PQI Management of Suppliers Article Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

PQI Management of Suppliers - Article Example Accordingly, Tier 1 providers ought to keep up the relationship with PQI. Level 2 providers have the capacity to keep up stable gracefully in the district. It likewise has solid specialized help, and creation the executives capacity. Because of this, PQI should keep working with Tier 2 to gracefully its items in the area. Level 3 providers have low serious costs, and less capacity to create quality items. PQI should give cautioning to Tier 3 providers. In the event that the quantities of nearby clients keep on lessening, PQI should stop working with Tier 3 providers and seek after new providers. It should share the appraisal results since this will empower the providers to understand their shortcoming and improve. This will likewise empower PQI to keep cozy relationship with all the providers since it needs to exploit any innovation that may emerge. Further, it will have the option to limit on creation costs. For example, keeping up close working relationship with Tier 3 inferred that creation of bite the dust items by a gifted organization would assume a crucial job in helping PQI to carry new items to the market at a low creation cost. 4-The buying administrator has limited its decision of possible provider for the surge request from the new client to A, B, and C. In the event that you were Wang, which provider would you suggest that the buying chief put in the request with? Clarify

food :: essays research papers

Food Food is the connector to everything that encompasses our way of life. Every festival incorporates a colossal banquet. We accept food tastes better when it is imparted to family, family members, and numerous others. In my granddad Makivik's time, a wide range of food were stored on the land, prepared for a festival. In those days there were numerous approaches to set up the nourishments, including various kinds of sauces and plunges. I am aware of three sauces that are generally excellent: aalu, misiraq, and nirukkaq. Aalu is produced using decision parts of caribou or seal. Here is the formula. Ensure the meat is lean and clean. Cut it up in minuscule pieces and put it in a bowl. Include a couple of drops of softened fat. At that point include a couple of drops of blood. Include uruniq (ptarmigan digestive tract) to taste. Mix everything friskily with your fingers until the volume duplicates and the blend turns soft. This is one of the most well known plunges for a wide range of meat. Misiraq is another plunge that is made everywhere throughout the North today. It is produced using fat. Cut up bits of seal fat, whale, or ujjuk (square flipper seal), trying not to incorporate any meat. Put the fat in a sheltered compartment with a punctured top †for instance, an old espresso tin holder. Try not to utilize plastic sacks or holders with impermeable tops. Store it in a cool spot where it tends to be gradually matured away from heat. At the point when it ages appropriately the fluid winds up clear, similar to a fine white wine. The fragrance is scrumptious and never harsh. (On the off chance that it smells horrible, toss it out! The hostile smell implies it hasn't matured appropriately.) All sorts of meats can be plunged in misiraq. The third plunge is called nirukkaq. It requires exceptional consideration. Nirukkaq is the substance of caribou stomach. Here is my Uncle Annowalk's formula. The tracker, when butchering the caribou, cautiously evacuates the stomach substance and places them into a compartment. The substance are solidified until fit to be utilized. At the point when the opportunity arrives, the substance are defrosted and a procedure called siingijaijuq is started. This includes cleaning the substance cautiously with working movements. Nuisances like bits of grass, leaves, lichen or protuberances are evacuated. At the point when smooth, it is prepared. Caribou meat is utilized for plunging. Our food is significantly more than simply solidified or crude meats and sauces. We additionally appreciate various sorts of dried fish and meats, for example, caribou.

M?n?g?m?nt Theory of Fr?d?ri?k H?rzb?rg

M?n?g?m?nt Theory of Fr?d?ri?k H?rzb?rg Fr?d?ri?k Herzberg (1923-2000), w?? a ?lini??l ????h?l?gi?t and pioneer ?f the job ?nri?hm?nt m?n?g?m?nt ??n???t. H? i? r?g?rd?d ?? one of th? great ?rigin?l think?r? in m?n?g?m?nt and m?tiv?ti?n?l theory.M?tiv?ti?n i? a ??w?rful, yet tricky b???t.S?m?tim?? it is r??ll? ???? t? g?t motivated, ?nd you find yourself wrapped u? in a whirlwind of ?x?it?m?nt.Oth?r tim??, it i? nearly impossible to figure out h?w t? motivate yourself ?nd ??ur? tr????d in a death ??ir?l of procrastination.M?tiv?ti?n i? literally th? d??ir? to d? thing?. Its the diff?r?n?? b?tw??n w?king up before dawn to ??unding the ??v?m?nt ?nd l?zing around th? house all d??.It? the ?ru?i?l ?l?m?nt in ??tting ?nd ?tt?ining g??l?â€"?nd research ?h?w? ??u ??n influ?n?? your own l?v?l? of m?tiv?ti?n and ??lf-??ntr?l.In 1959, H?rzb?rg ??ndu?t?d a ?tud? with 200 ?ngin??r? and ????unt?nt? ?? th? ?ubj??t?. Th?? w?r? asked t? recollect th?ir ?x??ri?n??? and f??ling? (positive ?r n?g?tiv?) th?? had at work, and th? r????n? b?hind th? w?? they f?lt.Based ?n the ?ubj??tiv? data from the r????nd?nt?, H?rzb?rg b?g?n to ?n?l?z? their j?b attitudes. Fr?m th? ?tud?, he proposed a tw?-f??t?r ???r???h wh?n attempting t? und?r?t?nd m?tiv?ti?n ?m?ng ?m?l?????.This g?v? birth t? th? Tw? Factor Th??r?, also known ??, Herzbergs M?tiv?ti?n Th??r?.Frederick Herzberg (1923 2000) w?? a US ?lini??l ????h?l?gi?t who l?t?r b???m? Professor ?f M?n?g?m?nt ?t th? Univ?r?it? of Ut?h.Hi? ?v?rriding int?r??t in m?nt?l h??lth ?t?mm?d from his belief that mental h??lth is th? core i??u? ?f ?ur tim??. This was ?r?m?t?d by hi? ???ting t? th? Dachau concentration ??m? ?ft?r its lib?r?ti?n. On his r?turn t? Am?ri??, he worked for th? US Public Health S?rvi??.H? i? b??t kn?w f?r hi? hygiene-motivation theory, whi?h was fir?t ?ubli?h?d in Th? m?tiv?ti?n t? w?rk in 1959. H?rzb?rg? w?rk focused ?n th? individual in th? workplace, but it has b??n ???ul?r with m?n?g?r? ?? it ?l?? emphasised th? im??rt?n?? ?f m?n?g?m?nt kn?wl?dg? ?nd ?x??rti??.H ?RZB?RG? M?IN TH??R? AND ITS ?IGNIFI??N??Herzberg was th? fir?t to ?h?w that ??ti?f??ti?n ?nd di???ti?f??ti?n at w?rk nearly always ?r??? from different factors, ?nd w?r? not simply opposing reactions to th? ??m? factors, ?? h?d always previously b??n b?li?v?d.Th?? ??ndu?t?d a ??ri?? of inter ¬views with 200 ?ngin??r? ?nd ????unt?nt? f??u?ing ?n f??t?r? ??n?id?r?d to be important ?? ??ur??? ?f motivation.E??h engineer was ??k?d two questions:Can ??u d???rib?, in detail, wh?n ??u felt ?x???ti?n?ll? b?d ?b?ut th? j?b?C?n ??u d???rib?, in d?t?il, wh?n you felt ?x???ti?n?ll? good about th? j?b?Fr?m th? r??li?? r???iv?d Herzberg di???v?r?d one ??t ?f factors that produce j?b ??ti?f??ti?n ?nd motivation ?nd ?n?th?r set ?f f??t?r? that l??d t? j?b di???ti?f??ti?n.Although ‘l?w ???’ might w?ll b? described as ??u?ing dissatisfaction, ‘high pay’ w?uld n?t necessarily be t?k?n as a ??u?? of satisfaction. In?t??d, diff?r?nt f??t?r?, ?u?h as recognition or ????m?li?hm?nt, were cited ?? ??ti?f?ing.This finding l?d H?rzb?rg t? arrive ?t the ??n?lu?i?n that th? traditional model of j?b ??ti?f??ti?n w?? incomplete. The tr?diti?n?l vi?w h?ld? that ??ti?f??ti?n ?nd dissatisfaction ?r? at ?????it? ?nd? ?f a ?ingl? ??ntinuum.But H?rzb?rg’? int?rvi?w? had identified tw? different ??t of factors: ?n? r?nging fr?m ??ti?f?? ¬ti?n to no satisfaction ?nd th? ?th?r r?nging fr?m di? ¬??ti?f??ti?n t? n? di???ti?-f??ti?n.Th? f??t?r? influ?n?ing the satisfaction ??ntinuum ?r? ??ll?d m?tiv?ti?n f??t?r? and th?? are r?l?t?d ????ifi ¬??ll? t? the w?rk ??nt?nt. Th? ?th?r ??t ?f f??t?r? (th? one causing di???ti?f??ti?n) H?rzb?g called h?gi?ni? factors; they are related t? th? work ??nt?xt, i.?., w?rk environment.Motivating f??t?r? h?v? uplifting effects on attitude ?r ??rf?rm?n??. H?gi?ni? (?r m?int?n?n??) f??t?r? ?r?v?nt l??? ?f m?r?l? ?r ?ff??tiv?n???.Alth?ugh th?? ??nn?t b? th?m??lv?? motivate human b?ing?, th?? ??n f?r??t?ll ?n? serious dissatisfaction or drop in ?r?du?tivit?. H?rz b?rg th?n argues th?t th?r? ?r? tw? ?t?g?? in th? process ?f motivating ?m?l?????.Fir?t, the manager must ?n?ur? th?t th? hygiene factors ?r? ?d??u?t?. Th?t is, ??? and security mu?t b? ???r??ri?t?, working conditions mu?t be ??f?, t??hni??l ?u??rvi?i?n must b? ?????t?bl?, and th? lik?.By ?r?viding these factors ?t an ???r??ri?t? level, the manager does n?t ?timul?t? m?tiv?ti?n but merely ?n?ur?? th?t ?m?l???r become ‘n?t di???ti?fi?d’. Employees whom m?n?g?r? ?tt?m?t t? ‘??ti?f?’ vi? h?gi?ni? factors ?l?n? will ?ut th? minimum effort t? avoid job l???.M?n?g?r? ?h?uld th?n ?r????d to the next stage- th?? should giv? ?m?l????? th? ????rtunit? t? ?x??ri?n?? motivation f??t?r? ?u?h as ??hi?v?m?nt ?nd recognition.Th? r??ult i? ?r?di?t?d t? b? a high l?v?l of ??ti?f??ti?n ?nd m?tiv?ti?n.H?rzb?rg ?l?? goes one ?t?? ?h??d of ?th?r? to d???rib? exactly, h?w t? u?? the tw?-f??t?r theory. S???ifi??ll?, h? r???mm?nd? j?b enrichment.H? ?rgu?? that j?b? ?h?uld be redesigned to ?r?vid? hi gh?r levels ?f th? m?tiv?ti?n f??t?r?.The im?li??ti?n i? th?t today’s employees ?x???t to b? tr??t?d f?irl? b? th?ir m?n?g?r? ?? ?? t? m?int?in th?ir individual rights.Th?? ?x???t decent working conditions ?nd w?g? ?nd salaries ??m??r?bl? t? th?t ?f ????l? doing ?imil?r j?b in other organisations. Th?? ?x???t company policies to b? ??n?i?t?ntl? and equitably applied to ?ll ?m?l?????.If th??? expectations ?r? n?t r??li??d, employees ?r? de-motivated (or n?g?tiv?l? m?tiv?t?d).Thi? condition i? u?u?ll? r?fl??t?d in inefficiency ?nd a high turn?v?r r?t? (i.?., frequent resignation).But fulfilling th??? ?x???t?ti?n? does n?t n??????ril? m?tiv?t? ?m?l?????.As M??l?w’? theory maintains, it i? ?nl? wh?n the lower-level needs are ??ti?fi?d th?t the high?r-l?v?l n??d? ??n b? m??t ?ff??tiv?l? u??d in m?tiv?ting ????l?.The k?? is for th? manager t? t?? th? motivating factors. Th? tw? sets ?f factors li?t?d may n?w be illu?tr?t?d.Ex?m?l?? of H?rzb?rg? h?gi?n? n??d? (or m?int?n?n?? f??t?r?) i n th? w?rk?l??? are:Pay The pay or salary ?tru?tur? should b? ???r??ri?t? ?nd r????n?bl?. It must b? equal ?nd ??m??titiv? t? those in the ??m? indu?tr? in th? same d?m?in.C?m??n? P?li?i?? ?nd ?dmini?tr?tiv? policies Th? ??m??n? ??li?i?? ?h?uld n?t b? t?? rigid. Th?? should b? f?ir ?nd clear. It ?h?uld include flexible working h?ur?, dr??? code, breaks, v???ti?n, ?t?.Fringe b?n?fit? Th? employees ?h?uld b? ?ff?r?d h??lth ??r? ?l?n? (mediclaim), benefits for the f?mil? m?mb?r?, ?m?l???? h?l? programmes, ?t?.Ph??i??l W?rking ??nditi?n? Th? w?rking conditions should b? ??f?, clean ?nd h?gi?ni?. The w?rk equipments ?h?uld b? updated and w?ll-m?int?in?d.St?tu? The ?m?l?????’ ?t?tu? within the ?rg?niz?ti?n should b? f?mili?r and retained.Interpersonal r?l?ti?n? Th? r?l?ti?n?hi? ?f th? employees with hi? ???r?, superiors ?nd ?ub?rdin?t?? ?h?uld b? ???r??ri?t? ?nd ?????t?bl?. Th?r? should b? n? ??nfli?t or humiliation element present.Job S??urit? Th? ?rg?niz?ti?n must ?r?vid? job ? ??urit? to th? ?m?l?????.H?rzb?rg? r????r?h identified that tru? m?tiv?t?r? w?r? ?th?r ??m?l?t?l? diff?r?nt factors, n?t?bl?:Recognition The ?m?l????? ?h?uld b? ?r?i??d and r???gniz?d for th?ir ????m?li?hm?nt? b? the managers.Sense of ??hi?v?m?nt The ?m?l????? mu?t have a ??n?? ?f achievement. Thi? d???nd? ?n th? job. Th?r? mu?t b? a fruit ?f some ??rt in th? job.Growth ?nd ?r?m?ti?n?l opportunities Th?r? mu?t be growth ?nd ?dv?n??m?nt ????rtuniti?? in an organization t? m?tiv?t? th? ?m?l????? t? ??rf?rm w?ll.Responsibility The employees mu?t hold themselves responsible f?r the work. Th? m?n?g?r? ?h?uld giv? them ?wn?r?hi? ?f the w?rk. Th?? should minimize ??ntr?l but r?t?in ????unt?bilit?.M??ningfuln??? of th? w?rk Th? w?rk it??lf ?h?uld b? m??ningful, int?r??ting and ?h?ll?nging for th? ?m?l???? to perform and t? get m?tiv?t?d.FACTORS F?R S?TI?F??TI?N â€" M?TIV?TI?N?LM?tiv?t?r f??t?r? emerge fr?m th? n??d ?f ?n individual t? ??hi?v? personal growth. J?b satisfaction results f rom th? presence ?f m?tiv?t?r factors.Moreover, ?ff??tiv? motivator f??t?r? do n?t ?nl? l??d to j?b ??ti?f??ti?n, but ?l?? t? b?tt?r ??rf?rm?n?? ?t work. The m?tiv?t?r factors are:Challenging ?r ?timul?ting w?rkStatusOpportunity f?r ?dv?n??m?ntR????n?ibilit?S?n?? of personal gr?wth/j?b achievementA??uiring recognitionM?tiv?ti?n?l f??t?r? ?r? th??? th?t d??l with th? metric ?f ??ti?f??ti?n ?nd ?r? th??? f??t?r? that positively ??t f?r and ensures satisfaction ?r motivation ?v?r a stretch ?f tim?.These f??t?r? d? n?t deal with the m?tri? of di???ti?f??ti?n. The motivational f??t?r? ?r? those whi?h ?ll?w for in?r????d ??rf?rm?n?? of the ?m?l?????. Th??? f??t?r? ?r? more intrinsic in n?tur? whil? th? h?gi?n? factors ?r? more ?r l??? ?xtrin?i?.H? laid ?ut 6 im??rt?nt f??t?r? ?? m?tiv?ti?n?l f??t?r? ?nd in th?ir ?rd?r ?f im??rt?n??, th?? ?r? Achievements, Recognition, the Nature ?f th? w?rk, R????n?ibilit?, Advancement ?nd Gr?wth.An ?m?l???? if h? i? r???gniz?d b? let’s say employee ?f the ???r for the h?rd w?rk h? has put in, th?n that ?m?l???? him??lf will b? satisfied ?nd will be m?tiv?t?d.There ?r? num?r?u? f??t?r? whi?h can m?tiv?t? ?m?l????? ?? id?ntifi?d in thi? th??r?.Th? f??t?r? commonly ?b??rv?d that ???itiv?l? influence satisfaction called M?tiv?t?r? in?lud? w?rk n?tur?, r???gniti?n t? ?n?’? ??hi?v?m?nt, ?dv?n??m?nt opportunities, r????n?ibilit?, ??n?? ?f importance, ?nd inclusion in d??i?i?n-m?king process.F??T?R? F?R DISSATISFACTION â€" HYGIENEHygiene f??t?r? are th??? th?t n??d t? be ?ddr????d by a bu?in??? in such a way th?t they w?uld n?t r??ult t? th? ?m?l????’? un?l????nt ?x??ri?n??? and f??ling? ?t w?rk.Th? ??ti?f??ti?n ?f hygiene factors motivates ?m?l????? in their work. Th? h?gi?n? f??t?r? are:Wages, ??l?ri?? ?nd ?th?r financial r?mun?r?ti?nC?m??n? ??li?? and administrationQu?lit? ?f int?r??r??n?l r?l?ti?n?W?rking ??nditi?n?Feelings of job ???urit?Qu?lit? ?f supervisionHygiene factors referred t? those job f??t?r? th?t d??? n?t ???itiv?l? ?n?ur? satisfaction ?r motivation ?v?r a ?tr?t?h ?f tim?, but ?r? th??? f??t?r? wh?n ?b??nt causes di???ti?f??ti?n ?nd lowering ?f m?r?l?.These f??t?r? ?r? n?t ???itiv? actors ?ll?wing for increased motivation but are positive reasons wh? ?n employee should n?t b? di???ti?fi?d with hi? job. Th??? factors ?r? ?l?? known ?? Di???ti?fi?r? or Maintenance F??t?r? because ?f th? f??t that it dealt with th? metric ?f di???ti?f??ti?n.H? l?id d?wn six im??rt?nt hygiene f??t?r in t?rm? ?f it? im??rt?n?? ?? C?m??n? P?li??, Su??rvi?i?n, Relationship with the B???, Work C?nditi?n?, Salary ?nd R?l?ti?n?hi? with ???r?.For in?t?n??, if the bu?in??? h?d a very rigid ?nd un????mm?d?ting ??m??n? ??li?? it meant di???ti?f??ti?n wh?r??? a company policy fl?xibl? enough t? giv? br??thing space did n?t ??u?? di???ti?f??ti?n.Simil?rl?, ???ur? work ??nditi?n? meant no di???ti?f??ti?n and d?ng?r?u? and un??f? ?n?? m??nt di???ti?f??ti?n.Th?r? ?r? ????r?ntl? more r????n? ??u?ing di???ti?f??ti?n th?n ??ti?f??t i?n.F??t?r? ??mm?nl? observed th?t cause di???ti?f??ti?n ?? ??r the th??r? ?nd ?r? called Hygiene include unf?ir ??m??n? ??li?i??, r?l?ti?n?hi? with ?u??rvi??r, mi?r? management, ??m??n??ti?n, working ??nditi?n?, ???r ??t, j?b ???urit?, ?t?tu? etc. B?th f??t?r? ?r? independent ?f ???h otherIt ?h?uld b? n?t?d that ?? ??r th? tw?-f??t?r th??r?, ?b?v? ?t?t?d factors ?f ??ti?f??ti?n ?nd dissatisfaction ??t ind???nd?ntl? ?nd ?b??n?? ?f one d??? n?t lead t? th? ?r???n?? ?f ?n?th?r.For instance, the absence ?f r????n?ibilit? d??? n?t l??d to dissatisfaction; it i? just n?t a ?t?t? ?f ??ti?f??ti?n. And th? ?b??n?? ?f unf?ir company policies d??? n?t l??d t? ??ti?f??ti?n, it i? simply n?t b?ing di???ti?fi?d.C?mbin?ti?n? ?f M?tiv?t?r? and H?gi?n? factorsSimple combinations ?f M?tiv?t?r? ?nd H?gi?n? factors ??n produce a useful m?trix gauging motivation ?f ?n employee and ?ub???u?ntl? success f?r a firm.F?ll?wing is the ??t of th??? ????ibl? ??mbin?ti?n?:High Motivation ?nd High H?gi?n?: A? so unds, it i? ?n id?lli? ??mbin?ti?n, ?nd ?v?r??n? would want t? achieve this. From ?n organization ??r????tiv?, it r??ult? in high motivation and l?w complaints ?m?ng?t ?m?l?????.High M?tiv?ti?n ?nd L?w Hygiene: Employees ?r? significantly m?tiv?t?d but ?till pose num?r?u? complaints. F?r in?t?n??, consider a job whi?h i? ?h?ll?nging ?nd r?w?rding but policies ?nd work ??nditi?n? are n?t well ?????t?d.L?w M?tiv?ti?n and High Hygiene: In ?u?h ?itu?ti?n?, employees ?r? happy doing th?ir j?b, ??rning ??l?ri?? ?t th? end ?f the day but lack th? d??ir? t? t?k? initiatives ?nd m?rk a diff?r?n?? f?r th?ir ?rg?niz?ti?n. Th? job i? synonymous to a ??? check.L?w M?tiv?ti?n ?nd L?w Hygiene: W?r?t ???iti?n t? be in f?r any organization. This can b? ??m??r?d t? a sight ?f failing ?rg?niz?ti?n r?du?ing it? ?r???n?? ?nd ???r?ti?n?, while ?v?r? employee i? l??king out f?r ?r??ti??ll? no in??ntiv? t? w?rk.To ?umm?riz? the Tw?-f??t?r th??r?;Intrinsic ?r satisfiers (m?tiv?ti?n?l) f??t?r?, ?u?h as advan cement, r???gniti?n, responsibility, and achievement seem t? b? related t? j?b satisfaction.Dissatisfied r????nd?nt? t?nd?d t? ?it? extrinsic ?r h?gi?n? (m?int?n?n??) factors, ?u?h as ?u??rvi?i?n, ???, ??m??n? policies, ?nd w?rking conditions.The opposite ?f ??ti?f??ti?n i? n?t di???ti?f??ti?n.Removing dissatisfying ?h?r??t?ri?ti?? fr?m a j?b d??? n?t necessarily m?k? th? job ??ti?f?ing.Job ??ti?f??ti?n f??t?r? ?r? separate ?nd distinct from job di???ti?f??ti?n factors. M?n?g?r? wh? ?limin?t? job dissatisfaction f??t?r? may n?t n??????ril? bring about m?tiv?ti?n.When hygiene f??t?r? ?r? adequate, ????l? will n?t b? di???ti?fi?d; n?ith?r will th?? b? ??ti?fi?d. T? m?tiv?t? ????l?, ?m?h??iz? f??t?r? intrin?i??ll? r?w?rding that are ?????i?t?d with th? work itself ?r to outcomes dir??tl? d?riv?d fr?m it.LIMIT?TI?N? ?F HERZBERG’S TH??R? ?R? QUITE ??RI?U?S?m? of th? major limit?ti?n? ?f this theory ?r?:Thi? theory i? based ?n a ?m?ll ??m?l?. It i? risky and unwi?? t? d?riv? g?n?r?liz?t i?n? fr?m the conclusions ?f a limit?d r????r?h project.Th? research sample, which i? the basis ?f thi? th??r?; i? t?k?n from a ri?h ??untr?; whi?h i? n?t r??r???nt?tiv? ?f behaviour ?f people in ?ll countries. F?r example, m?n?? which is not a m?tiv?t?r in ri?h ??untri??; is a v?r? powerful motivator for ????l? ?f ???r ??untri??.In f??t, in th? interviewing t??hni?u?, m??t often, ????l? t?ll what interviewers lik? t? h??r r?th?r th?n wh?t th?? r??ll? f??l about various things.On? ?f th? m?int?n?n?? (?r h?gi?n?) factors m?nti?n?d b? H?rzb?rg is ??r??n? lif?. What m?n?g?m?nt ??n do ?b?ut th? personal life ?f an individu?l; is r??ll? subject t? ?ffi?i?l ??n?tr?int?, ?ut on m?n?g?r? b? th? ?rg?ni??ti?n.Th?r? is ?n element of ?v?rl???ing in Herzberg’s th??r?. For example, in the ??t?g?r? of m?tiv?ti?n?l f??t?r?, ‘advancement’ ?nd ‘????rtuniti?? for gr?wth’ ?lm??t convey th? same ??nn?t?ti?n.CRITICISM ?F HERZBERG’S TWO FACTOR THEORYH?rzb?rg’? th??r? h??, however, b??n ?riti ?iz?d by m?n? ?uth?r?. The criticism ?f the th??r? i? based ?n th? f?ll?wing ??int?.The f??t?r? l??ding t? ??ti?f??ti?n ?nd di???ti?f??ti?n ?r? not r??ll? different from each ?th?r. It h?? been ??nt?nd?d that ??hi?v?m?nt, recognition, ?nd responsibility ?r? im??rt?nt f?r b?th ??ti?f??ti?n and di???ti?f??ti?n, whil? such dim?n?i?n? ?? security, ??l?r?, ?nd working ??nditi?n? ?r? less im??rt?nt;Th? two f??t?r th??r? i? ?n ?v?r-?im?lifi??ti?n ?f the tru? r?l?ti?n?hi? between motivation and di???ti?f??ti?n. Several studies ?h?w?d th?t one f??t?r ??n ??u?? job ??ti?f??ti?n f?r one person ?nd job dissatisfaction f?r another.H?rzb?rg’? inference r?g?rding diff?r?n??? between satisfiers and m?tiv?t?r? ??nn?t b? completely ?????t?d. P???l? generally attribute the ??u??? of ??ti?f??ti?n t? their ?wn ??hi?v?m?nt?. But more likely th?? ?ttribut? their dissatisfaction to obstacles ?r???nt?d by company’s ??li?i?? ?r ?u??ri?r? than t? th?ir d?fi?i?n?i??.Though H?rzb?rg’? th??r? h?? m?t sever e criticism, it has ???t a n?w light ?n th? content ?f work m?tiv?ti?n. It h?? ??ntribut?d ?ub?t?nti?ll? t? M??l?w‘? id??? ?nd m?d? them m?r? ???li??bl? t? th? work situation. It has also ??ntribut?d t? j?b design technique ?r j?b enrichment.Regardless ?f criticisms, H?rzb?rg’? theory has b??n wid?l? read, and few m?n?g?r? are unfamiliar with hi? r???mm?nd?ti?n?.The ???ul?rit? ?f v?rti??ll? expanding j?b? to ?ll?w w?rk?r? gr??t?r responsibility ??n ?r?b?bl? be ?ttribut?d to H?rzb?rg’? finding?.Th? disadvantages are th?t H?rzb?rg? m?d?l i? m?r? ?f a g?n?r?liz?ti?n that m?? n?t b? appropriate to all gr?u?? of ?m?l????? ?r individuals within a group. H?rzb?rg b???d his theory on int?rvi?w? with accountants ?nd ?ngin??r?.Hi? findings ?r? not necessarily dir??tl? ???li??bl? t? v??tl? diff?r?nt ?m?l???? gr?u??. H?url? ?m?l????? may not b? ??rti?ul?rl? interested in j?b ?nl?rg?m?nt and ?nri?hm?nt, ?nd may b? m?r? m?tiv?t?d by increased pay.S?m? ?m?l????? m?? b? m?r? m?tiv?t?d b? fl?x ibl? work arrangements.Additi?n?ll?, too mu?h of a g??d thing can be b?d: giving an ?m?l???? r????n?ibilit? th?? ?r? n?t ?r???r?d for ??n b? overwhelming ?nd become a de-motivator.TH? ?DV?NT?G??Th? ?dv?nt?g?? ?f H?rzb?rg? th??r? i? in id?ntif?ing th?t there are factors that in general will m?tiv?t? ?nd d?-m?tiv?t? groups of ?m?l?????, ??m? of whi?h are in th? ??ntr?l of m?n?g?r? (lik? level of r????n?ibilit? ?nd w?rking conditions) and ??m? whi?h ?r? outside ?f th?ir ??ntr?l (lik? ??r??n?l lif?).H?rzb?rg? model ??n be u??d t? id?ntif? br??d issues th?t need to be ?ddr????d or mitig?t?d in general.F?r example, in an environment wh?r? employees are un?ur? ?f th?ir job security, m?n?g?r? ??n tr? to mitig?t? the d?-m?tiv?ting ?ff??t b? ?r?viding ???n ??mmuni??ti?n, ?nd b? reassuring ?m?l????? ?b?ut the situation.IN ??R????TIV?H?rzb?rg? ideas h?v? ?r?v?d v?r? dur?bl?. Hi? work ??n b? ???n in ??mm?n with th?t of Elt?n M??? (kn?wn f?r th? H?wth?rn? Ex??rim?nt?), ?f Abr?h?m Maslow (d?v?l?? ?r of the hi?r?r?h? ?f n??d?) ?nd ?f Douglas McGregor (?r??t?r ?f Theory X ?nd Th??r? Y) ?? a r???ti?n t? F W T??l?r? Scientific M?n?g?m?nt th??ri??.These last f??u??d ?n t??hni?u?? whi?h ??uld b? u??d to m?ximi?? th? ?r?du?tivit? ?f m?nu?l workers and ?n th? separation of mental ?nd ?h??i??l w?rk b?tw??n m?n?g?m?nt ?nd workers.In ??ntr??t, H?rzb?rg ?nd hi? ??nt?m??r?ri?? b?li?v?d that w?rk?r? wanted th? ????rtunit? t? f??l part ?f a t??m and to grow ?nd d?v?l??.Although Herzbergs th??r? i? n?t highl? r?g?rd?d by ????h?l?gi?t? t?d??, managers h?v? f?und in it u??ful guidelines for action. Its b??i? tenets ?r? ???? t? und?r?t?nd ?nd ??n be applied t? ?ll t???? of ?rg?ni??ti?n.Furth?rm?r?, it appears t? ?u???rt th? ???iti?n ?nd influ?n?? ?f m?n?g?m?nt. It has b??n n?t?d th?t links b?tw??n m?tiv?ti?n ?nd ?r?du?tivit? are beyond the scope of Herzberg’s w?rk, and th? usefulness of motivating f??t?r? from th? ??r????tiv? ?f management may d???nd upon proving thi? r?l?ti?n?hi?, as other ?uth?r? h?v? tri?d t? d?.Th? theorys impact h?? been seen on r?w?rd systems, fir?tl? in a move away from ???m?nt-b?-r??ult? systems ?nd today in th? gr?wing ?r???rti?n of ??f?t?ri? b?n?fit? ??h?m??, whi?h ?ll?w individual employees to ?h???? the fring? b?n?fit? whi?h best ?uit th?m.Job ?nri?hm?nt w?? more th??ri??d about than ?ut int? ?r??ti??. Many schemes whi?h w?r? tri?d r??ult?d only in cosmetic changes or led t? d?m?nd? f?r in?r????d w?rk?r control ?nd w?r? therefore t?rmin?t?d.N?w?d??? th? ??n???t is m?r? ?n? of people enrichment, although thi? ?till ?w?? much to Herzbergs original w?rk.Hi? gr??t??t contribution h?? b??n th? knowledge th?t motivation ??m?? fr?m within th? individu?l; it ??nn?t b? im????d b? ?n organisation ????rding t? ??m? formula.M?n? ?f t?d??? tr?nd? ??r??r m?n?g?m?nt, ??lf-m?n?g?d learning, and ?m??w?rm?nt h?v? a b??i? in H?rzb?rg? in?ight?.