Compare theories of job satisfaction and job design
Compare Herzberg’s hygiene and motivator factors with Hackman and Oldham’s job characteristics model, then distinguish rotation, enlargement and enrichment.
Section OPTION-OR-4.5.1 · 4.5.1 Theories of job satisfaction
Original StudyForA teaching mapped to Cambridge 9990 Organisational Psychology for 2028–2030. Example studies are independent learning support, not Cambridge material or official mark schemes. Findings are limited to their samples, measures and settings.
Before you begin
- Job satisfaction and work attitudes are related but distinct. Identify the construct, sample and measurement method before interpreting a score or applying a model to an organisation.
Work on paper. Try each question before revealing help, and explain why your method works.
Quick readiness check
Which set belongs to Hackman and Oldham’s job characteristics model?
What you will learn
- Herzberg’s hygiene and motivational factors
- Hackman–Oldham job characteristics and psychological states
- Job enrichment, rotation and enlargement; Belias and Sklikas (2013)
Herzberg separates sources of dissatisfaction from motivators
Herzberg’s two-factor theory distinguishes hygiene factors from motivators. Hygiene factors include pay, policies, supervision, relationships and working conditions. Poor hygiene conditions may cause dissatisfaction; improving them may reduce dissatisfaction without automatically creating lasting interest in the work.
Motivators are features such as achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement and the work itself. The theory proposes that these can support satisfaction and motivation. Herzberg, Mausner and Snyderman developed the account from interviews asking 203 accountants and engineers to describe work events associated with marked satisfaction or dissatisfaction.
That method relies on retrospective accounts and the way events are interpreted and classified; occupational and cultural context can matter. Do not use the theory as a universal rule that pay never motivates or that a single job feature affects every worker in the same way.
Hackman and Oldham link job features to psychological states
The job characteristics model identifies skill variety, task identity and task significance as contributors to experienced meaningfulness; autonomy contributes to experienced responsibility; and feedback contributes to knowledge of results. These psychological states are proposed to support internal motivation and other work outcomes.
The model also recognises that people may respond differently to complex, challenging jobs. Growth-need strength and the work context can influence the relationship. The original test examined 658 employees in 62 jobs across seven organisations, supporting the model while remaining bounded by the measures, jobs and organisations studied.
The model differs from Herzberg: it specifies job characteristics and proposed psychological states, rather than dividing conditions into hygiene and motivator categories. Neither model means that simply adding responsibility or variety will help if workers lack training, resources or support.
Job design changes the content or control of a role
Job rotation moves workers between different tasks or roles, usually to broaden experience or vary activity. Job enlargement adds more tasks at a similar level of responsibility. Job enrichment adds greater responsibility, discretion, planning or control, so the role changes vertically as well as horizontally.
Belias and Sklikas (2013) discuss job rotation, enlargement and enrichment as job-design techniques. Their article is a review, not a randomised workplace trial that proves one technique always increases satisfaction or performance.
Start with the job and workers’ needs: a rotation requires training and safe handovers; enlargement can become extra workload without extra control; enrichment needs authority, time and support. Evaluate satisfaction, quality, safety and workload together, with employee consultation and a baseline.
Sources for this lesson
- Cambridge International AS & A Level Psychology 9990 syllabus, 2028–2030
- Cambridge International AS & A Level Psychology 9990 Reference List, 2028–2030
- Hackman and Oldham (1976), Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory
- Belias and Sklikas (2013), Aspects of job design, as listed in the Cambridge 9990 Reference List
Pause and explain
A worker receives more tasks at the same level of responsibility. Which job-design technique is this?
Worked example
A call centre raises pay but leaves workers with repetitive scripts, no task discretion and little feedback. Apply Herzberg and Hackman–Oldham to suggest a cautious job redesign.
Show the worked solution
- Pay is a hygiene factor in Herzberg’s account; correcting it may reduce dissatisfaction but need not make the task meaningful.
- Low skill variety, task identity, autonomy or feedback may limit the psychological states described by Hackman and Oldham.
- Test a supported redesign, such as added task variety or appropriate discretion, while tracking workload, service quality and worker experience.
Answer The pay change addresses a hygiene condition but does not resolve the repetitive task design. A pilot could increase skill variety, task identity, appropriate autonomy and feedback, with training and clear limits. Measure worker experience, quality, errors and workload before and after; neither theory guarantees the same response for every worker.
Try a topic test
Choose Easy, Normal or Difficult. Save your answers and open worked review after finishing.
Test this topic →From guided practice to a new situation
Write your answer and reasoning first. Use a hint only if you are stuck. The model solution is for self-checking; your written work is not automatically marked.
A warehouse improves lighting and pay but offers no feedback or responsibility. Explain the change using both Herzberg and Hackman–Oldham.
Give me a hint
Use each theory’s own terms and avoid treating one as the other.
Compare my reasoning
- Lighting and pay are hygiene conditions in Herzberg’s account; improving them may reduce dissatisfaction.
- The change does not necessarily add motivators such as recognition, achievement or responsibility.
- In Hackman–Oldham, feedback and autonomy are job characteristics linked to knowledge of results and experienced responsibility.
The improvements address hygiene conditions and may reduce dissatisfaction, but they do not necessarily add Herzberg motivators. In the job-characteristics model, the role still lacks feedback and autonomy, so knowledge of results and experienced responsibility may remain limited.
Look for these in your work
- Hygiene factors applied
- Motivators distinguished
- Job characteristics mapped to states
Classify three proposals: rotate workers between stations; add two similar-level duties; let workers plan and evaluate their own work.
Give me a hint
Look at movement between roles, added breadth, and added responsibility.
Compare my reasoning
- Moving between stations is job rotation.
- Adding duties at a similar level is job enlargement.
- Planning and evaluating work adds discretion and control, so it is job enrichment.
The proposals are rotation, enlargement and enrichment respectively. A fair evaluation would check training, workload, safety and whether workers have real authority to carry out enriched responsibilities.
Look for these in your work
- All three techniques classified
- Responsibility distinguished from breadth
- Implementation needs noted
Design a small job redesign for a team with low reported feedback and autonomy. State what you would change and how you would evaluate it.
Give me a hint
Tie each proposed change to a model component, then measure possible costs as well as benefits.
Compare my reasoning
- Add a regular, useful feedback loop so workers can see task quality and results.
- Offer bounded discretion over task sequence or method where safety and service standards allow.
- Compare baseline and follow-up worker ratings, errors, workload and safety, and consult workers about access and unintended effects.
A pilot could add task feedback and controlled discretion, linking the change to knowledge of results and autonomy. Evaluate the outcomes together; increased control is not beneficial if workload rises or safety support is missing.
Look for these in your work
- Model links explicit
- Changes feasible and bounded
- Evaluation includes outcomes and trade-offs
Common mistakes
- Claiming hygiene factors can never influence motivation
- Treating Herzberg and Hackman–Oldham as the same theory
- Confusing enlargement with enrichment
- Assuming more tasks automatically mean more meaningful work
- Treating a review as an experiment that proves job-design effects
What can you explain now?
How does job enlargement differ from job enrichment?
Compare with the explanation
Enlargement adds tasks at a similar responsibility level; enrichment adds greater responsibility, discretion or control.
Ask whether the change is horizontal in task breadth or vertical in responsibility.
After trying it yourself, choose your next review. This is your self-assessment.
Your review choice appears on Today. Sign in to sync it across devices.
Make it stick
Explain the difference between hygiene factors and motivators, then map the five job characteristics to the three psychological states. Distinguish rotation, enlargement and enrichment.
If you needed the solution, close it and solve the problem again from a blank page. A correct answer is stronger when you can explain the reason for each step.