Scott Buck

1
Motivation

• Scott Buck
• Erast Pohorylo
• BUAD 870
• April 7, 2009

2
(No Transcript)
3
Exercise

• Think of 1 or 2 things that motivate you in your
  job at AZ.
• Think of 1 or 2 things that de-motivate you in
  your job at AZ.
• Which theory or theories of motivation help to
  explain your answers to questions 1 and 2?

4
Contemporary Theories of Motivation

• Cognitive Evaluation Theory
• Goal-Setting Theory
• Self-Efficacy Theory
• Reinforcement Theory
• Equity Theory
• Expectancy Theory
• Self-Determination Theory

5
Self-Determination Theory (SDT)

• Based on the distinction between autonomous
  motivation and controlled motivation.
• Intrinsic motivation is autonomous.
• Extrinsic motivation can vary in the degree to
  which it is autonomous versus controlled.
• External regulation behavior that is initiated
  and maintained by external contingencies
  (controlled motivation).
• Internalization taking in values, attitudes, or
  regulatory structures, such that the external
  regulation of a behavior is transformed into an
  internal regulation and no longer requires the
  presence of an external contingency.

6
Self-Determination Theory (SDT)

• There is a controlled-to-autonomous continuum
  that describes the degree to which an external
  regulation has been internalized.
• Introjected regulation a regulation that has
  been taken in by a person but not accepted as his
  or her own
• Identified regulation the behavior is more
  congruent with personal goals and identity
• Intregrated regulation people have a sense that
  the behavior is an integral part of who they are
  and that it is self-determined (autonomous
  motivation)

7
Self-Determination Continuum
Gagne M, Deci EL. Journal of Organizational
Behavior 2005 26 331-62.
8
Prosocial vs. Intrinsic Motivation

• Different levels of autonomy
• Intrinsically motivated feel naturally drawn to
  complete work
• Effort based on personal enjoyment is autonomous
• Prosocial motivated feel pushed to complete work
• Less autonomous effort since it is conscious or
  self controlled
• Goal Direction
• Intrinsically motivated employees are process
  focused
• Prosocial motivated employees are outcome focused
• Temporal Focus
• Intrinsic employees are concerned with the
  experience
• Prosocial employees desire to achieve a
  meaningful outcome

9
Prosocial Motivation

• The desire to benefit other people
• It has been thought by some scholars that
  prosocial motivation facilitates enhanced
• Persistence
• Performance
• Productivity
• Enables dedication to a cause or moral principle,
  a commitment to the people who benefit from ones
  efforts and a willingness to accept and utilize
  negative feedback

10
Hypothesis

• Intrinsic motivation moderates the relationship
  between prosocial motivation and persistence,
  performance and productivity.
• The higher the intrinsic motivation, the stronger
  the positive association between prosocial
  motivation and persistence, performance and
  productivity.

11
Study 1 Participants

• 58 paid municipal firefighters
• 2 women, 56 men
• Midwestern U.S. community

12
Study 1 Survey

• Items adapted from self-regulation scales
  developed by Ryan and Connel (1989)
• Introductory question Why are you motivated to
  do your work?
• Four items measuring each form of motivation
• 7-point Likert-type scales with anchors of 1
  (disagree strongly) to 7 (agree strongly)

13
Study 1 Measures of Motivation

• Prosocial motivation (? .90)
• Because I care about benefiting others through
  my work
• Because I want to help others through my work
• Because I want to have positive impact on
  others
• Because it is important to me to do good for
  others through my work
• Intrinsic motivation (? .71)
• Because I enjoy the work itself
• Because its fun
• Because I find the work engaging
• Because I enjoy it

14
Study 1 Measure of Persistence

• Two months after the surveys were completed, the
  training chief provided data on the number of
  overtime hours that firefighters had worked in
  the previous week.
• Firefighters were allowed to sign up for overtime
  hours in advance, thus demonstrating persistence.

15
Study 1 Results

• The prosocial and intrinsic motivation variables
  were mean-centered to create a continuous
  interaction term.
• Ordinary least squares regression analyses were
  conducted to predict overtime from prosocial
  motivation, intrinsic motivation and the
  interaction term.
• Prosocial motivation did not significantly
  predict overtime (? .02, t(54) 0.14, p .89)
• Intrinsic motivation significantly predicted
  overtime (? .29, t(54) 2.13, p .04)
• Interaction term significantly predicted overtime
  (? .35, t(54) 2.47, p .02)
• Hierarchical regression showed that the addition
  of the interaction term increased the variance
  explained in overtime from r2 .14 (f2 .16) to
  r2 .22 (f2 .28), F(1,54) 6.09, p .02.

16
Study 1 Results

• Prosocial motivation was positively associated
  with overtime when intrinsic motivation was high
  (? .44) but was negatively associated with
  overtime when intrinsic motivation was low (?
  -.53)
• Firefighters with high levels of both prosocial
  and intrinsic motivation averaged 33.12 overtime
  hours per week, whereas all other firefighters
  averaged 19.78 overtime hours per week.
• Thus, intrinsic motivation moderated
  (strengthened) the association between prosocial
  motivation and overtime hours.

17
Study 1 - Results
Grant AM. Journal of Applied Psychology 2008
93(1) 48-58.
18
Study 1 - Limitations

• Small sample of employees in one occupation
• Only one outcome measure (overtime hours)
• An alternative explanation for the results is
  that intrinsic motivation is a reflection of job
  satisfaction.
• A generally favorable job attitude may strengthen
  the prosocial motivation behavior relationship.
• Job satisfaction might lead employees to perceive
  other people in their work environment in a more
  favorable light, increasing the willingness of
  prosocially motivated employees to expend
  additional effort in order to benefit these
  people.

19
Study 1 Questions

• Is paid overtime a valid measure of prosocial
  motivation?
• Would overtime hours worked by salaried employees
  be a more valid measure?

20
Study 2

• Objective was to examine intrinsic and prosocial
  motivations as predictors of performance and
  productivity of fundraising callers and measured
  job satisfaction as an alternative explanation of
  the result
• Method
• 140 participants (71 female and 69 male)
• All callers worked same hours and shifts
• Goal
• Persuade alumni to donate funds to university
• Inform alumni of recent events activities

21
Study 2

• Measures
• Similar to Study 1
• Prosocial (? .91)
• Intrinsic (? .93)
• Both used 7 point likert scale for motivation
  measurement
• Job Satisfaction
• 4 point item scale
• Perfomance and Productivity
• Performance of calls made in a 1-week
  interval
• Productivity raised during similar 1-wk
  interval

22
Results

• Neither prosocial motivation or intrinsic
  motivation independently predicted performance or
  productivity
• However, the interaction between prosocial and
  intrinsic motivation was a significant predictor
  of both performance and productivity
• Conducting confirmatory factor analyses on the
  expected two-factor model displayed very good fit
  with the data
• X2 (19, N140) 60.84,
• NFI .94, NNFI .93 CFI .96, SRMR .040
• A chi-square difference test showed that the
  model fit significantly from one-factor to
  two-factor model
• X2(1, N140) 251.98, p lt .001

23
Predicting Performance Productivity

• Prosocial motivation was positively associated
  with performance when intrinsic motivation was
  high (? .41) but not low (? .00)
• Prosocial motivation was also positively
  associated with productivity when intrinsic
  motivation was high (? .31) but not low ( ?
  -.20)
• Callers with high levels of both averaged 51.82
  calls and 510.58 in donations
• All other callers averaged 40.26 calls 308.10
  donations

24
(No Transcript)
25
Job Satisfaction

• Results show that intrinsic motivation, but not
  job satisfaction, interacted with prosocial
  motivation to predict both performance and
  productivity.
• Concluding that during this study the specific
  experience of intrinsic motivation, rather than
  the more general positive attitude of job
  satisfaction, is responsible for the moderating
  patterns that are observed by callers.

26
Discussion

• Intrinsic motivation strengthened the association
  between prosocial motivation and persistence,
  performance, and productivity in firefighting and
  fundraising.
• Intrinsic motivation independently predicted the
  number of overtime hours that firefighters worked
  in Study 1, but it did not independently predict
  the performance and productivity of fundraisers
  in Study 2.
• The discrepancy might be related to differences
  in the variety and complexity of the work.
• Firefighters had higher levels of intrinsic
  motivation (M 6.09, SD 0.77) than fundraisers
  (M 3.76, SD 1.54).
• This is consistent with evidence that intrinsic
  motivation is difficult to sustain in repetitive
  tasks and more likely to increase effort in
  varied repetitive tasks.

27
Discussion

• The two studies revealed a negative relationship
  between prosocial motivation and the outcomes of
  persistence (Study 1) and performance and
  productivity (Study 2) when intrinsic motivation
  was low.
• When intrinsic motivation is low, pushing oneself
  to complete a task in the absence of enjoyment
  leads to stress and overload.
• Prosocial motivation without intrinsic motivation
  may deplete employees psychological resources
  for self-regulation, leading to decreased
  persistence and productivity.

28
Discussion

• Employees experience prosocial motivation as a
  form of identified regulation when intrinsic
  motivation is high and as a form of introjected
  regulation when intrinsic motivation is low.
• The combination of enjoying the process and
  valuing the outcome can enable higher levels of
  persistence, performance and productivity.

29
Limitations

• The studies did not control for other established
  predictors of persistence, performance and
  productivity, such as conscientiousness,
  perceived job characteristics, and positive
  affect.
• The use of self-report measures of prosocial and
  intrinsic motivation at single points in time
  raises questions about whether employees
  responses reflect enduring orientations,
  temporary states, or both.

30
STUDY 3 Third phase of the trial was to see how
other organizations motivated their employee to
increase productivity
31
Practical Implications and Conclusion

• The results suggest that employees display higher
  levels of persistence, performance and
  productivity when they experience both prosocial
  and intrinsic motivation.
• For the purposes of selection, managers can
  attempt to measure prosocial and intrinsic
  motivation in an effort to hire employees with
  high levels of both.
• For socialization, managers can design work
  contexts to cultivate both prosocial and
  intrinsic motivation.
• Task significance
• Empowerment

32
References

• Grant, M.A. (2008). Does intrinsic motivation
  fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in
  predicting persistence, performance and
  productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93,
  48-58.
• Gagne, M. Deci, E.L. (2005) Self-determination
  theory and work motivation. Journal of
  Organizational Behavior, 26, 331-362.

33
The beatings will continue until morale
improves. Any questions?