Based upon the Magic Cable case discussion in class today, I decided to expand on my previous post for hygiene factors being a bigger prediction of job satisfaction than motivators. I think that an average worker such as Gary, the main character in our case study will be more influenced to leave or remain within a company based on hygiene factors, rather than motivators. Gary ultimately leaves his old company to take a job at Magic Cable because of hygiene factors. He was not getting along well with his supervisor at his previous company. Also, the work environment was dusty, noisy, and fast paced, making it harder to deal with working day to day. Ironically enough Gary decides to take a new job at the Magic Cable company, where he will ultimately quit due to a new set of hygiene factors, causing him dissatisfaction at work.
Even though this is only one example, I feel that this kind of thing happens many times throughout all different companies. One company may be perfect for a specific individual, but provide negative hygiene factors for another. I believe that more people are influenced to change companies or careers based on simple hygiene factors than on motivators. I guess when it comes down to it people would rather not be dissatisfied than be satisfied at a job. I think that many people would rather have good working conditions or pay or company policies, than have the opportunity for recognition or added responsibility.
In Gary's defense, his generation tends to work with one company for a long period of time and I definitely wouldn't want to do that with the hygiene factors that his first employer has. But I feel like his motivator is still his most important factor in a job (opportunity to advance) but the negative hygiene factors set him over the tipping point. He is willing to sacrifice the motivator if the proper hygiene factors are there to suit him.
ReplyDelete