A. Maslow’s theory of the hierarchy of needs was developed in the two-factor theory of motivation, which was developed in 1950 by the famous American scientist, researcher of problems of organizational behavior, labor relations and management Frederick Herzberg (1923-2000). The results of his research predetermined the 1960-1970s. appearance management methods“enrichment”, expansion and rotation of work tasks aimed at structuring labor activity in such a way as to provide the employee with the opportunity to feel the complexity, importance and significance of the work area assigned to him, independence in choosing decisions, the absence of monotony and routinization of work operations, and personal responsibility for the assigned task.

The theory of motivation developed by F. Herzberg received another name: “the theory of atmosphere actualization factors.” This theory examines the factors that influence satisfaction or dissatisfaction with job tasks and is based on a hierarchical approach to human needs. At the beginning of the study, F. Herzberg, together with his assistants, organized interviews with a group of workers, which consisted of 203 engineers and accountants working in nine plants and factories in the vicinity of Pittsburgh. The interview questionnaire asked two questions:

• 1) “Can you tell us in detail about a time when you had extremely positive feelings about your work?”;
• 2) “Can you describe in detail a time when you felt exclusively for her? negative feelings?»

After analyzing the interview results, F. Herzberg was able to establish that in the case when employees spoke about dissatisfaction with their work, they blamed the environment, and in the case when they were satisfied with it, they noted the importance and prestige of their work, the opportunity realize your creativity, obtained professional successes. These results led to the conclusion that job satisfaction and dissatisfaction are completely opposite things.

The researchers, led by F. Herzberg, set themselves the goal of uncovering the internal connection between the objective “events” that were present in the subjects’ stories and were accompanied by corresponding sensations, and the effects that these events and sensations caused. Moreover, each respondent could choose an episode when he felt strong positive or negative feelings in relation to work. After this sequence had been carefully reviewed and analyzed, the interviewer offered to tell another episode, which was the opposite of the first in the sense of a positive (negative) or short (long) sequence of events. During the conversation, some respondents themselves volunteered to give a third or fourth incident from their lives.

The researchers carefully studied the collected material and tried to identify certain categories of factors and effects. Carefully checking each other's conclusions, the scientists divided all the answers into blocks, defining them as follows: a message about a single event or state that led to a certain feeling; single sensation characteristic; a description of a single effect, such as “the way in which this was communicated to me demonstrated that management had confidence in me.”

A sample of 5,000 blocks, drawn from the original raw material, was divided into three main categories:

• 1) first level factors;
• 2) second level factors;
• 3) effects.

Each of these main categories was divided into smaller ones. After reaching a 95% level of agreement on these categories, the researchers analyzed 476 “episodes,” or sequences, of events.

The adopted scientific search technology led F. Herzberg and his colleagues to the fact that they were able to identify first-level factors - 14 categories of elements or actions in a certain situation, which respondents considered sources of positive or negative emotions:

• 1) recognition;
• 2) success;
• 3) development opportunity;
• 4) promotion;
• 5) salary;
• 6) interpersonal relationships;
• 7) leadership - formal;
• 8) responsibility;
• 9) company and administration policy;
• 10) working conditions;
• 11) the work itself;
• 12) personal life factors;
• 13) status;
• 14) consistency of work.

As a result of the work, F. Herzberg discovered factors of two types:

• 1) actualization factors (or motivators) - work and all the forms of recognition obtained through it;
• 2) atmospheric factors (or hygiene factors)- This includes working conditions and the environment.

Actualization factors (there are six of them) are directly related to the content of the labor process: achieving success, recognition of merit, career advancement, interest in work, responsibility, and the opportunity for professional growth. The use of these factors makes it possible to achieve deep and time-stable changes in individual human behavior in the labor process. In other words, if these factors are present in the work process, they give it strong motivational incentives, resulting in excellent job performance. So, according to F. Herpberg, job satisfaction is a consequence of the action of actualization factors.

Atmospheric factors are more numerous (there are ten of them): salary, rewards, job security, company policy, company activities, working conditions, status, technical supervision, interpersonal relationships with superiors, subordinates, colleagues, labor safety, personal life factors.

According to F. Herpberg, these external factors (atmospheric factors) are capable of weakening internal tension in the organization, but only in the short term, and therefore such weakening cannot lead to fundamental and profound changes in the behavior of employees. Of course, the creation of good and comfortable working conditions in the workplace can for some time influence the improvement of the psychological climate in the team, but if human dignity is humiliated in the organization, then the prerequisites for high labor productivity will not be created in it.

In order to confirm the correctness of his theory, F. Herzberg used the results of his empirical studies carried out in various companies many countries of the world. For example, the example given by F. Herzberg regarding the organization of the work of company secretaries became widely known. Bell Telephone, responsible for responding to letters from shareholders. All answers were written according to a predetermined template and double-checked by supervisors. Empirical analysis showed that the morale of the secretaries was low (depressed), they made many mistakes, and often did not go to work under various pretexts. An attempt was made to change some external factors of their activities (increasing wages, changing the hierarchical structure, labor planning), but all this did not correct the situation.

Finally, it was decided to radically change the work organization of these employees. Each of them received her own area of ​​responsibility, for which she was personally responsible. As a result, this allowed them to better navigate and even provide advice to colleagues. The control of the bosses was weakened. The letters themselves began to be drawn up not according to a template, but by the employees themselves. Observations showed that in the first weeks after the introduction of innovations, labor productivity decreased slightly, but later it increased. sharp rise, and the quality of responses to shareholders has reached unprecedented levels.

There is a close connection between the theories of motivation by A. Maslow and F. Herzberg. For example, the highest needs in the theory of A. Maslow's hierarchy of needs - respect and self-esteem - coincide with the six motivators of F. Herzberg, and the lowest - physiological, existential (security needs) and social - approximately correspond to the ten hygiene factors.

Herzberg introduced a persistent policy that determined that not a high salary, but interest in work and involvement in the labor process are the most powerful incentives for an employee to effectively complete production tasks. He noted that the worker is not a machine and can hardly tolerate those organizations that alienate him from the results of his work. Research by F. Herzberg has shown that money cannot be considered as a constantly acting motivating factor (the idea of ​​classical management by F. Taylor is built on this), since they work for money only up to a certain limit, the boundaries of which are the satisfaction of personal ideas about the “good life”. Another way to put it is this: if a person decides that he can achieve a “good life” by receiving a salary of 30 thousand rubles. per month, it is unlikely that he will work more productively for 38 thousand rubles. Herzberg named salary and bonuses negative incentives. Of course, if they are absent, people feel dissatisfied, but if they are present, they will not necessarily feel happy and immediately begin to increase productivity. The point is that the increase wages only encourages people to stay where they work.

We should note that the results of F. Herzberg's research are important not only in determining the role of money in motivating behavior. The second important result of his activities is the modification of the concept division of labor And unlimited command power of management. Due to the current misunderstanding, many managers attribute specialization only to working conditions. At the same time, it also affects the content of the work. Excessive fragmentation of production operations and private tasks leads to the fact that managers deprive a person of a sense of completeness and completeness of work. This leads to a decrease in the level of responsibility, suppression of the employee’s actual abilities, a feeling of meaninglessness of work, and a feeling of dissatisfaction with work.

If a worker discovers that he is only a cog in a gigantic bureaucratic machine and the results of his work and professional efforts are not recognized, if he is not able to influence anything, the worker loses his taste for work and his activities. It is not the person who should be adapted to the work, but the work should correspond to the individual abilities of the person 1 . F. Herzberg, insisting on providing workers with autonomy, additional features to organize its activities through quality control and maintenance technological equipment, initiated the creation of more flexible and adaptive organizations, as well as the so-called network corporations.

At the same time, despite numerous criticisms of F. Herzberg’s two-factor theory, its scientific reliability is confirmed by data from 12 special studies that were conducted in the USA, Japan, Finland, Hungary, India, South Africa, and Zambia. In addition, numerous large corporations have implemented this system and speak favorably of it. In the USSR, this theory was also partially used in the famous study “Man and His Work”, conducted in 1964 by V.A. Yadov and A.G. Zdravomyslov.

• Meskon M.Kh., Albert A/., Khedouri F. Fundamentals of management: trans. from English M.: Delo, 1993.S. 372. The authors cite F. Herzberg's description of the relationship between different opinions of employees: “The results of our research, as well as the results I obtained in discussions with other specialists who used completely different methods, allow us to conclude that the factors that caused job satisfaction and provided adequate motivation - These are different and significantly different factors than those that cause job dissatisfaction. Since when analyzing the causes of job satisfaction or dissatisfaction we have to consider two different groups of factors, then, consequently, these two feelings are not directly opposite each other to a friend. The opposite of job satisfaction is its absence, not satisfaction. The opposite of the feeling of dissatisfaction is, in turn, its absence, and not satisfaction with work.”
• F. Herzberg believes that in the absence or insufficient degree of presence of hygiene factors, a person develops a feeling of dissatisfaction with work. However, if they are sufficient, then in themselves they do not cause job satisfaction and cannot motivate a person to do anything. In contrast, the absence or inadequacy of motivation does not lead to job dissatisfaction. But their presence in full causes satisfaction and motivates employees to improve their performance. Contrary to the opinion of A. Maslow, F. Herzberg believes that a person has not one system (hierarchy) of needs, but two - qualitatively different and independent. Both of these systems are multidirectional planes of human behavior. If a manager is concerned about stabilizing the staff, then he needs to influence mainly hygienic factors (increasing wages, issuing a loan to an employee to purchase housing, etc.), as this helps to secure personnel. But at the same time, the manager must understand that taking into account only these factors will not lead to increased productivity. The fact is that other factors - motivators - are associated with increased labor productivity.
• A.P. Chekhov noted that a person does not look for a profession, but a profession looks for a person. It is obvious that in society it is necessary to create conditions for a successful “meeting” of a person with his profession.
• Network structure - organizational form corporate management, which assumes the absence of a vertical hierarchy, is based on self-government, self-organization of performers and autonomy in decision making; designed for horizontal interaction and the use of collective group capabilities of several companies located at different stages of the technological chain.
• Kravchenko A.I., Tyurina I.O. Sociology of management: fundamental course: textbook, manual for university students. M.: Academic project: Triksta, 2004.

October 28, 2013

Herzberg and his collaborators surveyed 200 engineers and office workers one paint company. The questionnaire consisted of only two questions:

1. Can you describe in detail a time when you felt particularly good after completing your official duties?
2. Can you describe in detail a time when you felt particularly bad after performing your official duties?

After working through the survey results, Herzberg and his colleagues came to the conclusion that motivating factors can be divided into two broad categories - motivating factors (motivation) and hygiene factors.

Hygiene factors in Herzberg's theory

According to Herzberg's theory, hygiene factors are associated with environment, in which the work is carried out.

So, hygiene factors can be:

• company and administration policy,
• normal working conditions,
• decent income
• status,
• interpersonal relationships with superiors, colleagues and subordinates,
• degree of direct control over work.

These are the so-called factors that relieve job dissatisfaction.

According to Herzberg's theory, in the absence or insufficient degree of presence of hygiene factors, a person experiences job dissatisfaction. If they are sufficient, then in themselves they do not cause job satisfaction and cannot motivate a person to do anything. But their sufficiency causes satisfaction and creates a motive for increasing the efficiency of work activity.

Motivating factors in Herzberg's theory

According to Herzberg's theory, motivating factors are internal factors related to the very nature and essence of work.

Motivating factors are, for example:

• success,
• promotion,
• recognition and approval of work results,
• high degree of responsibility for the work performed,
• opportunities and business growth.

According to Herzberg's theory, these factors create a motive when the employee has a good idea of ​​the goal and knows how to achieve it. And the absence or insufficiency of motivation factors does not lead to job dissatisfaction. But their presence fully causes satisfaction and creates a motive for increasing labor productivity.

Criticism of Herzberg's theory

But criticism also did not bypass the theory of Friedrich Herzberg.

Firstly, it has a lot in common with Maslow's theory. That is, hygiene factors are similar to physiological needs, and motivating factors are similar to the needs for communication, recognition and self-development. Therefore, the criticism is the same as Maslow’s criticism - hygienic (physiological) factors are not dominant.

Secondly, Herzberg's theory of motivation does not take into account many variables that determine the situations associated with it. 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. In order to apply Herzberg's theory, it is necessary to consider numerous aspects of people's behavior during their work activities and environmental conditions.

Application of Herzberg's theory in management practice

According to Herzberg's theory, in order to achieve motivation, a manager must ensure the presence of both hygiene and motivating factors.

That is, it is necessary to ensure that the work brings more satisfaction, and that its direct performer is also rewarded. It is necessary to make the performer feel his importance, as well as the importance of the task he performs. Give him independence in doing his work. But it should be remembered that this method is not suitable for motivating all people and not in all situations.

When applying Herzberg's theory in practice, it was found that most often in organizations with sufficient high level education and, accordingly, wages, management needs to be more attentive to its employees, listen to their personal problems, in order to ensure, thus, the influence of other motivational factors on increasing labor productivity.

For example, you can carry out activities to create a healthy social and moral climate in the team, which will contribute to the greatest satisfaction from work.

For maximum effective use Herzberg's theory in practice, it is necessary to develop a list of hygiene factors and motivation factors and provide the opportunity for the organization's employees to determine and indicate what they prefer.

The next step in understanding the motivational mechanisms of work was 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 be 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 large 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 row can be attributed to the “animal nature of man - the innate desire to avoid pain plus all the 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. This is not a treatment, but rather a prevention. Modern methods waste recycling, water and air purification do not cure diseases, but without them there would be more diseases." Similarly, hygiene factors do not create satisfaction (and internal motivation), they only eliminate dissatisfaction. Hygiene factors are external to work (describe the external aspects of work , work situation) and include company policies, management practices, supervision, interpersonal relationships, working conditions, salary, status and safety.

Table Hygiene factors according to Herzberg.

Hygiene factors	General inefficiency of the company resulting from irrationality, waste of effort and resources, duplication of responsibilities or internal struggle for power. Lack of information about job responsibilities. The harmful consequences of company policies: unfairness in appointments, evaluations, etc.
Formal guidance (technical aspects of the manual)	Inept leadership, inability to properly organize work, inability to inspire subordinates, short-sightedness of the manager, low professional level of the manager.
Interpersonal relationships	Poor relationships with superiors, subordinates and colleagues; low quality public life At work
Salary	The total amount of monetary compensation, fairness in salary calculations
	Position in relation to others, expressed in the title of the position, the size and decoration of the office, the make of the car, the parking location, etc.
Reliability of operation	Uncertainty, anxiety, fears about losing a position or job
Personal life	Impact of work on family life person, including stress, overtime or change of residence
Working conditions	Inconvenient location of the enterprise, lack of conditions for high-quality work, insufficient quantity or too much work.

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 a 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 included in this group center on the facts of successful completion of a work task, solving new work problems, and 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 a positive attitude at 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.

5. Promotion up the career ladder. Promotions, in terms of increased satisfaction, are often associated for respondents with a feeling of professionalism 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. 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 employee’s desire to work with full effort, 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 needs of the employee, 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 the workforce. Satisfying hygiene needs 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 with making better use of the human resources at their disposal, go to great expense to create good working conditions in the organization, believing that in this way they can increase employee satisfaction with their work in the organization and strengthen 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 employees, 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 employees through factors related to the group of motivators, creating better conditions for recognition of 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

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; 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 remuneration with labor results; creative nature work; complexity of the tasks being solved; participation in decision making; high degree responsibility.

To effectively 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 individual's degree of satisfaction with his job.

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. A 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 of fair treatment and a sense 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 turn, assessment of labor contribution contains both a material part in the form of salary, bonuses, profit sharing, and an intangible part in the form of official position, recognition of merit, trust, 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 in 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 abilities, 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 himself 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 intensely 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 the theory of expectations is the emphasis on the individuality of human perception. The level of an individual’s work effort is determined by him on the basis of his own assessment of the likelihood of achieving the desired results of work and his own ideas about the desired reward within the framework of his 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 French 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 the historical development of control as a management function, a certain category of people gradually formed - social class 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. Currently they perform a control function huge amount civil servants, 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 necessary.

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 to 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 technological progress, the development of the legislative framework, and various random fluctuations in people’s lives. 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 behavior that is preferable for him and does not always meet the requirements labor discipline, instructions and more.

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.

 Feedback carries 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. Here, the method of scientific observation of employees, collection of statistical information reflecting the dynamics of controlled indicators, oral and written reports can be used;

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 primarily 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 special kind management relations that begin to form at the moment of legal consolidation of the subject of management and include: 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 taking corrective actions.

Based on 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 process of goods or services);

Financial resources (budgeting, setting cost limits for specific types of 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 control standards. This type control gives management 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.

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, comfortable workplace, and 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.