Katsura (2012) stated that the success of every business depends on motivated employees. However, there is no secret formula for motivating employees and there is no form to fill out. Motivation is like an individual employee. This means that a one-size-fits-all motivation strategy does not fit all employees. It would always be different for each individual. An employee can be motivated by recognition for a job well done. The other may be motivated by getting a promotion and many are motivated by a salary increase, additional benefits and an incentive program. The best technique to motivate an employee according to Issa (2014) is to find out what your employee wants and give it to them or find ways to enable them to earn it. For example, encourage teams to realize their achievements. Incentives are good motivators to reward workers for achieving their goals. The author further suggests that determining how to motivate employees or workers varies by region. For example, people in the MENA region are generally motivated by a good work-life balance. Excerpted from the article “The Power of Motivating Employees” (2014), it emphasizes a good employee motivation tactic: rewarding good achievement. Recognizing a job well done will improve the person's self-image, increase their self-esteem, and motivate them to do even better in the future. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”?Get the original essayHerzberg's Two-Factor Theory of MotivationThe theory simply states that in the workplace, there are two opposing factors that can make the employee satisfied or not. . These two opposing factors are those tangible and intangible things that can either make the employee happy when he experiences them or make him dissatisfied when he receives them. Herzberg's motivation-hygiene theory is also called two-factor theory due to the presence of two factors, one is the set of motivation and the other is the set of hygiene factors. Motivation factors are: recognition of a good deed, stimulating work, feeling of importance, personal development, etc. For hygiene, the factors are: job security, salary, employment status, working conditions, good salary, etc. There are four possible combinations of these factors that determine employee satisfaction and dissatisfaction. High hygiene and high motivation = employees are undoubtedly satisfied. Low hygiene and high motivation = you will hear complaints from those who feel unsatisfied. High hygiene and low motivation = again, many would complain. Low hygiene and low motivation = there is no There is no doubt that employees are dissatisfied, as this is the worst combination of factors that permeate the workplace. Motivated employees are responsible for the success of every company. In reality, there is no formula for the best motivation technique. Also, there is no sheet of paper to fill out to enroll the employee and the motivation that corresponds to him. Just like for every employee, motivation and its technique are not suitable for a single employee. In other words, each employee has their own level of motivation. While an employee may consider that recognition for a job well done is enough to motivate them, others may still be dissatisfied unless they get a promotion. Others may be happy to receive a pay raise. According to Issa(2014), the best motivation for an employee is something he earns, because it would be more pleasant to receive it when you give your best. As for the question of how management can use this theory to improve employee performance, what was previously mentioned is true. Every employee has his own set of needs, so the manager must first discover these needs and factors to motivate him. However, since Herzberg's theory is also called two-factor theory, which means that the manager must give the employee the motivation and hygiene factor, exactly what the combinations show. The theory could be more effective if the management, while providing the employee with challenging work (motivation), the manager at the same time offers the employee good working conditions or good salary (hygiene factor). Employee A, for example, was rewarded for leading the sales team and meeting their quota for the month. In the same spirit, he and his team members enjoyed a 3-day trip to the island of Bali. This will definitely motivate Employee A and his team to strive to meet their quota the next time they are given a similar task. Since both motivators must go hand in hand, this type of theory is ineffective or less effective if only one factor is provided to the employee. For example, the employee has good working conditions but his salary is very low, so we cannot say that he is satisfied. In short, to satisfy the employee, the combination of high motivation and high hygiene must go hand in hand to fully satisfy the employee. Additionally, if Herzberg's motivation-hygiene theory fails to improve employee performance, there are likely other needs that the employee wants or needs other than motivation and hygiene factors. The best way is for the manager to approach the employee in question and ask him what can satisfy him. If the company can afford to provide the things he wants and which would also be commensurate with his services, then the manager will give them if it will satisfy him. There is no better way to learn the needs of employees than to communicate with them face-to-face as much as possible. An organization should be generous in giving employees what they want that might make them happy, as long as this “gift” is done appropriately. McClelland's Learned Needs Theory This theory of motivation is proposed by David McClelland in 1961, explaining that an individual's needs in the workplace are shaped by their daily experiences. Man's motivation to improve his performance at work depends on how his experiences can give him recognition for his achievements, improve his affiliation with others and how his experiences can make his influence felt in the workplace. work environment. Man would like to obtain recognition, belonging to others and become influential. When one of these classes is achieved, only then can we say, according to McClelland, that a person will be motivated. This means that at least an individual must acquire one of these courses to be effective in this workplace (McClelland and Acquired Needs Motivation Theory, 2014). Furthermore, this theory is based on the concept that every individual is “achievement driven”. Man wants to achieve something so that he can also demonstrate his worth. When he achieves something and people around him recognize this achievement, he is more motivated to improve further and take on the toughest challenge and prove once again that he can do it again. Furthermore, the theory explains that an individualwants to gain power. An individual wants to be an authority so that he can demonstrate his influence and better if he can show his leadership through this power. He wants to lead others individually and he also wants to lead the group as a whole. If he succeeds, the man is more motivated to improve his performance, particularly at work. Finally, McClelland's acquired needs theory of motivation also explains that an individual is a social being who desires an enhanced affiliation or relationship. In short, man is “affiliation motivated” because he wants to improve his relationships within the framework of his belonging needs similar to those of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. McClelland's theory of acquired needs is applicable in the workplace or business organizational setting because it is true of man that man, in the strictest sense of the term, is a man who seeks achievement, power/authority and he seeks affiliation or relationships because these are all motivators for him to improve his performance at work. Based on McClelland's theory that man becomes motivated in the workplace if his needs to acquire achievement, power/authority and affiliation are satisfied through his daily experiences, management can capitalize on this theory by forcing employees to improve their performance at work. As far as achievement is concerned, man desires more achievements if he acquires something he desires. His desires for more achievements are infinite and therefore, in this sense, for example, the manager should entrust the best performers with more ambitious projects but with achievable objectives. For example, Employee A is able to complete his special project on time and within budget. He deserves recognition from management and probably a bonus and should be given a more ambitious project next time since he is able to accomplish the first one effectively and efficiently. In this example, the bonus in terms of monetary reward is nothing, but what is more important is the positive feedback that can further motivate the individual to complete the more difficult task. Concerning the individual need for affiliation, management must place this individual in teams or cooperative enterprises. This type of individual works best in a team because by being affiliated with others and acquiring good relationships, the individual will be likely to further improve their work performance. Finally, management must help the individual gain power or authority. For example, the supervisor gives the individual the chance to lead a group or team to complete a special project. Being able to accomplish a task through leadership, the individual will be more motivated to improve their performance at work next time. There are limitations to McClelland's theory, however. In some cases, the theory may become less effective or even ineffective. For example, when people who are motivated by their achievements are placed among high achievers, their achievements may be overshadowed by others, leading to demotivation. With other people who are more successful than you, you tend to be inferior and, once again, you become an ordinary achiever again and, even worse, you will even become an underachiever this time. When it comes to individuals who gain power or authority as a motivation, they may be less effective when leading others, especially as those others also desire to become an authority or influence in their rights. This means that there would be a possibility of conflict of “power needs”. Regarding affiliation, it.