CONCEPTO, CARACTERÍSTICAS Y ANTECEDENTES DE LA SOCIEDAD ANÓNIMA

Although student persistence research has principally used social-psychological and economic models, elements of organizational theory may help explain aspects of student retention and student satisfaction. In particular, elements of Herzberg’s two-

154

factor theory may explain findings of this study that do not appear consistent with nexus theory. Elements of this framework suggest plausible explanations for some of the counterintuitive observations, such as the fact that financial impact on college choice shows no direct association with persistence and that interactions involving costs and aid do not predict persistence in an expected manner.

Herzberg’s formulation of two-factor theory originally examined motivation to succeed in workplace settings (Herzberg, Mausner, & Snyderman, 1959). The theory asserted that causes of worker satisfaction and causes of worker dissatisfaction were completely distinct elements. That is, eliminating causes of dissatisfaction is not sufficient to create satisfaction, and vice versa. The two are not opposite ends of the same scale, but phenomena that occur on different planes. Dissatisfaction is largely driven by poor working conditions, low pay, or demanding hours. Satisfaction, by contrast, is driven by a sense of purpose in one’s work, opportunities for advancement, and achieving important goals. The former category is hygiene, the latter is motivation. Addressing threats to hygiene may improve organizational function but cannot directly affect motivation.

Herzberg’s original theory has been examined in literature extensively (Stello, 2011). Critics have pointed out flaws in Herzberg’s methodology, and attempts to replicate Herzberg's findings have not always supported the original study (Bockman, 1971; French, Metersky, Thaler, & Trexler, 1973; Gordon, Pryor, & Harris, 1974; Farr, 1977; Gardner, 1977; Bellott & Tutor, 1990). In addition to potential validity and reliability issues with Herzberg's instrument, for example, the described categories of satisfaction and dissatisfaction are not necessarily determinants of worker productivity.

155

However, more recent research has found support for the basic framework of Herzberg's theory, in spite of the criticisms of his original methodology (Gawel, 1997; Bassett-Jones & Lloyd, 2005; Sachau, 2007; Eveleth, Liesz, Pettit-O’Malley, Rounds, & Xu, 2011). The concepts of satisfaction and motivation may apply to higher education in ways similar to how Herzberg used them to describe relationships between employers and employees. Two-factor theory may thus have useful application in persistence research.

At least one recent study has used expansions of Herzberg’s two-factor theory as a framework to explain student retention and persistence, as many determinants of student satisfaction and motivation to persist parallel those of workplace employees’ satisfaction and loyalty to an employer. DeShields, Kara, and Kaynak asserted that “faculty

performance and classes are directly related to the outcome from a college experience and may be considered motivators or satisfiers (e.g. growth and achievement)” (2005, p. 132). They found that these motivators had significant influence on persistence. Though research in this area is limited, Herzberg’s theory, when applied to higher education, would suggest that motivating factors similar to the ones DeShields et al. examined (e.g. a student’s program of study, opportunities to engage with faculty) are more important to student persistence than hygiene -related influences like available facilities, amenities, or—to an extent—even finances.

According to Herzberg’s original conception, an employee’s pay falls squarely into the “hygiene” category. Raising employees’ wages may eliminate dissatisfaction but does not instill motivation into otherwise unfulfilling work. Similarly, it may be that favorable educational costs and aid reduce student dissatisfaction but are not motivating factors and therefore do not increase satisfaction. However, though motivating factors

156

are hypothesized to be important factors in persistence, and though finances are

hypothesized not to be motivating factors, this does not suggest that cost and aid have no impact on persistence. This may simply mean that other factors are in play or that other factors may take precedence.

Applying Herzberg’s two-factor to the overarching process of college choice and student persistence reveals a possible link to nexus theory. The distinction between hygiene and motivation factors may have an important connection to the distinction between college choice factors and persistence factors. Richard James (2002), in an examination of the consequences of mismatches between student expectations and experiences, articulates what may be a theoretical bridge:

The motivational factors associated with higher education are generally unobservable for outsiders and can only be understood through sustained

involvement. As a consequence, student expectations [when they begin college] probably lie closest to hygiene factors. During the process of choice of a course and university, prospective students are known to find it easier to make decisions on course/institution characteristics that lean towards hygiene factors—readily observable, tangible qualities…. However, they have limited access to the less tangible course features that are likely to provide motivation. The less observable dimensions of the university experience are those which capture the imagination and spur a continuing commitment, and which are the key to persistence and success at university…. (p. 78)

Borrowing elements from two-factor and nexus theory to re-word James’ assertion, a plausible hybrid between the two emerges: Hygiene factors are ostensibly the primary

157

consideration in college choice because this type of information is more readily available to potential students. Motivation factors are largely unknown until after students

matriculate, but may have greater impact on persistence decisions. Theoretically, then, students evaluate their college experience according to different criteria (motivation) than the ones on which they based their expectations (hygiene). However, this does not preclude the possibilities that students nevertheless perceive an implicit contract with the university and that they still weigh their experiences against their expectations.

Intersection between two-factor and nexus theories. A combined theoretical

model using both two-factor and nexus theory may better explain the college choice- persistence relationship better than either model in isolation. Results of the current study, considered in light of past studies, provide several indications that elements of both theories play a role in students’ decision processes. Three basic assumptions would describe this hybrid theory:

First, the perceived implicit contract described by nexus theory is a valid construct. The process by which students form expectations and then re-evaluate those expectations in light of experiences is supported by the study’s findings of significant, moderating relationships between college choice variables and college experience variables (though the lack of main effects suggests financial experience variables reflect other influences). The interaction between these elements does provide evidence that dissonance between expectations and experience—a perceived violation of the implicit contract—is associated with leaving an institution.

Second, based on limited research (James, 2002; DeShields et al., 2005), factors which influence college choice and which influence student satisfaction predominantly

158

fall into the categories of hygiene factors and motivation factors, respectively. Extrinsic factors like cost, aid, facilities, and program offerings are the primary drivers of college choice because they are transparent to an outsider. However, intrinsic factors like quality of instruction, value of student support, and other academic and social integration factors are the primary determinants of student satisfaction. Student satisfaction may influence persistence, suggesting there is an association between motivating factors and decisions to persist or leave.

Third, linking the first two assumptions, hygiene and motivation factors interact within the college student decision process in a manner that likely would not occur in a workplace situation due to their temporal relationship in higher education. This temporal relationship dictates the way students interpret them. Based on the theoretical

comparison of expectations and experiences, and based on the factors which ostensibly drive each, the implicit contract is established by hygiene factors and re-evaluated based on motivation factors. Put another way, the implicit contract is considered inviolate when students’ experiences, which are based on motivation factors, are consistent with their expectations, which are based on hygiene factors.