Self-Determination Theory and work motivation Flashcards
What are intrinsic and extrinsic motivations according to Porter and Lawler (1968)?
- intrinsic motivation: when people do something that they find interesting; derivespontaneous satisfaction from it
- extrinsic motivation: doing something for the reward connected to doing it (activity is instrumental)
What did the model of Porter and Lawler (1968) suggest for workplaces to maximize job satisfaction?
- increasing both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation by making job
- more interesting (intrinsic rewards)
- making extrinsic rewards contingent on performance
- basic assumption is that these motivations add up on each other
- however, early studies found that tangible extrinsic rewards diminished intrinsic motivation and verbal rewards increased intrinsic motivation
- thus intrinsic and extrinsic motivation can be positively and negatively interactive… these effects are accounted for in Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET)
According to CET. What diminishes and what enhances intrinsic motivations?
External factors, such as:
- tangible rewards
- deadline
- surveillance
- and evaluations
diminish feelings of autonomy, (loss of perceived locus of control (PLOC) - undermine intrinsic motivations
- providing more choice options about task engagement tend to increase feelings of autonomy (intrinsic motivatin)
Apparently,
- feelings of autonomy and competence tend to increase internal motivation
- optimally challenging tasks were intrisically motivating
- verbal rewards increase sense of competence
- negative feedback tends to diminish intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (undermining effect)
What are some problems (5) of CET?`
The undermining of intrinsic motivation was a very disputed finding.
- most CET studies were don in the lab instead of ind real organisations
- CET was difficult to integrate in the popular expactancy-valence approaches (Vroom e.g.)
- many work tasks are not intrinsically interesting so enhancing intrinsic motivation is not always possible
- most people work to earn money so rewarding with money seem practical and appealing
- seemed to suggest that managers should focus either on increasing intrinsic motivation or extrinsic ones
Research on how intrinsic motivation may become autonomous (internalised) led to self-determination theory (SDT) - a way in which extrinsic motivation can become autonomous
What are the main types of motivation, central to SDT?
- Autonomous motivation: drives behaviour that is done with the sense of volition, having choice
- Dworski (1988): autonomy means endorsing ones behaviour at the highest level of reflection
- intrinsic motivation is an example of autonomous motivation
- Controlled motivation: acting with a sense of pressure; that one has to do it
- use of extrinsic rewards was found to induce controlled motivation
-
SDT says that these types of motivation differ in underlying regulatory processes and their accompanying experiences
- behaviour can have different degrees of both types of motivations
Please explain what the autonomy continuum in SDT is and which role extrinsic motivation plays in it.
It is a continuum from amotivation to autonomous motivation. In between are the different extrisinc motivational stages, varying in degrees of controlled and autonomous motivation.
External motivation can be internalised in which it becomes partly serving an autonomous motivation, it becomes self-determined, chosen.
The four stages are:
- external motivation
- the most controlled type of external motivation
- introjection
- a regulation that has been taken in but is not yet accepted as his own. E.g.
- contingent-self-esteem. pressure to act in a certain way to feel worthy
- ego involvement: pressure to act in way to buttress their fragile egos
- this form of motivation is relatively controlled
- a regulation that has been taken in but is not yet accepted as his own. E.g.
- identification
- identified regulation: people feel greater freedom and volition because behaviour is more congruent with personal goals and identities
- internal PLOC
- nurses understand the importance of bathing their clients for their well-being and agree with it even though the task may not be seen as pleasent or interesting
- identified regulation: people feel greater freedom and volition because behaviour is more congruent with personal goals and identities
- and integration
- with integrated regulation people have a full sense that the behaviour is part of who they are, thus is completely self-determined.
- this form of external motivation is completely voloitional/autonomous
- it is, nevertheless, not intrinsic motivation because the person is not intrinisically interested and enjoying the behaviour but considers it instrumental for their personal goals
How does SDT define needs and why are they important to consider?
-
SDT considers the satisfaction of needs as the fuel that powers intrinsic motivation and internalisation
- the three most relevant needs in this regard seem tobe:
- need of competence
- need of autonomy
- and need of relatedness (connection to coworkers)
- “the degree to which these needs are satisfied will determine how well external motivations are internalised (so integration instead of introjection)
- SDT defines needs as universal necessities
- the three most relevant needs in this regard seem tobe:
- needs are improtant because increasing internalisation and intrinsic motivation will lead to better work outcomes:
- persistent and maintained behaviour change
- effective performance (particularly for cognitive flexibility and creativity)
- job satisfaction
- positive work-related attitudes
- organisational citizenship behaviour
- psychological adjustment and well-being
- positive relation between staifaction of needs and work engagement and well-being
What role does the social context play for internalisation of behaviour.
-
autonomy-support is the most important factor in predicting identification and integration (autonomous behaviour)
- three specific factors led to more internalisation:
- presenting a meaningful rationale for doing the task
- acknowledging that people may not find the task interesting
- emphasis on choice rather than control
- the more of these factors were present the more internalisation (e.g. integration rather than introjection)
-
autonomy seems to be the most important need for internalisation. autonomy support fall in two categories:
- specific factors in social contexts. e.g. choice and meaningful positive feedback
- and interpersonal ambience (e.g. organisational climate or managers interpersonal styles)
- finally, people do not necessarily require structures, limits and contingencies for to maintain intrinsic motivation but they are essential for internalisation, because this is what gets internalised
- three specific factors led to more internalisation:
What are the three general causality orientations relevant for STD?
- they index the degree to which one has a certain orientation toward intiation and regulation of beaviour
- autonomy oriented:
- tendency to experience social contexts as autonomy supportive and to be self-determined
- positively related to: self-actualisation, self-esteem, ego development, satisfying interpersonal rellationships
- control oriented
- tendency to experience social contexts as controlling and to be controlled
- positive relation to: public self-consciousness, Type A behaviour pattern, defensive functioning, high importance of pay etc.
- impersonal orientation
- tendency to be amotivated
- related to external locus of control, self-derogation and depression
Please summarize what we have learned about SDT so far.
-
SDT distinguishes between amotivation (not having an intention to act) and motivation.
- withhin motivation there are autonomous (intrinsinc and internalised extrinsic motivation) and controlled motivation (external regulation/pressure ad introjected motivation)
- degree of controlled motivation determines the degree to which one feels coerced or seduced into doing something
- type of motivation concerns ones relation to an activity. Almost state-like motivational concepts)
- motivation is predicted by
- aspects of the social environment (e.g. work climate, autonomy supporting activities)
- individual differences in causality orientations e.g.
- autonomy orientation
- controlled orientation
- impersonal orientation
- motivation is predicted by
- concept of basic psychological needs of competence, autonomy and relatedness that influence the degree of internalisation
- withhin motivation there are autonomous (intrinsinc and internalised extrinsic motivation) and controlled motivation (external regulation/pressure ad introjected motivation)
What is the one feature that distingishes SDT from most other work related theories?
- most theories see motivation as a unitary concept that differs in amount, not in kind
- e.g. cybernatic approach, expectancy-valence approach (Vroom), even Porter and Lawler (1968) saw intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation as additive
-
SDT focuses on the relative strength of autonomous vs controlled motivation, not on the total amount of it
- autonomous motivation seems to facilitate effective performance and well being
- controlled motivation seems to decrease effectiveness (especially when it involves creativity)
What are differences and similarities between SDT and Goal-setting Theory?
- Locke and Latham’s (1990) goal setting theory of motivation says that goal representations are efficient causes of behaviour
- and that performance will be maximised when:
- people set specific, difficult goals with high valence
- they know which behaviours lead to that goal and feel competent to do these things
- theory has a lot of empirical support
- difference to SDT: they do not differentiate types of motivations, charactersitics of goals are predictors of work outcomes not characteristics of motivation
- SDT says that autonomous motivation is better predictor of of performance on heuristic tasks
- however, types of motivation do not differ in outcome of algorithmic tasks
- SDT maintains that differentiating motivations is a means of relating characteristics of tasks and interpersonal environment, plus individual differences to types of performance and well-being
- both approaches see a meaningful rationale as important for internalisation or “goal acceptance”in goal-setting theory
What is the difference between heuristic and algorithmic tasks?
In Algorithmic work the process is defined and the end product is expected. We follow a set of instructions down a single pathway to one conclusion. By definition there are no surprises unless the algorithm breaks down and the result is unexpected. Heuristic work is the opposite, because there is no algorithm for it. We devise ideas and strategies, experiment and create hypotheses until a solution is found.
Please relate the Action Regulation Theory to SDT.
- primarily popular in Germany, influenced by the cybernetic approach
- states that maximum motivation and action results from decision latitude (which is another term for autonomous motivation)
- decision latitude allows workers to set their own goals
- however, it considers a variety of variables to contribute to a single motivation variable (does not differentiate autonomous and controlled motivation)
- SDT sees decision latitude (autonomy) as just one factor supporting autonomy, but e.g. interpersonal style of manager is also very important
Please relate Kanfer’s task-specific motivation to SDT.
- similar to action regulation theory
- interaction of motivation and individual differences as basis for predicting performance
- motivation is characterised as two cognitive resource allocation processes:
- distal.
- mechanisms such as utility to a person, instrumentality of putting effort into something
- proximal.
- factors such as self-monitorng and self regulation. important if task is complex or requires sustained effort
- distal.
- its a unitary conception of motivation (affected by distal and proximal factors)
- not well equipped to predict types of performance )alogirthic or heuristic)
- does not consider effects on well-being
- SDT is less concerned with how a goal is attained but rather on predicting types of performance and well-being