According to Baah & Amoako (2011), although Herzberg theory generally accepted by scholars but still there are some drawbacks pertaining of this theory especially for unskilled jobs or those who work unchallenging, uninteresting, repetitive and limited in scope. He also mentioned the relationship between satisfaction and productivity even though his research normally focus on satisfaction and ignored productivity (Baah & Amoako, 2011). According to Hayday (2003), satisfaction are mostly perceive as inactive attribute while motivational level viewed more as proactive measures since it is closely linked to performance and behavioural change. Other than that, a study by the Gallup Organization based on the book of ‘First, Break All the Rules’: What The World’s Great Managers Do’, written by Marcus Buckingham discusses about the study provided framework for defining high performing individuals and organization based on the identification of 12 questions. These 12 questions support the Herzberg motivational factors whereas hygiene factors claimed to have less impact on motivating high performance (Baah & Amoako, 2011).
According to Robbins (2009), the consequence for the organization to choose of this Herzberg theory is fulfilling the hygiene and motivator factors are just to prevent the dissatisfaction of employees but will not motivate the employees to focus on their efforts to increases performance. (Yusoff, Kian & Idris, 2013). The organization should provide intrinsic or motivation factors in order to motivate the employees (Yusoff, et.al, 2013). For example, a study conducted by Wan Fauziah & Tan (2013) towards 124 employees from electronic companies in Malaysia exposed that employees have some different perception on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation factors. Thus, organization should modify their operation and procedures according to the needs of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation factors of their employees.
Another study conducted by Fang Yang (2011) in China identified that all extrinsic motivational factors can makes the employees in China to work hard. The author further explain about the findings which show that extrinsic motivation factors become more important than intrinsic motivation factors and to be the first and second highest motivation factors for workers in China. So, this research highlighted that organization should emphasizes on the favourability of employees towards intrinsic and extrinsic motivation factors. Most of the studies discussed about the findings across the industries and countries concluded that extrinsic factors has an effect on respondent’s job satisfaction whereas the disagreement side of the findings mentioned that the theory need to be revise and update the settings since extrinsic factors might turn up with job satisfaction or neutral feeling towards the job (Yusoff, et.al, 2013). Based on the arguments and criticisms from the various authors about this Herzberg theory, so this study propose the introduction of psychological ownership as mediator to transmits the strong effect of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation factors on work performance.
Herzberg (1959), conducted study on the job-related satisfaction and dissatisfaction and constructed the need based model in order to provide direct managerial application (Figure 2.3). In his study, he conducted an interview session with engineers and accountants by using the critical incident technique (Osabiya ; Joseph, 2015). The purpose of the interview is to collect information from experts or less experienced users of the existing system to received knowledge about the way to improve it. The interviewers are focused on two questions (1) what made them to feel good about their job? (2) what made them feel bad about their job?