to contribute to teachers’ job satisfaction and motivation. Specifically,
“personal growth” tends to be the leading intrinsic (motivator) factor, while
“performance feedback” was found to be the most dominant extrinsic (hygiene) factor.

The study clearly indicates that specific needs for job satisfaction and motivation
depends on a complex group of factors, the system of rewards and motivation tools
applied in educational institutions must be appropriately diversified to cater the
different needs of teachers.

I
Table of Contents

ABSTRACT I

CONTENTS II

INTRODUCTION 1

MOTIVATION AND JOB SATISFACTION 1

THEORETICAL BASE 2
MASLOW’S NEED HIERARCHY 2
HERZBERG TWO-FACTOR THEORY 3
DOUGLAS MCGREGOR X AND Y THEORY 5
LIMITATIONS OF THEORIES 6

CONCLUSION 7

REFERENCES 9

List of figures and tables

FIGURE 1 3

TABLE 1 4

II
Introduction

Motivation is an important element in improving work performance, every educational

institution must have a clear understanding of the relation between job satisfaction and
rewards. Understanding job satisfaction and work motivation can be determinant to
choose the most appropriate reward system in order to improve educational
productivity (Amzat et al., 2017, pp.78-97).

Many motivational theories have been put forward since Taylor’s theory of scientific
management argued that workers are mainly motivated by an extrinsic factor, pay
(Cosma & Gilceava 2014, p. 116). For the purpose of this literature review, the focus
will be on assessing intrinsic and extrinsic factors as contributors to teachers’
motivation. This paper will discuss and review three main content theories: Maslow ‘s
Need Hierarchy, Herzberg Two-factor theory and Douglas McGregor X and Y theory.

It will present the results of recent studies in the educational sector using these
motivational theories. These results will be used to ascertain the main factors that
contribute to teachers’ motivation and job satisfaction.

Motivation and job satisfaction

This literature review attempts to examine intrinsic and extrinsic factors that contribute
to the teacher’s sense of satisfaction and dissatisfaction. It would then be appropriate
to look at the meaning of motivation and job satisfaction.

A motive is what prompts a person to act in a particular manner and motivation can be
defined as the direction of behaviour (Peters, 1956, p.118-124), the forces within a
person that pushes to satisfy basic needs. The level of those needs will determine the
type of rewards needed to satisfy an employee. According to Maslow (1954, pp. 77-
96), satisfied needs will create no motivation, only the needs that are unsatisfied will
generate tension and therefore, motivation.

There are two distinctive factors of motivation: intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic
motivated people are driven by an internal impulse, the process of achieving produces

1
satisfaction. On the other hand, extrinsic motivated people are inspired by an external
stimulus offered in exchange for obtaining the goal (Deci & Gagne, 2005, p.331).
Internal and external stimuli take the form of rewards, the main difference between
them is the tangibility of those incentives. Intrinsic rewards are usually highly
subjective whereas extrinsic rewards tend to be much more tangible.

The employee’s feelings, perceptions, emotions and behaviour towards the job can be
defined as job satisfaction (Locke & Latham, 2002, p. 712), which anticipates to high
productivity. On the other hand, job dissatisfaction causes low levels of productivity,
revenue, and retention (Mustapha, 2013, pp. 244-248).

Job satisfaction and motivation are essential to increase work performance, hence,
the productivity of organizations. The school administration should have as a priority
to know teacher’s motivators and how they lead to job satisfaction (Mullins, 2005, pp.
699-745).

Theoretical Base

Many researchers proposed an array of theories on how to motivate a company’s

employees. Since the aim is to determine the needs that contribute to teachers’
motivation and job satisfaction, the focus will be on three content theories of
motivation: Maslow ‘s Need Hierarchy, Herzberg Two-factor theory and Douglas
McGregor X and Y theory.

Maslow ‘s Need Hierarchy

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory (1970, p.37) claims that exists five levels of
human needs, both physiological and psychological (figure 1). The basic
(physiological) needs must be satisfied before being motivated by higher level
psychological needs. Maslow’s theory has been studied over time and three
categories of needs (cognitive needs, aesthetic needs, and transcendent needs) were
added to satisfy critics’ concerns about the inflexibility of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs
(Knight, 2013, p.45). Studies have confirmed that when all needs are met and levels

2
are achieved, employees will be satisfied and motivated, they will then, perform better
and show commitment to their employers (Tseng & Lee, 2011, p.97).

• Creativity, morality, acceptance,

spontaneity

• Confidence, achievement, respect,

self-esteem

• Friendship, relationships,
family

• Employment, health,
property, family,
resources
• Food, water,
sleep, sex,
breathing

Figure 1. Maslow’s Need Hierarchy adapted from Motivation and personality (p.37) by I. Maslow, 1970,
New York: Harper & Row.

In relation to teacher motivation, Maslow’s theory has been shown to produce

excellent learning outcomes and increase the level of academic achievement. A study
of the psychological and social factors of teachers’ motivation in Nigerian schools
(Nyam and William-west 2014, pp.1-8) showed that financial rewards will instigate
other levels, playing a significant role in the teacher’s performance. Teachers are more
committed in the classroom when they receive the highest amount of reward, whereas
an unmotivated teacher may not be as committed when the reward is low.

Herzberg Two-factor theory

Herzberg Two-factor theory (2008, pp.53-62) took Maslow’s notion of needs and
created a simplified version with two factors of motivation. The two-factor theory of
motivation states that money is a hygiene factor (dissatisfier), not a motivating factor
(satisfier). Herzberg proposed that motivators and hygiene factors ought to be present
for employees to be motivated. Hygiene or extrinsic factors are not sufficient to

3
motivate an employee’s performance, whereas, intrinsic conditions from motivators
factors make the job satisfying and more meaningful.

Motivators are the job indicators and factors that if delivered will satisfy or motivate but
if non-existent will not automatically dissatisfy (Herzberg 2008, pp.53-62). These
satisfiers involve achievement, autonomy, responsibility, recognition, and other
indicators presented in Table 1. When hygiene factors are existent will decrease
dissatisfaction. These dissatisfiers are incentives, salary, working conditions, etc.
(Latham, 2012, p.38).

Characteristics Criteria Indicator

Vocation
Need for Self-actualization
Work content
(Maslow 1970)
Possibility for growth
Responsibility
Possibility for making decisions
Motivators independently
Autonomy
Leading to
Age
satisfaction
Need for Esteem
(Herzberg 2008) (Maslow 1970) Status
Prestige
Education
Work experience
Position held
Recognition
Influence on others
Relationships with co-workers
Need for Love & Belonging Relationship with the manager
(Maslow 1970) Organizational policy and quality of
Hygiene factors management
Arrangement of different events
Leading to
Workplace guarantee
dissatisfaction Safety needs
(Herzberg 2008) (Maslow 1970) Quality of personal life
Help from the organization
Salary
Physiological needs
Incentives
(Maslow 1970)
Working conditions

Table 1. System of characteristics, criteria and indicators adapted from ‘Motivators of teacher Job
satisfaction’ by A. Juozaitiene, & B. Simonaitiene, 2011. Socialiniai Mokslai, 72 (2), 82

4
Performance feedback may be an important contributor to teacher motivation. A study
about job satisfaction and job performance of teachers in India mentioned in
Chamundeswari (2013, p.423), confirmed that there is a significant correlation
between job satisfaction and teaching performance. Similarly, a research conducted
on the job satisfaction of private sector university teachers in the region of Peshawar,
Pakistan (Islam & Ali 2013, pp.87-104), supported Herzberg’s two-factor theory
regarding motivators as the main factors leading to job satisfaction. The tertiary
teachers in the district of Peshawar expressed their satisfaction with aspects like
achievement, job appreciation, responsibility and promotion. The same study
demonstrated dissatisfaction with extrinsic factors such as salary and university’s
policies. According to Herzberg (2008, pp.53-62) both factors are needed in the
workplace for workers’ satisfaction and productivity. The Two-factor theory clearly
shows that motivators contribute to job satisfaction and encourage employees to be
more industrious.

Various researchers have also reported a correlation between extrinsic factors and job
satisfaction. In a case study by Wang and Tran (2015, pp.80-81) on job satisfaction
amongst Vietnamese secondary school teachers, it was apparent that teachers were
satisfied with some hygiene factors such as school policies, management, working
conditions, and professional development, but were dissatisfied with other extrinsic
aspects such as human relations, compensation, and the workplace competition. The
findings of this study indicated that extrinsic factors were linked to job satisfaction and
by increasing job satisfaction, teaching performance could improve.

Douglas McGregor X and Y theory

This theory relies on the Maslow’ hierarchy of needs theory, which states that the
managing approach can affect the employee’s motivation. In addition, McGregor’s
theory sees human beings in two ways, either theory X or theory Y. Theory X sees
employees as being lazy, unwilling to work, and hard to motivate. Under these
assumptions, this theory proposes that humans need to be controlled, threatened and
punished. Companies using theory X tend to be led by autocratic managers and
supervisors controlling every step and level to manage workers. As a result,
employees in this type of organization tend to be motivated by fear and feel
underappreciated (Mohamed & Nor, 2013, pp.716-717).

5
Theory Y seeks to increase employees’ growth, ensures that employees achieve the
goals through autonomy. In general, employees are considered to be positive under
this theory, and are allowed to maximize their gains and self-development within their
organizations (Seniwoliba & Nchorbono, 2013, pp.237-238). Theory Y declares that
workers need to be satisfied and motivated as per human nature, and does not
perceive them as being lazy and unproductive people, therefore, a manager Y does
not need to punish the workers in order to make them more productive.

Limitations of theories

Despite the contribution of Maslow, Herzberg and McGregor to organizational theory

and their explanations of the factors that motivate workers, some drawbacks have
been found.

McGregor’s X and Y theory has been generally seen as very hard to be used with
each other. While theory X has been heavily criticised as it promotes a very hostile
and distrustful environment, a manager’s attitude Y can influence the employees in a
way that increases their satisfaction and self-competence (Duricova & Sugerekova
2017, pp.36-44, Gurbuz, Sahin & Koksal 2015, pp.1888-1906). There have been only
three attempts to prove empirically the relationship between the managers’ attitudes
and behaviours of McGregor’s X and Y theory and job performance: Thomas &
Bostrom (2010, pp.1-20) and back in 1970s, Fiman (1973, pp.95-105) and Michaelsen
(1973, pp.226-245). In the three studies the findings showed negative correlations,
hence, they were not supportive of McGregor’s theory (Lawter, Kopelman & Prottas,
2015, p.85). Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs theory is widely accepted; however, it has
been difficult to apply due to its complex hierarchical levels and it has not received
much support by research evidence (Suyono & Mudjanarko, 2017, p.91).

Herzberg’s two-factor theory of motivation has been extensively used in job

satisfaction and dissatisfaction research since its inception in 1959. Many studies have
been carried out around the world using this theory, unfortunately, their findings have
been inconsistent. Teck-Hong and Waheed (2011, pp.89-90) found that sometimes

6
extrinsic factors such as income were found to be motivators and other times hygiene.
In another study among university teachers in Pakistan showed that university
teachers were satisfied with both motivators and hygiene factors and the latter led to
motivation (Ghazi, Shahzada & Khan, 2013, p.450).

Because of these inconsistencies, Herzberg’s two-factor theory has been criticized.

Arguably, most studies around the world on job satisfaction and motivation,
irrespective of the workplace, refers to Herzberg theory. However, it is worth
remembering that Herzberg’s theory was created and tested in the business context
of USA in the late 1950s. These discrepancies may occur because of the disregard to
cultural and geographical settings, the sample and the methodologies used.

Gender and age might also be relevant variables to be taken into account. Despite the
few studies on gender differences in the education sector. A study by Santhapparaj
and Alam (2005, p.75) showed that female teachers in Malaysian universities in the
private sector proved to have more job satisfaction in all the factors observed,
including extrinsic indicators such as working conditions and income than their male
colleagues. Teachers are also expected to be motivated in different ways at different
stages in their teaching careers (Lavigne, 2014, pp.37-38). The motivation factors and
interests will differ depending on the age and experience (Canrinus et al. 2012,
pp.127-128).

Conclusion

In this research, both extrinsic (hygiene) and intrinsic (motivator) factors were found
to contribute to the motivation and job satisfaction of teachers. Personal growth was
the leading factor among motivator factors, whereas performance feedback was found
to be the most dominant factor under hygiene. This research revealed that in general,
extrinsic factors were the leading variable. This indicates that the teachers’ personal
growth and performance feedback should be the priority if we want the teachers to be
motivated and satisfied in their schools.

7
It is important to mention that the specific needs for job satisfaction and motivation will
vary depending on a complex group of factors. Literature have shown that job
satisfaction and work performance will be different according to factors like age and
gender. The cultural and geographical context also plays an important role on the
factors for job satisfaction. This literature review showed that in some studies
conducted in Malaysia, Pakistan and India, good working conditions, and job security
have been reported to contribute to teacher motivation. These factors might not be
relevant if the same studies were conducted in a different geographical context. This
indicates that both intrinsic motivation (motivators) and extrinsic (hygiene) factors may
predict teachers’ job satisfaction. This relationship clearly contradicts Herzberg’s
theory, which predicts that job satisfaction could only be achieved by intrinsic factors
or motivators (Amzat et al., 2017, p.82).

Concluding the research theme of this paper, the system of rewards and motivation
tools applied in educational institutions must be appropriately diversified and
continuously updated in order to reflect the shifting motivations of the teaching
profession.

8
References

Amzat, I.U., Don,Y., Fauzee, S.O., Hussin,F., Raman, A. (2017) Determining

motivators and hygiene factors among excellent teachers in Malaysia: An experience
of confirmatory factor analysis, International Journal of Educational Management,
31(2), pp.78-97

Canrinus, E. T., Helms-Lorenz, M., Beijaard, D., Buitink, J., & Hofman, A. (2012). Self-
efficacy, job satisfaction, motivation and commitment: exploring the relationships
between indicators of teachers’ professional identity. European Journal of Psychology
of Education, 27, 115. Retrieved from
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10212-011-0069-2

Chamundeswari, S. (2013), “Job satisfaction and performance of school teachers”,

International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 3(5),
420-428.

Cosma, D., Gilceava, S.A. (2014). How important is money as an incentive to motivate
employees in higher education sector? Literature review. Annals of the Constantin
Brâncuş i, Economy Series, 2, 116-122.

Deci, E. & Gagne, M. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal
of Organizational Behavior, 26, 331-362

Durikova, L. & Sugerekova, T. (2017). A Manager ´s self-concept in the context of their

leadership style within McGregor´s theory. Človek a spoločnosť, 20(1), 36-44.

Fiman, B. G. (1973). An Investigation of the Relationships among Supervisory

Attitudes, Behaviors, and Outputs: An Examination of McGregor’s Theory Y.
Personnel Psychology, 26, 95-105.

Ghazi, S.R., Shahzada, G. & Khan, S. (2013). Resurrecting Herzber’s Two Factor
Theory:An Implication to the University Teachers. Journal of Educational and Social
Research, 3(2), 445-451.

Gürbüz, S., Şahin, F., Köksal, O. (2014) Revisiting of Theory X and Y: A multilevel
analysis of the effects of leaders’ managerial assumptions on followers’ attitudes,
Management Decision, 52(10), 1888-1906.

Herzberg, F. (2008). One more time: how do you motivate employees?. Harvard
Business Review, 46(1), 53–62.

Islam, S. & Ali, A. (2013). Motivation-Hygiene Theory: Applicability on Teachers,

Journal of Managerial Sciences, 7(1), 87-104

Juozaitiene, A. & Simonaitiene, B. (2011). Motivators of teacher Job satisfaction.

Socialiniai Mokslai, 72(2), 80-91.

9
Knight, I. (2013). A multi-disciplinary approach to managing Ehlers-Danlos (type III)--
hypermobility syndrome: working with the chronic complex patient. London: Singing
Dragon.

Latham, G. P. (2012). Work motivation: history, theory, research, and practice.

Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Lavigne, A. L. (2014). Beginning teachers who stay: beliefs about students. Teacher
and Teaching Education, 39, 31-43.

Lawter, L., Kopelman, R.E. & Prottas, D. (2015). McGregor’s Theory X/Y and Job
Performance: A Multilevel, Multi-source Analysis. Journal of Managerial Issues, 27(1-
4), 84-101

Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting
and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57, 705–717

Maslow, A. H. (1970). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.

Michaelsen, L. K. (1973). Leader Orientation, Leader Behavior, Group Effectiveness

and Situational Favorability: An Empirical Extension of the Contingency Model.
Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 9, 226-245.

Mohamed, R.K., Nor, C.S. (2013). The Relationship between McGregor's X-Y Theory
Management Style and Fulfillment of Psychological Contract: A Literature Review.
International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 3(5),
715-720.

Mullins, L. J. (2005). Management and organisational behaviour. London: Financial

Times Management.

Mustapha, N. (2013). The Influence of Financial Reward on Job Satisfaction among

Academic Staffs at Public Universities in Kelantan, Malaysia. International Journal of
Business and Social Science, 4(3), 244-248

Nyam, J. & William-West, T.O. (2014). Teacher motivation: a study of the

psychological and social factors, International Journal of Education and Research,
2(2), 1-8.

Peters, R.S. (1956). Motives and Motivation. Royal Institute of philosophy, 31(117),
117-130. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3749355

Santhapparaj, A. & Alam, S. (2005). Job satisfaction among academic staff in private
universities in Malaysia. Journal of Social Sciences 1(2), 72-76.

Seniwoliba, A.J. & Nchorbono, A.D. (2013), Examining the role of motivation on
employee performance in the public sector in Ghana, Merit Research Journal of
Education and Review, 1(10), 227-249.

10
Suyono, J., Mudjanarko, S.W. (2017). Motivation Engineering to Employee by
Employees Abraham Maslow Theory. Journal of Education, Teaching and Learning,
2(1), 86-92.

Teck-Hong, T. & Waheed, A. (2011). Hygiene Theory and Job Satisfaction in the
Malaysian Retail Sector. Asian Academy of Management Journal, 16(1), 73-94.

Thomas, D. & Bostrom, R. (2010). Building Trust and Cooperation through Technology
Adaptation in Virtual Teams: Empirical Field Evidence. EDPACS: The EDP Audit,
Control, and Security Newsletter 42(5), 1-20.

Tseng, L.Y., Lee, T.S. (2011). Can High-Tech Companies Enhance Employee Task
Performance through Organizational Commitment?. International Journal of Business
Administration, 2(2), 94-113. doi:10.5430/ijba.v2n2p94

Wang, L.W. & Tran, T.T. (2015). The Study of Teachers’ Job Satisfaction in Junior
Secondary School Administration System: A Case Study of Vietnamese National
Secondary Schools’ Teachers. Euro-Asian Journal of Economics and Finance, 3(2),
73-89.

11