PofoliaShared via Pofolia

Cogent Social Sciences· 2026Q2

Revisiting Herzberg’s dual-factor theory: path analysis of motivational drivers among academics in higher education institutions

Rewan Kumar Dahal, Dipendra Karki, Binod Ghimire, Surendra Prasad Joshi

Short summary

In Nepalese higher education, hygiene factors like job security (β = 0.88) and working conditions (β = 0.78) significantly drive academic motivation, while traditional motivators such as achievement and recognition show no significant effect.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Hygiene factors, especially job security and benefits (β = 0.88), are the most influential drivers of academic motivation in Nepalese higher education.
  • Working conditions (β = 0.78) and institutional policies (β = 0.37) also significantly contribute to academic motivation.
  • Traditional motivators like achievement (β = 0.07) and recognition (β = 0.08) showed no statistically significant effect.
  • The overall motivator construct was negative and non-significant (β = –0.131), indicating they did not meaningfully drive motivation or job satisfaction in this context.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

The study analyzes the relevance of Herzberg’s two-factor theory as a tool for analyzing the motivation of teacher groups in higher education institutions in Nepal. Using structural equation modeling and path analysis, it evaluated the influence of hygiene and motivator factors on academic staff motivation. The results showed that hygiene factors, such as job security, working conditions and institutional policies, are among the most influential factors in motivating teachers. Among these factors, job security and benefits had the most substantial effect (β = 0.88, p < 0.05), followed by the work environment (β = 0.78, p < 0.05) and institutional policies (β = 0.37, p < 0.05). In contrast, the relationship between co-workers and supervisors was not statistically significant (β = 0.08, p > 0.05), which might indicate the hierarchical organizational culture common in Nepal. At the same time, achievement (β = 0.07, p > 0.05) and recognition (β = 0.08, p > 0.05), motivators in the traditional sense, showed no statistically significant effect, and the overall motivator construct was negative and non-significant (β = –0.131, p = 0.242), indicating that motivator factors did not meaningfully drive academic motivation and job satisfaction in this context. The research emphasizes the necessity of context-specific strategies for faculty motivation and expands the application of Herzberg’s model to different cultural contexts.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Cogent Social Sciences, 2026 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Applied Psychology

Applied PsychologyPsychology