File 11432

Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to job

satisfaction and to motivational theories

A comparison between the public sector (nurses) and the private

sector (call centre agents)

University of Maastricht

Faculty of Economics and Business Administration

Department of Organization and Strategy

Holtum, December 11th

2007

Oudejans, R.

ID 072346

Supervisor: Drs. N. L. Van den Elst

Master thesis

Abstract

The aim of this thesis is two-sided. This thesis examines the relationship between job

satisfaction and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and the moderating variables influencing

this relationship, compared over the public sector and the private sector. Nurses represent the

public sector while call centre agents represent the private sector. This thesis also investigates

the relationship between various motivational theories and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.

The motivational theories included in this research are the equity theory, expectancy theory,

goal-setting theory, attribution theory, theory X and Y, cognitive dissonance theory,

investment model, and cognitive evaluation theory. This thesis also checks which theory is

better applicable to which group.

This study found that intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are negatively correlated to each

other. In addition, intrinsic motivation is positively correlated to job satisfaction while

extrinsic motivation is negatively correlated to job satisfaction. Call centre agents are more

extrinsically motivated and less intrinsically motivated than nurses. Moreover, call centre

agents are less satisfied than nurses. Concerning the effects of one of the two groups on the

relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction, this research

found that call centre agents have a stronger effect on the relationship between intrinsic

motivation and job satisfaction and on the relationship between extrinsic motivation and job

satisfaction. However, the last effect was not found significant.

This study also found that almost all theories were related to at least intrinsic or extrinsic

motivation. The equity theory is positively related to extrinsic motivation. The expectancy

theory is positively related to both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation and better applicable to

call centre agents. The next theory, goal setting theory, is positively related to both extrinsic

and intrinsic motivation as well. The attribution theory, however, shows some mixed results.

One construct is positively related to extrinsic motivation. Moreover, this construct depicts

that, concerning the relationship with extrinsic motivation, the theory is better applicable to

call center agents while for the relationship with intrinsic motivation, the theory is better

applicable to nurses. The second construct of the attribution theory shows that the theory is

negatively related to extrinsic motivation but positively related to intrinsic motivation.

Regarding theory X and Y, the theory is found to be positively related to extrinsic motivation

while negatively related to intrinsic motivation. For the relationship between theory X and Y

and intrinsic motivation, the theory is better suited for nurses. The cognitive dissonance

theory is found to be negatively related to intrinsic motivation. The investment model is

negatively related to extrinsic motivation but positively related to intrinsic motivation.

Regarding the relationship between the investment model and extrinsic motivation, the theory

is better applicable to nurses and for the relationship with intrinsic motivation, the theory is

better suited for call centre agents. The last theory, cognitive evaluation theory, did not find

any significant relationships with intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. However, regarding the

relationship with the cognitive evaluation theory and intrinsic motivation, the theory is better

applicable to nurses.

Table of contents

1. Introduction 1

2. Theories on motivation 8

2.1 Equity theory 9

2.2 Expectancy theory 11

2.3 Goal-setting theory 13

2.4 Attribution theory 17

2.5 Theory X and Y 19

2.6 Cognitive dissonance theory 21

2.7 Investment model 22

2.8 Cognitive evaluation theory 24

3. Job satisfaction 27

3.1 Job satisfaction defined 27

3.2 Determinants of job satisfaction 27

3.3 Correlations of job satisfaction with other variables 31

3.3.1 Job involvement 31

3.3.2 Organizational citizenship behaviour 33

3.3.3 Organizational commitment 34

3.3.4 Turnover 35

3.3.5 Absenteeism 37

3.3.6 Perceived stress 39

3.3.7 Job performance 40

3.3.8 Productivity 43

3.3.9 Life satisfaction 44

3.3.10 Mental health 47

3.3.11 Motivation 48

4. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation 54

4.1 Intrinsic motivation 54

4.2 Extrinsic motivation 56

4.3 The influence of extrinsic motivators on intrinsic motivation 61

4.3.1 The start of the debate 61

4.3.2 Conclusions of the debate 64

4.4 Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in nursing units and call centres 67

4.4.1 Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in nursing units 67

4.4.2 Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in call centres 69

5. Hypotheses development 72

5.1 Hypotheses 1-8 72

5.2 Hypotheses on motivational theories 76

5.3 Framework 81

6. Methodology 82

6.1 Questionnaire design 82

6.2 Variables and measures 85

6.2.1 Dependent variable 85

6.2.2 Independent variables 85

6.2.2.1 Intrinsic motivation 85

6.2.2.2 Extrinsic motivation 86

6.2.2.3 Motivational theories 86

6.2.2.4 Sector 87

6.2.3 Control variables 87

6.3 Validity and reliability tests 87

6.4 Data analysis and hypotheses tests 90

7. Data analysis and results 93

7.1 Characteristics of the sample 93

7.2 Correlations 98

7.3 Regression assumptions 98

7.4 Testing hypotheses 99

7.4.1 Hypothesis 1 99

7.4.2 Hypotheses 2 and 3 100

7.4.3 Hypotheses 4 and 5 100

7.4.4 Hypotheses 6, 7, and 8 101

7.4.5 Hypotheses of motivational theories 103

8. Discussion and conclusion 106

8.1 Addressing the problem statement 106

8.2 Addressing the motivational theories 109

8.3 Implications 111

8.3.1 Implications for academic literature 111

8.3.2 Implications for managerial practice 111

8.4 Conclusion 113

9. Limitations 115

References 119

Appendix A 160

Appendix B 169

Appendix C 187

- 1 -

Chapter 1: Introduction

In 2006, around 185,000 persons (only 10,000 in 1996) were working in call centres in the

Netherlands (CBS-Statline, 2007a). Introduced in the 1960s in the United States, call centres

are facilities that centralise telephone sales, customer-service, technical support and other

telephone-based operations for an organisation (Ubaldi, 1997). In other words, a call centre is

part of an organisation that aims at being most efficient, effective, and customer-friendly in

dealing with incoming and outgoing calls. King (2003) adds that working in a call centre

demands an immense amount of emotional labour because this line of work needs continuous

interaction with customers and the ability to regulate emotions at the job. Emotional labour

occurs when an employee has to display emotions desired by the organisation during personal

interactions with the customers (Morris and Feldman, 1996). Even when encountering angry

customers, whether they are right or wrong, a call centre agent has to apply organisational

standards and assume that the customer is always right.

Call centres try to stay up-to-date in technological advances and global demands for cost-

cutting initiatives (Lewig and Dollard, 2003). One does not have to be a genius to understand

that this could lead to problems. Working in call centres, even in the ones that focus on

quality instead of quantity, can be monotonous, very demanding, and stress-sensitive (Lewig

and Dollard, 2003; Taylor and Bain, 1999; Wallace, Eagleson and Waldersee, 2000). This

results in high levels of absenteeism and turnover, higher than in other employment sectors

(Bain, Watson, Mulvey, Taylor and Gall, 2002; King, 2003; Lewig and Dollard, 2003).

Like the call centre industry, the health care industry can be categorized in the service sector.

In 2004, almost a million individuals were working in the health care industry in the

Netherlands. From this number, almost 250,000 individuals were listed to work in hospitals.

Around 165,000 employees (including interns) were working in hospitals as (male)nurses

(CBS-Statline, 2007b). The hospital is the principal location of modern medical practice.

According to Gray (1984), nursing has conventionally occupied the middle range of the

hierarchical medical division of labour because nurses generally outrank non-medical support

staff and medical technicians but are subordinate to doctors and hospital administrators. The

position of nursing in the health care industry has caused several problems since the start of

this profession. Nurses have often been denied the status of a true profession, have received

Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation Introduction

to job satisfaction and to motivational theories

- 2 -

lower wages in comparison to other professions, had restrictions on the range of nursing tasks,

and have a lack of professional autonomy (Freidson, 1970 in Gray, 1984). Nowadays, nurses

have more responsibility and authority with regard to the practice of medicine and nursing is

now widely accepted as a profession (Tummers, Van Merode and Landeweerd, 2006).

Although nurses’ salary has increased over the past few years ("Survey trio find nurses' pay is

on the rise", 2006), it still remains rather low in comparison to other professions ("Money

matters", 2006; Pitcher, 2006; Steltzer, Woods and Gasda, 2003). More strikingly, in a

female-dominated profession (around 90 percent), male nurses still earn more than female

nurses for doing the same job ("Money matters", 2006; Steltzer et al., 2003).

More and more firms are realizing the importance of having motivated and satisfied

employees. Employee motivation is a crucial element in a successful organisation. Employee

satisfaction is often referred to in a same way as employee motivation. However, being

motivated and being satisfied are two related but different things. The word motivation comes

from the ancient Latin verb ‘movere’, which means to urge or to move. The problem with

finding a suitable definition of motivation is that there are so many definitions available in the

literature. This could be due to the many different motivational theories present and the

various fields where motivation is used. Managers and supervisors acknowledge the

importance of motivation in organizations for creating a successful enterprise. Employees that

are motivated to work long and hard are normally more productive than employees that are

not motivated (Daniels and Radebaugh, 2001). Daniels and Radebaugh (2001) continue by

stating that higher productivity, caused by increased work motivation, normally reduces

production costs. As mentioned before, there are several definitions on motivation available.

One of them is Robbins (2003), who defines motivation as the eagerness to do something,

conditioned by this action’s capacity to satisfy some specific need for the individual. Another

definition is given by Kinicki and Kreitner (2003), who depict motivation as those

psychological processes that cause the stimulation, direction, and determination of voluntary

actions that are goal oriented. In other words, motivation is what drives individuals to do what

they do. Motivation can be traced back in numerous aspects. When one is a member of a

soccer club, there can be a number of drives for his motivation to be part of this club. He can

be motivated to sport in order to obtain a good health, to work on his social skills, to get away

from his parents who are annoying him, to lie in the mud, and so on. Simple physical needs

also cause motivation. When one is sitting in the living room and feeling hungry, the physical

need for food makes him or her get up from the comfortable couch to the closet or fridge



- 3 -

where the food is stored. If he is not satisfied with what he comes across in the closet and

fridge, he may even decide to drive to the supermarket and to buy the groceries he needs for

cooking an appropriate dish. If one is feeling tired, the physical need causes the motivation to

go to bed (depending on where this person is and at what time of the day this feeling occurs).

The first theories on motivation and work motivation come from Herzberg (1959), McGregor

(1960), and Maslow (1954). The two-factor theory, or motivation-hygiene theory, found that

the answers people gave when they felt good about their work were significantly different

from the answers given when they felt bad about their work (Herzberg, Mausner, and

Snyderman, 1959). In the chapter on job satisfaction, the link between the motivation-hygiene

theory and job satisfaction will be elaborated. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory depicts that

within every human there exists a hierarchy of needs and that when one of those needs

becomes satisfied, the human moves up the hierarchy to the next need (Maslow, 1954 in

Robbins, 2003). McGregor’s theory X and Y explains two distinct views (positive and

negative) of human beings (McGregor, 1960 in Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003). The theory of

Maslow will be not elaborated in this paper but theory X and Y will be clarified in chapter 2

on theories of motivation.

A number of other motivational theories have been developed as well. One could think of the

equity theory by Adams (1963; 1965 in Harder, 1991) that states that employees balance what

they contribute to a job and get out of it and compare this ratio to other employees. Another

theory that is prominent in the field of motivation is the expectancy theory by Victor Vroom.

The expectancy theory, based on work of Atkinson, Lewin, Peak, and others, holds that an

individual will act in a certain way based on the expectation that the act will be followed by a

specific outcome and on the attractiveness of that outcome (e.g. Vroom, 1964 in Isaac, Zerbe

and Pitt, 2001; in Kopelman and Thompson, 1976; in Kopf, 1992; in Robbins, 2003). An

additional motivational theory is the goal setting theory with as main proponent Locke.

According to Locke (1968, e.g. in Austin and Bobko, 1985; in Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003; in

Locke, 1978; in Locke and Latham, 2002), specific goals increase performance, and difficult

goals, when accepted, result in higher performance than easy goals. These motivational

theories are just some of the incredible list of theories available. Some of them that are

interesting for this research will be elaborated later on in this paper in chapter 2 on theories of

motivation.



- 4 -

The topic of motivation, as with the motivational theories, has been discussed extensively. In

general, total motivation consists of two separate constructs, namely intrinsic motivation and

extrinsic motivation. The same distinction will be made in this research. Intrinsic motivation

is the motivation to do something for its own sake, for the pure enjoyment of the activity itself

(Hennessey and Amabile, 2005). It is the desire to work on something or do something since

it is involving, challenging, exciting, interesting, or satisfying (Robbins, 2003). When applied

to work, intrinsic motivation means that employees genuinely care about their work, that

employees search for better ways to get work done, and that employees are energised and

committed to do it well (Thomas, 2000). Intrinsic motivators are an endogenous part of an

individual’s involvement in an action. According to Amabile (1993) those intrinsic motivators

are necessarily bound up with the work itself. Next to intrinsic motivation, there is extrinsic

motivation. Extrinsic motivation is the motivation to do something in order to attain some

external goal or meet some externally imposed constraint (Hennessey and Amabile, 2005).

Extrinsic motivation is performing an activity with a feeling of being pressured, tension,

anxiety, just to make sure that one would receive a desired result (Lindenberg, 2001).

Extrinsically motivated behaviours are actions that cause the attainment of rewards that are

externally imposed, including material possessions, salary, additional bonuses, feedback and

evaluations from others, fringe benefits, and prestige (Ryan and Deci, 2000b). There has been

much debate between proponents of extrinsic motivation theory and intrinsic motivation

theory regarding the use and influence of rewards on intrinsic motivation (see Deci, 1971;

Deci, Cascio and Krusell, 1975; Deci, Koestner and Ryan, 1999; Deci, Schwartz, Sheinman

and Ryan, 1981; Eisenberger and Cameron, 1996; Eisenberger and Cameron, 1998;

Eisenberger, Pierce and Cameron, 1999a; Eisenberger, Rhoades and Cameron, 1999b; Tang

and Hall, 1995 in Henderlong and Lepper, 2002; Lepper, Henderlong and Gingras, 1999;

Cameron and Pierce, 1994; 1996 in Lindenberg, 2001; Ryan and Deci, 2000b). The comments

of those different views will be discussed later in this paper.

As has been said before, motivation is related to, but different from job satisfaction. The

concept of job satisfaction has been researched as extensively as (work) motivation.

According to Kinicki and Kreitner (2003), job satisfaction is an affective or emotional

response toward a variety of aspects of one’s job. It is important to understand that job

satisfaction is some kind of total sum of various aspects of work. One can be fairly happy

with his current salary but at the same time, one can be incredibly annoyed by his supervisors

and colleagues. This shows that job satisfaction is a combination of several factors. Because



- 5 -

satisfaction is an emotional response, it is very personal and can mean different things to

different employees. Kinicki and Kreitner (2003) suggest that there are five predominant

models of job satisfaction that specify its causes, namely need fulfilment, equity, discrepancy,

value attainment, and genetic components. These models will be elaborated in chapter 3 (on

job satisfaction). Robbins (2003) adds that job satisfaction refers to an individual’s general

attitude toward his or her job. When a person is satisfied with his present job, he holds

positive attitudes toward his work and when a person is dissatisfied, he holds negative

attitudes toward his work. Similar to motivation, job satisfaction is an important issue for

managers to consider. Several authors, like Freeman (1978) and McEvoy and Cascio (1985),

show that job satisfaction is an important determinant of labour market mobility and that

dissatisfied employees can lead to increases in turnover rates of organisations. As could be

reasoned by common sense, employees that are satisfied with their current jobs show a higher

worker productivity (Mangione and Quinn, 1975). Likewise, when employees report higher

levels of satisfaction, the number of cases of absenteeism is decreasing (Clegg, 1983). In the

chapter of job satisfaction several constructs (e.g. organizational citizenship behaviour,

motivation, job involvement, life satisfaction), with which job satisfaction is correlated, will

be discussed and clarified. These relationships between job satisfaction and other variables

will be applied to the two relevant samples for this research, namely to call centre agents and

nurses in hospitals. Moreover, the relationships between the various motivational theories

included in this research and the concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation will be

elaborated on.

The majority of research on work motivation and job satisfaction focuses on either of the two

topics. Although many acknowledge that there is some link between the two, it is hard to find

studies that relate both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation combined to job satisfaction. The

problem of most studies relating intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction is that results are

often different and contradicting (Eskildsen, Kristensen and Westlund, 2004). This is due to

that these studies are limited to single companies and specific countries (Eskildsen et al.,

2004). This can be seen in the research done by Clark, Oswald and Warr (1996), Finlay,

Martin, Roman and Blum (1995, in Eskildsen et al., 2004), Gaertner and Robinson (1999),

Groot and van de Brink (1999), Miles, Patrick and King (1996), Robie, Ryan, Schmeider,

Parra and Smith (1998, in Eskildsen et al., 2004), Sousa-Poza and Sousa-Poza (2000),

Sousa-Poza and Sousa-Poza (2003). Regarding nursing units and call centres environments,



- 6 -

not much research has been conducted on the relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation and job satisfaction. Even research in general linking extrinsic and intrinsic

motivation to job satisfaction is hard to find, if existent. This paper tries to clarify the

relationship of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation with job satisfaction and to apply it to two

different groups of employees, namely to call centre agents and nurses. Furthermore, several

motivational theories will be linked to the concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation to

find out what the relationships are between those constructs. In order to shed a light on these

problems, this research will focus on whether employees in a specific sector are more

motivated through extrinsic factors, such as salary, than through intrinsic factors. It would be

attention-grabbing to find out how job satisfaction is affected with the problems that the

industry is facing. With respect to the profession of nursing, it would be fascinating to see

what the role of motivation and job satisfaction is in this employment sector. A comparison

between the two sectors is what this paper is aiming at.

The central aim of this thesis is to investigate the concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation and job satisfaction. The central questions in this thesis are: What is the

relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on the one hand and job satisfaction

on the other hand and the possible moderating variables influencing this relationship in two

different sectors, namely men and women working as a nurse in hospitals (public service

sector) and men and women working in call centres (private service sector)? Furthermore,

what is the relationship between several motivational theories, included in this research, with

the constructs of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation? Data will be gathered by means of a

questionnaire, which will be handed out to respondents working in either of the two sectors

that are relevant for this research. The relevant subquestions are:

§ What are the various motivational theories that are interesting for this research?

§ What are the different aspects of job satisfaction?

§ What is the role of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in this research?

§ What does the existing literature depict about the link between intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation and job satisfaction?

§ What are the moderating variables influencing the relationship between intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction and why are they relevant for this research?



- 7 -

This paper will focus on the relationship of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation to job

satisfaction applied to two samples (nurses and call centre agents). Chapter 2 will discuss

several theories of motivation, followed by an extensive review on the construct of job

satisfaction in chapter 3. Next, in chapter 4, the concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation

are clarified and discussed. Chapter 5 deals with the hypotheses relevant for this paper.

Chapter 6 will focus on the methodology in this research. In chapter 7, the results of this

research will be showed. Then, a conclusion will be given to the most essential questions in

this research, namely what the relationship is of intrinsic/extrinsic motivation and job

satisfaction in the two relevant sectors and what the influence of various motivational theories

is on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Lastly, limitations of this research and suggestions for

future research will be provided.

- 8 -

Chapter 2: Theories on motivation

The basic job of a manager or a supervisor is to get work done by his employees. In order to

do this successfully, the manager of supervisor must be able to comprehend the underlying

psychological processes that motivate his employees. A lot of research has been conducted in

the field of motivational theories. To work out all motivational theories available in detail

would be well beyond the scope of this paper. To list all motivational theories would be an

impossible process since theories are being revised, developed, criticised, and so on, as this

paper is being written. Moreover, many theories are in some way related to each other; it is

even harder to distinguish between them. The motivational theories included in this research

are linked to intrinsic and extrinsic motivation to find out what their possible influence could

be on those two constructs. This is the so-called exploratory part of this study.

The motivational theories that are relevant for this research are the equity theory (Adams,

1963; 1965 in Carrell and Dittrich, 1978; in Cosier and Dalton, 1983; in Harder, 1991; in

Huseman, Hatfield and Miles, 1987; in Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003; in Robbins, 2003),

expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964 in Harder, 1991; in Isaac et al., 2001; in Kinicki and

Kreitner, 2003; in Kopelman, 1976; in Kopf, 1992; in Reinharth and Wahba, 1975; in

Robbins, 2003; in Wahba and House, 1972), goal-setting theory (Locke, 1968 in Austin and

Bobko, 1985; in Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003; in Locke, 1978; in Locke, 2004; in Locke and

Latham, 2002; in Locke, Shaw, Saari and Latham, 1981; in Robbins, 2003), attribution theory

(Heider, 1958 in Borkowski and Allen, 2003; in Kelley, 1973; in Kelley and Michela, 1980),

theory X and Y (McGregor, 1960 in Burns, 1967; in Carson, 2005; in Kinicki and Kreitner,

2003; in Meeker, 1982; in Robbins, 2003; in Schein, 1975), cognitive dissonance theory

(Festinger, 1957 in Robbins, 2003), investment model (Rusbult, 1983; Rusbult and Farrell,

1983; Rusbult, Johnson and Morrow, 1986), and cognitive evaluation (Deci, 1971; Deci et al.,

1975; Deci et al., 1981).

The following theories on motivation are not discussed in this research (due to time and space

limitations) but are still prominent in the field of motivation: The hierarchy of needs theory

(Maslow, 1943), two-factor theory or motivation-hygiene theory (Herzberg, Mausner &

Snyderman, 1959), achievement motivation theory (McClelland, 1975), reinforcement theory

or operant conditioning theory (Skinner, 1938), ERG theory (Alderfer, 1972), self-

Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation Theories on motivation


- 9 -

determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985), social cognition theory (Bandura, 1977a; 1986;

1997), theory Z (Ouchi, 1981), control theory (later renamed choice theory) (Glasser, 1984),

self-perception theory (Bem, 1967), scientific management (Taylor, 1911), Hawthorne

experiments (Mayo, 1933), cognitive behaviourism (Tolman, 1932), social learning (Bandura,

1977b), drive theory (Hull, 1952), correspondent inference theory (Jones & Davis, 1967),

self-consistency theory (Aronson, 1968), self-affirmation theory (Steele, 1988), self-

discrepancy theory (Higgins, Bond, Klein & Strauman, 1986), (social) interdependence theory

(Deutsch, 1949), social exchange theory (Homans, 1958), and reactance theory (Brehm,

1966). The first motivational theory that will be elaborated in this chapter is the equity theory

with as main proponent Adams.

2.1 Equity theory

One thing that is common for humans is to compare themselves to others. One theory that

comes forth from this evaluating of one’s self and each other is the equity theory. Equity

theory is based on cognitive dissonance theory developed by Leon Festinger in the 1950s

(Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003). The cognitive dissonance theory will be discussed as well later

on. John Stacey Adams put his equity theory forward in 1963. Central to comprehending

Adams’ equity theory of motivation is an understanding of the individual-organization

exchange relationship.

Carrell and Dittrich (1978) depict that most theorists discussing the equity theory posit three

primary points. First, employees perceive a fair return for what they contribute to their job.

Second, employees then run some kind of social comparison what their compensation should

be with their colleagues. Last, each employee that perceives himself to be in an inequitable

situation will try to decrease this inequity. Robbins (2003) and Adams (1963; 1965, in Harder,

1991) explain that the equity theory is a theory that centres on perceived fairness of an

individual. An employee reflects on how much effort he has expended and compares this to

what he has got from it. After this individual evaluation of his input-output ratio, he will

compare his ratio to the input-output ratios of others, especially the direct peers. If the

employee considers his input-output ratio to be equal to ratios of other relevant employees, a

state of equity exists. The employee will have a feeling that he is treated fairly. In this



- 10 -

situation of equity, the person is seemingly content and will not act to imbalance the condition

(Cosier and Dalton, 1983).

Naturally, when an employee perceives unequal ratios between him and his counterparts,

there will be a state of inequity. There are three types of equity, namely external, internal, and

employee equity (Konopaske and Werner, 2002). External equity arises when employees use

comparisons to others who have the same job but work in different organizations. Internal

equity occurs when employees compare themselves to others who have a different job but

work in the same organization. Employee equity exists when an employee compares himself

to other employees who occupy the same job within the same organization. The most relevant

of the three types seems the employee equity, since an employee tends to evaluate his own

input-output ratio to those of his direct peers. One possible reason for this is that it is the

easiest comparison to make for an employee. He can see how much effort his colleague has

put into a job and how much he got from it. This is harder to do when making comparisons

regarding internal and external equity.

Kinicki and Kreitner (2003) emphasize the aspect of ratios in the equity theory. Since equity

is based on comparing ratios, inequity will not necessarily be perceived because someone else

receives greater rewards. This inequity can be two-sided. An employee can feel overrewarded

when he thinks that his ratio is better than others and he can feel underrewarded when he

thinks that he should get more for his work. Adams (1963; 1965 in Cosier and Dalton, 1983)

suggests that although both overreward and underreward produce tension, they may not have

equal effects. Overreward can be perceived as luck or fortune and therefore not causing much

tension. It is possible that overreward will not be perceived as inequity as such. If this

overreward is viewed as desirable, the tension to decrease inequity would be zero in fact.

Logically, this will be different for each person. Moreover, there could be a difference

between public (hospitals) and private (call centres) organisations concerning the tension to

decrease inequities when they occur.

People try to correct inequities when they occur (Kaplan, Reckers and Reynolds, 1986;

Robbins, 2003). There are four statements that relate to inequity (Adams, 1963; 1965 in

Cosier and Dalton, 1983; Adams, 1963; 1965 in Huseman et al., 1987). First, the perceived

inequity creates tension in an individual. Second, the size of tension is proportional to the



- 11 -

degree of inequity. Next, the created tension motivates the employee to decrease it. Last, the

strength of the motivation to decrease the inequity is proportional to the perceived inequity.

Robbins (2003) continues with several choices that employees have when they encounter an

inequity. First, they can alter either their own or others’ inputs or outcomes. Second, they can

behave in some way to induce others to change their inputs or outcomes. Next, they can

behave in such a way to change their own inputs or outcomes. Fourth, they can select a

different comparison referent. Last, they can quit their job.

The equity theory is included for the study because it is interesting to see how employees

compare themselves to each other. These comparisons can lead to job turnover when some

employees perceive not to be treated fairly. Important is that equity theory shows that beliefs,

perceptions, and attitudes influence motivation. Employees are motivated powerfully to

correct situations when there is a perception of inequity present. The theory that will be

discussed next, is the expectancy theory, which is also a theory that includes the concept of

perceptions from individuals.

2.2 Expectancy theory

Expectancy theory refers to a set of decision theories of work motivation and performance

(Vroom, 1964 in Ferris, 1977). Perception plays a central role in expectancy theory because it

emphasizes cognitive ability to anticipate likely consequences of behaviour (Kinicki and

Kreitner, 2003). The most famous version of an expectancy theory is the theory depicted by

Victor Vroom. Basically, Vroom (1964, in Isaac et al., 2001; in Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003; in

Kopelman, 1976; in Kopf, 1992; in Reinharth and Wahba, 1975; in Robbins, 2003; in Wahba

and House, 1972) depicts that the strength of a tendency to act in a specific way depends on

the strength of an expectation that the act will have a certain consequence and on the

attractiveness and value of that specific outcome to the individual. As said by Vroom (1964,

in Kopf, 1992), the expectancy theory has two major assumptions. The first assumption is that

individual persons have perceptions about the consequences that result from their behavioural

actions, and the causal relationship among these outcomes. These perceptions, or beliefs, are

referred to as either expectancies or instrumentalities (see also in Figure 2.1). The second

assumption is that individual persons have affective reactions to certain outcomes. Affective



- 12 -

reactions reflect the valence (positive or negative value individuals place on results) of

outcomes (Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003).

According to the expectancy theory, individuals will be motivated to perform by two

expectancies (Ferris, 1977; Harder, 1991; Isaac et al., 2001; Kopelman and Thompson, 1976).

The first expectancy is the probability that the effort put forth will lead to the desired

performance. The second expectancy (also referred to as instrumentality) is the probability

that a particular performance will lead to certain preferred outcomes. When the probability of

some effort will not be rewarded, the employee will not be highly motivated to perform a

certain task. According to the theories that fall under the heading of expectancy theory, the so-

called central expectancy core is that motivation is based on individual’s viewpoints about the

perceived probability that the effort will lead to specific performance (expectancy), multiplied

by the probability that performance will lead to a certain reward (instrumentality), multiplied

by the supposed value of the reward (valence) (Feldman, Reitz and Hilterman, 1976; Ferris,

1977; Isaac et al., 2001; Reinharth and Wahba, 1975). Figure 2.1, depicted by Fisher,

Schoenfeldt and Shaw (1999) explains the expectancy theory in a graphical way.

Figure 2.1: Major elements of expectancy theory

Retrieved from Fisher, C. D., Schoenfeldt, L. F. and Shaw, J. B. (1999). Human resource

management (4th

ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. p. 609.

Effort

Performance

Outcomes (pay, recognition,

other rewards)

Expectancy

(probability that

effort will lead to

desired

performance)

Instrumentality (probability that

performance will

produce desired

outcomes)

Valence (value of outcome to

individual)



- 13 -

The expectancy theory is embedded in the study, as it is, like the equity theory, a widely used

theory for comprehending employee motivation and satisfaction. Expectancy theory primarily

relies upon extrinsic motivators to clarify causes for behaviours exhibited at work (Leonard,

Beauvais and Scholl, 1999). External rewards are viewed as inducing motivational states that

fuel behaviours, as opposed to intrinsic motivators, where behaviours are derived from

internal forces such as enjoyment of the work itself because it is challenging, interesting, and

so on (Isaac et al., 2001). It is interesting to see how expectancy theory influences motivation

and satisfaction.

Kinicki and Kreitner (2003) show three ways how motivation is present in the expectancy

theory. An employee’s expectation that a specific level of effort produces the intended

performance goal influences (extrinsic) motivation. Moreover, the employee’s perceived

chances of actually getting certain outcomes by accomplishing the organizational goals affect

motivation as well. Last, employees are motivated to the extent that they value the outcomes

received. Concerning extrinsic and intrinsic motivation, one can see that the focus is more on

extrinsic motivation than on intrinsic motivation. Figure 2.1 focuses on extrinsic motivation

and not on intrinsic motivation. This is backed up by Hennessey and Amabile (2005).

Hennessey and Amabile (2005) depict that intrinsic motivation is the motivation to do

something for the pure enjoyment of the work itself while extrinsic motivation is the

motivation to achieve some external goal or to meet some constraint. Regarding the

expectancy theory, one can see that the focus is on receiving and valuing rewards, which is

mostly extrinsic. Intrinsic motivation is still present here, but to a lesser extent than extrinsic

motivation. The expectancy theory is a theory that is based on maximization of self-interests,

wherein each employee tries to maximize his or her expected satisfaction (Robbins, 2003).

One can see the principles of hedonism back in expectancy theories, since hedonistic

individuals attempt to minimize their pain and to maximize their pleasure and wealth (Kinicki

and Kreitner, 2003). With the expectancy theory, individuals try to maximize gains by

minimizing costs. The following theory that will be discussed is the goal-setting theory.

2.3 Goal-setting theory

In its earliest formations, the goal-setting theory and the expectancy theory shared some

common elements. Tolman (1932, in Klein, 1991) depicts that the expectancy of a goal and



- 14 -

demand for a goal were the key determinants of impulse to certain action. The two theories

show indeed some relationship with each other as Locke and Latham (2002) confirm. To go

back to the goal-setting theory, Locke, Shaw, Saari and Latham (1981) defined a goal as what

an individual attempts to accomplish; it is the object or aim of a certain action. The basic

assumption of goal-setting is that goals are immediate regulators of human action (Locke et

al., 1981). Evidence from the goal-setting research indicates that specific goals lead to

increased performance and that difficult goals, when individuals have accepted them, result in

higher performance than easy goals (Locke 1968, in Austin and Bobko, 1985; in Kinicki and

Kreitner, 2003; in Locke, 1978; in Locke, 2004; in Locke and Latham, 2002; in Locke et al.,

1981; in Robbins, 2003). Next to that, they should be challenging but achievable (Locke et al.,

1981). Following Kinicki and Kreitner (2003), goals should be “SMART”, which is an

acronym that stands for specific, measurable, attainable, results-oriented, and time bound.

Goal setting has four motivational mechanisms (Bryan and Locke, 1967; LaPorte and Nath,

1976; Locke and Latham, 2002; Locke et al., 1981). The first motivational mechanism is that

goals that are personally meaningful and interesting tend to focus an individual’s attention on

what is important and what is relevant (Locke & Bryan, 1969 in Locke et al., 1981). The

second mechanism is that goals have an energizing function. Simply said, higher goals lead to

more effort than lower goals (Bryan and Locke, 1967). The third mechanism is that goals

affect persistence. Persistence is the effort expended on a specific task over a certain amount

of time (LaPorte and Nath, 1976). Normally, the more difficult a goal is to achieve, the higher

the persistence. The last motivational mechanism holds that goals affect action indirectly by

leading to the arousal, discovery and use of knowledge and strategies (Wood & Locke, 1990

in Locke and Latham, 2002).

Regarding the impact of goal-setting on intrinsic motivation, Elliot and Harackiewicz (1994)

show some interesting evidence in their article. They explain, by means of a regression

analysis, that the effect of performance or mastery-focused goals on intrinsic motivation

depends on the degree of achievement orientation of an individual. Performance achievement

goals focus on the demonstration of ability and define competence in a normative manner

while mastery-focused goals focus on the development of skills and define competence in a

self-referential way (Ames and Archer, 1988). When an individual is low on achievement

orientation, he tries to avoid assessment and achievement settings and he is not oriented

toward competence. Scoring high on achievement motivation means that this individual seeks



- 15 -

for ability and skills assessment and likes competence performance (Elliot and Harackiewicz,

1994; Trope, 1975). Such a person wants to be evaluated by others. Logically, the highest

intrinsic motivation is displayed for individuals with low achievement orientation when

offered with mastery-focused goals and for individuals high in achievement orientation when

presented with task-specific standards with a performance focus (Elliot and Harackiewicz,

1994). Elliot and Harackiewicz (1994) show with this research that goal setting can enhance

interest in enjoyable activities for some individuals.

Goals are simultaneously an object or outcome to look for and a standard for satisfaction

(Locke and Latham, 2002). When an individual wants to achieve a certain goal means that

this individual will not be satisfied until he reaches that goal. Therefore, goals serve as the

inflection point or reference standard for satisfaction versus dissatisfaction (Mento, Locke and

Klein, 1992). Locke and Latham (2002) add to this that individuals that produce the most,

those with difficult goals, are harder to satisfy. In this case, individuals that set high goals

produce more as they are dissatisfied with less (Locke and Latham, 2002). Because this

specific point where they become satisfied is much higher, they are motivated to produce

more than those individuals with lower goals (Locke and Latham, 2002). This conclusion is

can be seen in Figure 2.2 (depicted in Mento et al. (1992)).

Figure 2.2 shows undergraduate business students reporting four beneficial outcomes that

they expected as a result of having an average grade average of A, B, or C. In this case, the

grade average of A is the highest grade average a student could receive and the grade average

of C is the lowest. Anticipated satisfaction (valence) showed an opposite direction as can be

seen in Figure 2.2. The achievement valence curve represents the mean anticipated

satisfaction score for each goal. Students with as goal an average grade of C showed the

highest anticipated satisfaction while students with as goal an average grade of A showed the

lowest anticipated satisfaction (Mento et al., 1992). With Figure 2.2, one can see that, on

average, students with an average grade of C seem to be more satisfied than students with an

average grade of A. This is because students aiming for an ‘A’ are harder to satisfy than

students that are more interested in just passing a course. Interesting for this research are the

several linkages in Figure 2.2. Pride and competence are related to intrinsic motivation

whereas school outcomes, job benefits, and career benefits are more related to extrinsic

motivation. Some of those concepts, like pride, competence, and to a lesser extent job benefits

and career benefits will be included in the study. This study will compare the constructs of



- 16 -

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation between call centre agents and nurses to find out which

group is more extrinsically motivation and which group is more intrinsically motivated.

Figure 2.2: Goal level, valence, instrumentality

Retrieved from Mento, A. J., Locke, E. A., & Klein, H. J. (1992). Relationship of goal level to

valence and instrumentality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(4), p. 401.

It is clear why the goal setting theory is included in the study. As mentioned above, goal

setting has four motivational mechanisms, namely for direction, for effort, for persistence, and

for strategy development (Locke et al., 1981). Moreover, goal setting has an impact on



- 17 -

intrinsic motivation as shown by Elliot and Harackiewicz (1994) and Hirst (1988). Hirst

(1988) conducted research where he linked goal setting to intrinsic motivation. He found that

goal setting enhanced intrinsic motivation under conditions of low intrinsic task interest and

that goal setting damaged intrinsic motivation under conditions of high intrinsic task interest.

In other words, goal setting can enhance intrinsic motivation on tasks that are not interesting

and decrease intrinsic motivation on tasks that are interesting. Last but not least, goal setting

also influences satisfaction, as depicted above by Locke and Latham (2002) and Mento et al.

(1992). The fourth motivational theory that will be dealt with is the attribution theory.

2.4 Attribution theory

Regarding the attribution theories, Fritz Heider is considered the founder or pioneer.

Attribution theory is based on the premise that people attempt to infer causes for observed

behaviour by other individuals and themselves (Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003; Robbins, 2003).

In other words, according to the attribution theory, people interpret behaviour in terms of its

causes and these interpretations play a significant role in determining reactions to that specific

behaviour (Kelley, 1973; Kelley and Michela, 1980).

Attribution theory suggests that when individuals look at the behaviour of others, they try to

determine whether this behaviour was internally or externally triggered (Kinicki and Kreitner,

2003; Robbins, 2003). Individuals try to answer questions to ‘why?’ something occurs

(Weiner, 1979). Internal factors, like ability and skills, are situated within a person and

believed to be under the personal control of that person while external factors are situated

outside a person in the environment (Robbins, 2003). A simple example can clarify this.

When a person is late for school, the tutor can either think that his tardiness is due to internal

(controllable) factors or external (non-controllable) factors. In this case, a possible internal

factor could be that he overslept because he was too lazy to come out of his bed and a

possible external factor could be that the public transport system was failing.

Kelley (1973) and Kelley and Michela (1980) put forward that individuals make causal

attributions after collecting information concerning three dimensions of behaviour. The first is

consensus, which involves a comparison of a person’s behaviour with that of his peers. The

consensus is higher when more individuals within a certain group behave the same way. The



- 18 -

second dimension is distinctiveness, which is determined by weighing an individual’s

behaviour on one specific task against his behaviour on other tasks. In other words, whether

or not his behaviour is the same in different situations. The third and last dimension is

consistency. Consistency answers the question whether an individual behaves the same way

over time. Kelley (1967, in Kaplan et al., 1986) also mentions consistency over modality,

which means that a certain situation can occur through various modalities (like seeing,

hearing, feeling and so on). Kelley (1973) theorized that individuals attribute behaviour to

internal causes when the observed behaviour is characterized by low consensus, low

distinctiveness, and high consistency. Externally caused behaviour is characterized by high

consensus, high distinctiveness, and low consistency. This can be clarified with an example

where a tutor evaluates the tardiness of a certain student. When a tutor notices that most of his

students are late (high consensus), and he knows that the student’s behaviour is normally very

strict and motivated in tutorial meetings and that this tardiness comes as a surprise (high

distinctiveness), and he realises that the student has never been late during this course and

previous courses (low consistency), the tutor will attribute the student’s tardiness to external

factors, like a failure in the public transport system. When a tutor sees that the specific student

is the only one that is not present (low consensus), and that the student gives a sloppy

experience in tutorial meetings and in general (low distinctiveness), and that the student has

been late a couple of times (high consistency), he will attribute the student’s behaviour to

internal causes, like being too lazy to get out of his bed.

Interesting is that individuals, when something goes wrong, tend to blame external factors,

but, when it goes well, contribute this to internal factors (D. T. Miller, 1976; Snyder, Stephan

and Rosenfield, 1976; Wortman, Costanzo and Witt, 1973). According to Heider (1944, in

Schlenker and Miller, 1977), there is some kind of self-serving motivation bias present to

protect self-esteem. Miller and Ross (1975) were the first ones to really suggest this bias as it

is known today. Bradley (1978) tested successfully that persons tend to accept responsibility

for behavioural actions with a positive outcome but tend to deny responsibility when

behavioural actions have a negative outcome. Another error that distorts an individual’s

interpretation of observed behaviour is the fundamental attribution error (Ross, 1977 in Kahle,

1980). This fundamental attribution error by Ross (1977, in Kahle, 1980) refers to a situation

where individuals underattribute importance to situational variables. A good example is that a

coach of a team contributed the bad performance of his team to bad teamwork rather than that

the other team just performed better.



- 19 -

Lepper, Greene and Nisbett (1973) show an interesting link of attribution theory and intrinsic

and extrinsic motivation. They tested the consequences of shifting an individual’s perception

on his own motivation from being intrinsically motivated to being extrinsically motivated by

adding a reward (external motivator) to a situation where one was intrinsically motivated. The

results show that individuals in the expected-award condition would show less subsequent

intrinsic interest in the target activity than individuals in the unexpected-award condition and

the no-award-condition. In other words, including an external reward to an activity that was

previously based on pure interest makes people less intrinsically motivated to do that activity.

This is due to the shift of the locus of control. The locus of control shifts from intrinsic to

extrinsic and therefore there is a decrease in intrinsic motivation. The influence of extrinsic

rewards on intrinsic motivation will be extensively discussed in the chapter 3 on intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation.

The attribution theory is included in the study because it is interesting to find out how

employees make causal attributions in the work environment. An employee’s attribution for

his own performance can have severe impact on subsequent motivation, performance, and

satisfaction (Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003). Employees will leave the job, develop lower

expectations for the future, and experience decreased self-esteems and harmed egos when

they attribute failure to a lack of skills and ability (Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003). Fortunately,

employees can be attributionally trained in order to improve motivation, persistence, and

performance (Försterling, 1985). The study could also be used to find out whether employees

at certain jobs received such training in order to help them deal with certain drawbacks.

Moreover, it would be interesting to see whether persons that chose a certain profession

(either because they think this was challenging, interesting, and so on, or because they needed

the money) would stay at the same job even if they received less salary. The next theory that

will be elaborated is theory X and Y by McGregor.

2.5 Theory X and Y

Douglas McGregor is the creator of theory X and Y. In 1960, he wrote his famous book ‘The

human side of enterprise’, in which he worked out theory X and Y. He formulated two

contrasting views about human nature (Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003). Both views have some



- 20 -

critical assumptions concerning employees at work. According to theory X, employees dislike

work and will avoid it whenever they can, employees must be threatened with punishment to

make them work, they need and want direction when they are working, employees have little

or no ambition, and they are only interested in security (McGregor, 1960 in Burns, 1967; in

Carson, 2005; in Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003; in Robbins, 2003; in Schein, 1975). These

assumptions are, as can be seen above, rather pessimistic in how managers and supervisors

saw their employees.

McGregor’s concern was the development of the individual employee in the work

environment. As said by Meeker (1982), it is McGregor, with his assumptions in theory Y,

who provided intellectual foundations that were different from the limited views on human

behaviour underlying theory X and the principles of classical economical/organization theory.

Theory Y holds that work is a natural activity, that employees are capable of self-direction

and self-control when they are committed to organizational goals, that employees become

committed if they are appropriately rewarded, that employees can learn to seek responsibility,

and that an employee can be creative (McGregor, 1960 in Burns, 1967; in Carson, 2005; in

Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003; in Meeker, 1982; in Robbins, 2003; in Schein, 1975).

One can see that McGregor is influenced by the work of Abraham Maslow with his hierarchy

of needs theory (Carson, 2005; Meeker, 1982). Regarding the pyramid of Maslow, theory X

assumes that lower-order needs dominate individuals while theory Y can be traced back to the

higher-order needs (Robbins, 2003). However, there is a significant difference regarding the

end result between the two (Meeker, 1982). As an individual moves through Maslow’s

pyramid when he satisfies each layer of needs (physiological, safety, social, esteem and at the

top self-actualization) the satisfying conclusion is self-actualisation or personal growth. For

McGregor, this satisfaction merely serves the cause of commitment to organizational

objectives. Moreover, for McGregor, this satisfaction is a means of acquiring control instead

of the traditional punishments associated with hierarchical control (Meeker, 1982).

Theory X and Y are included in the study for the interesting viewpoints that managers and

supervisors might have about their employees. It would be fascinating to see how employees

think that they are being looked at by their managers. A theory X manager would see the

employees from a negative angle. Employees would be lazy, not creative, will avoid

responsibilities, have little ambition and the only way to make them work is to threaten them



- 21 -

with punishments to achieve desired goals (McGregor, 1960 in Burns, 1967; in Carson, 2005;

in Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003; in Meeker, 1982; in Robbins, 2003; in Schein, 1975). In

contrast with theory X, theory Y assumes that individuals want to work, will seek

responsibility, will exercise self-direction and self-control if they are committed to

organizational goals, and that the satisfaction of doing well at work is a powerful motivation

on itself (McGregor, 1960 in Burns, 1967; in Carson, 2005; in Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003; in

Meeker, 1982; in Robbins, 2003; in Schein, 1975). Another reason why theory X and Y are

included in the study is the link to intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Theory X is related more

to extrinsic motivation because of the involvement of punishments while theory Y relates to

intrinsic motivation since employees will become satisfied when they perform well at work.

The following theory that will be put forward is the cognitive dissonance theory.

2.6 Cognitive dissonance theory

Fifty years ago, Leon Festinger developed a theory of cognitive dissonance, which had a large

impact on the field of social psychology. The cognitive dissonance theory depicts that

dissonance is a psychological state of tension, which individuals are motivated to decrease

because of the discomfort it brings (Festinger, 1957 in Robbins, 2003). Cognitive dissonance

occurs when there are inconsistencies between two or more attitudes of an individual or

between an individual’s behaviour and attitudes (Festinger, 1957 in Robbins, 2003). If one

cognitive element follows logically from the other, they are said to be consonant to each other

(Oshikawa, 1969).

The amount of dissonance is a function of the ratio of dissonant to total relevant relations,

with each relation weighted for its importance to the person (Festinger and Carlsmith, 1959).

Dissonance can be reduced in several ways by motivating an individual to reduce the tension,

namely by changing one’s behaviour, by concluding that the dissonant behaviour is not so

important after all, by changing one’s attitudes, and by sorting out more consonant elements

to outweigh the dissonant ones (Oshikawa, 1969; Robbins, 2003). Logically, the more

disagreeable the induced behaviour, the greater the extent of dissonance (Allyn and Festinger,

1961; Festinger and Carlsmith, 1959). There are several moderating factors influencing the

degree to which individuals are motivated to reduce dissonance (Robbins, 2003). When the

problems causing the dissonance are of minimal importance, when a person thinks that the



- 22 -

dissonance is externally imposed and is substantially uncontrollable, or if rewards are large

enough to offset the dissonance, the person will not feel large tension to decrease the

dissonance (Robbins, 2003).

Concerning the study, the cognitive dissonance theory is included because it can help to

predict the propensity to engage in both attitude and behavioural change (Robbins, 2003). The

attribution theory influenced the cognitive dissonance theory. One similarity is that certain

attributions to events can change an individual’s behaviour. If employees are asked to do

things at work (external causes) that go against their personal attitudes, they will tend to

modify their attitudes with the aim of making it compatible with the cognition of what they

must say or do. Moreover, the greater the dissonance, the greater the pressures to decrease the

dissonance. Naturally, the moderating variables influencing the degree to which individuals

are motivated to reduce dissonance, whether the individual has an influence over the choice,

and the possible provision of rewards play a significant role here. Interesting to see is whether

employees have engaged for example in non-ethical behaviour or have seen things at work

they do not agree with. Cognitive dissonance can be a very powerful motivator and when an

organization is going through an immense change process, the cognitive dissonance theory

can be used to change the minds of the employees. This can be done by proving that the new

ideas, which are contradicting to the old ideas, are better, faster, more efficient, and so on.

Another theory that will be coped with is the investment model.

2.7 Investment model

The original investment model is based on some principles of the interdependence theory

(Kelley and Thibaut, 1978 in Rusbult and Farrell, 1983) and uses some aspects of the

traditional exchange theory (Blau, 1964 in Rusbult and Farrell, 1983; Homans, 1961 in

Rusbult & Farrell, 1983). Categorized as a theory of motivation, the investment model

suggests that job satisfaction, the degree to which an individual evaluates his or her job,

should be greater to the extent that the job offers high rewards and low costs (Rusbult and

Farrell, 1983; Rusbult et al., 1986). When the satisfaction is lower than a certain point, the

motivation of a person to continue at his job is decreasing as well. This investment model has

been applied to romantic relationships as well (Drigotas, Safstrom and Gentilia, 1999;

Rusbult, 1983). For romantic relationships, the investment model argues that persons should



- 23 -

be more satisfied (and more motivated) with a relationship to the extent that they continue to

provide high rewards and low costs, and exceed their general expectations, or comparison

level. In other words, persons are satisfied when they have a lot in common with their partner

and share some interests with each other (high rewards), when they rarely have disputes (low

costs) with each other, and when they expect little from their romantic involvements more

generally (low comparison level), then they should be relatively satisfied with their

relationship. Although this may sound strange, the model has even been applied for

explaining infidelity and destructive behaviour within relationships (Drigotas et al., 1999;

Rusbult, Verette, Whitney, Slovik and Lipkus, 1991).

The investment model distinguishes four basic model parameters, namely job costs, job

rewards, alternatives, and investments, which are presumed to affect job turnover through

their effects on job attitudes (Dam, 2005). To be more precise, the model embraces that a

person’s evaluation of his present job consists of constant personal reward-cost analyses, in

which the reward and cost values of various job attributes are weighted and combined into an

overall job value (Dam, 2005). This specific personal job value (which changes over time as

well) influences the individual’s satisfaction at work (Dam, 2005). Logically, this satisfaction

can influence whether this person will stay at his job or leave. Next to satisfaction, there are

two more factors influencing job commitment as depicted by Dam (2005). These are the

individual’s previous investments in the job (resources that are invested in the relationship)

and the employee’s job alternatives. Concerning previous investments in the job, one could

think of emigration to another city or country and number of years working for the company,

and for an employee’s job alternatives, one could imagine leaving the company for a

competitor.

The investment model shows a nice viewpoint regarding motivation and satisfaction of

employees. Seemingly related to equity theory and adopting some elements from the

interdependence and traditional exchange theories, the model shows a link to satisfaction that

is interesting for the study. Employees, who are satisfied with their jobs, will less likely rotate

jobs. Moreover, the extended investment model, as depicted by Dam (2005), might help to

improve employees’ attitudes towards organizational change, hereby showing a relation with

the cognitive dissonance theory and the expectancy theory. The link between those theories is,

in this case, when the difference between the actual or perceived and the desired situation is

negative, the employee will be dissatisfied. Pertaining to intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, it



- 24 -

would be interesting to see whether these relationships will be represented in this study. The

last motivational theory that will be discussed here is the cognitive evaluation theory.

2.8 Cognitive evaluation theory

The cognitive evaluation theory, as part of the self-determination theory, specifies factors in

social contexts that cause variability in intrinsic motivation (Deci and Ryan, 1985). Cognitive

evaluation theory predicted at first that monetary rewards would undermine intrinsic

motivation (Deci, 1971). Later on, Deci, Cascio and Krusell (1975) mentioned that expected

rewards would lead to a larger decrease in intrinsic motivation than unexpected rewards

would. Deci et al. (1975) depict that if a person expects a reward while he is doing the

activity, then it is very likely that he perceives that he is doing the activity for the reward. On

the other hand, if the person does not expect to receive the reward, it is less likely that he

realises that the reason he is doing the activity to get the extrinsic reward (Deci et al., 1975).

However, it is possible that when he gets unexpected rewards the individual relates this to

actual working for rewards. Therefore, expected and unexpected rewards could lower intrinsic

motivation, but the unexpected reward would decrease it the least and would be less likely to

do so (Deci et al., 1975).

According to Deci, Koestner and Ryan (1999), the primary negative effect of rewards is that

they have the tendency to hinder self-regulation. This holds that rewards undermine

individuals taking responsibility for motivating or regulating themselves (Deci et al., 1999).

Deci et al. (1999) concur with Deci (1971) that unexpected rewards may be a way for

showing appreciation without undermining intrinsic motivation. On the other hand, when

rewards are used to signify competence there might be individuals that do not receive the full

amount due to the fact that they did not reach their targets (this is related to extrinsic

motivation because they do not perform up to the expected standards), this may be

experienced as negative feedback about their performance and is highly damaging for

intrinsic motivation (Deci et al., 1999). From 1985 on, Deci and Ryan (1985) presented the

cognitive evaluation theory as one of the four mini-theories within the self-determination

theory with as main goal to specify factors that explain variability in intrinsic motivation. The

other subtheories are the organismic integration theory (which will be discussed briefly in

chapter 3 on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation), the causality integration theory and the basic



- 25 -

needs theory (the last two will not be discussed in this paper). The cognitive evaluation theory

is framed in terms of social and environmental factors that either enhance or decrease intrinsic

motivation.

There are basically three needs that can enhance intrinsic motivation (Deci and Ryan, 1985;

Ryan and Deci, 2000b). The first need is the so-called social-contextual factors that can lead

to feelings of competence, like positive feedback, optimal challenges, freedom from

demeaning evaluations, excellent communications, and non-monetary rewards. The critical

issues of when and how to use rewards most effectively without decreasing intrinsic

motivation have been discussed in the previous paragraph. Second, feelings of competence

will not enhance intrinsic motivation unless combined with a sense of autonomy. Individuals

must experience their behaviour to be self-determined. Deci, Schwartz, Sheinman and Ryan

(1981) show that individuals are more satisfied and more intrinsically motivated in an

environment that is not based on control but based on autonomy. If companies rely heavily on

controlling behaviour by the use of rewards (in the wrong way), they may be having

considerable negative long-term effects (Deci et al., 1999). The last need is that of relatedness

or security. Although intrinsic motivation can occur just as good in isolation, a secure

relational support appears to be important for the expression of intrinsic motivation

(Anderson, Manoogian and Reznick, 1976; Ryan and Deci, 2000b; Ryan and Grolnick, 1986).

In other words, when individuals feel comfortable and appreciated by the people that surround

them, they seem to portray a higher degree of intrinsic motivation. To give an example, Ryan

and Grolnick (1986) showed that students that perceived their teachers as cold and uncaring

showed less intrinsic motivation than students that perceived their teachers as warm and

caring. Furthermore, Anderson et al. (1976) depicted that when children worked on something

they liked in the presence of a stranger who did not respond to their actions, the intrinsic

motivation decreased significantly.

Deci (1972) suggests that when one is interested in enhancing intrinsic motivation in

employees or individuals in general, he should not concentrate on external control systems

such as monetary rewards, but instead he should focus on making work intrinsically

interesting for the employees. The link to the equity theory is also fascinating in this case.

When a person would get much more salary out of the blue (for the same work), he would get

feelings on inequity (Deci, 1972). However, this increase of rewards would also lead to being

more dependent on the money, which of course leads to a reduction of intrinsic motivation



- 26 -

(Deci, 1972). Furthermore, research revealed that not only tangible rewards but also

deadlines, directives, pressured evaluations, threats, and imposed goals decrease intrinsic

motivation since they conduce toward an external perceived locus of causality (Deci and

Ryan, 1985). On the contrary, acknowledgment of feelings, opportunities for self-direction,

and choice were found to improve intrinsic motivation for the reason that they allow

individuals a greater feeling of autonomy (Deci and Ryan, 1985). These relations to

enhancing or decreasing intrinsic motivation, as depicted above, can be applied to questions

in this paper.

- 27 -

Chapter 3: Job satisfaction

This chapter will deal with the several aspects of job satisfaction. First, the concept of job

satisfaction will be defined and discussed. Second, some determinants of job satisfaction are

depicted, followed by five principal models of job satisfaction that identify its causes. Last,

the relationships of job satisfaction (categorized as consequences of job satisfaction) with

other constructs are discussed. The two relevant environments for this research, namely the

call centre environment and the ‘nursing’ environment, are applied to each relationship as

well.

3.1 Job satisfaction defined

There are as many definitions of job satisfaction available as there are authors. Job

satisfaction is an emotional or affective response to several aspects of an employee’s work

situation, and has been depicted as a positive emotional reaction resulting from appraisal of an

employee’s job (Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003). Job satisfaction includes various aspects of

one’s job and is therefore some kind of total sum of various components. This means that a

person can be reasonably satisfied with one part of his job but dissatisfied with another part.

An employee can like his salary and his colleagues but at the same time he can be annoyed by

his direct superior, the distance to work, and so on. Robbins (2003) adds to this that an

individual who is dissatisfied with his current work situation holds negative thoughts about

his job while an individual who is satisfied with his current work situation holds positive

thoughts about his or her job. In the end, if the negative aspects of one’s job outweigh the

positive aspects of one’s job, the logical consequence is that the employee will search for a

better job. Sharma and Jyoti (2006) mention that job satisfaction is a function of the degree to

which an employee’s needs can be satisfied. Put into practice, job satisfaction is the difference

between what there is now and what there should be. To clarify this, an employee will be

satisfied when current reality equals expectations.

3.2 Determinants and causes of job satisfaction

The author noticed a difference in categorization of two authors regarding causes or

determinants of job satisfaction. The two different viewpoints should be the same but are

Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation Job satisfaction


- 28 -

different. According to Robbins (2003), there are four primary factors that determine job

satisfaction. The first determinant is equitable rewards, which refers to the pay and promotion

systems that employees perceive as fair and in line with their expectations (related to the

equity theory). When employees perceive their promotion and pay systems to be fair and to be

based upon pay standards and individual skill levels, they are most likely to experience a

feeling of satisfaction. The second determinant is supportive working conditions. Employees

do not prefer to work in work environments that are dangerous but in work environments that

are comfortable and safe. Moreover, many employees prefer to work as close to home as

possible and with adequate tools to successfully complete their tasks. Next determinant is to

have mentally challenging work. Jobs that are boring, dull, and have little challenge often

create boredom with employees. Contrasting, jobs that are too challenging and demanding

often create feelings of failure and frustration. Employees like jobs that can give them

opportunities where they can use their capabilities, knowledge, and skills and jobs that offer a

variety of tasks, freedom, and feedback. The last determinant is supportive colleagues. For

many employees, social interactions at work are a critical factor in job satisfaction. Therefore,

supportive and friendly colleagues often lead to higher job satisfaction.

Another categorization has been done by Kinicki and Kreitner (2003). There are five principal

models of job satisfaction that identify its causes (Brief, 1998 in Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003).

The first category of models are the so-called discrepancy models. The models situated in this

category suggest that (job) satisfaction is a result of met expectations. According to Kinicki

and Kreitner (2003), met expectations embody the difference between what an employee in

fact receives and what the employee expects to get from his job. An employee will be

dissatisfied when his personal expectations are greater than what he has received from his job.

On the contrary, an employee will be satisfied when his expectations are exceeded by what he

actually receives. Every employee has different expectations with respect to rewards and

payoffs in certain work situations (Porter and Steers, 1973). According to Porter and Steers

(1973), the definition of met expectations depicts that people compare their pre-entry

expectations to their post-entry perceptions. Logically, this requires a within-person

comparison on two different points in time. Most definitions on met expectations are

variances on the definition given by Porter and Steers (1973) (Wanous, Poland, Premack and

Davis, 1992). Wanous et al. (1992) show, by means of a meta-analysis of several studies, that

met expectations are significant correlated to job satisfaction. This is the reason why many



- 29 -

companies use surveys to find out what the expectations and perceptions are of their

employees (Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003).

The second category of models are related to need fulfillment. Kinicki and Kreitner (2003)

depict that these models suggest that job satisfaction is determined to the degree that the

characteristics of a certain job allow an employee to fulfill his or her needs. The model

suggests that individuals have stable, basic, and relatively unchanging and identifiable

attributes, including needs and personality (Argyris, 1957 in Salancik and Pfeffer, 1977). The

model also suggests that jobs have a relative stable set of characteristics that are interesting to

these needs of the employees (Salancik and Pfeffer, 1977). The assumption is made that when

the characteristics of a certain job are congruent with the needs an individual possesses, the

employee is satisfied. A further assumption of this model is that when the characteristics of

the job meet the needs of that individual, the employee will be more motivated to work.

The third category of models are the models situated in the value attainment category. The

basic idea behind job satisfaction is that satisfaction results from the perception that a job can

enable the fulfillment of an individual’s personal work values (Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003).

Recent research on value attainment proposes that the attainment of general values at work

can have an impact on a number of other relevant outcomes, including job satisfaction and job

performance (George and Jones, 1996). According to George and Jones (1996), value

attainment is related to the degree that work and variables at work can help an employee to

attain life values. Moreover, they mention that life and work values help to trigger behavior

through standards that employees use to assess their actions and the results of those actions in

life and at work. Locke (1976, in Perrewé, Hochwarter and Kiewitz, 1999) depicts that

comparing an employee’s current situation to the personal values of that employee creates

attitudes such as job satisfaction. Locke (1976, in Perrewé et al., 1999) explains that the

situational factors at work could be perceived more satisfactorily when the job enables

employees to attain their values. If those values are not attained, dissatisfaction will occur.

Therefore, it is important for companies to make sure that employees feel satisfied by

organizing the work environment in order to attain employees’ values.

Perrewé et al. (1999) give an interesting figure that clarifies the relationship between value

attainment and job satisfaction. Figure 3.1 shows the model of the hypothesized effects of the

mediating effects of value attainment in the relationship between family-work conflicts and



- 30 -

job satisfaction and life satisfaction. Figure 3.1 shows that both work interference with family

and family interference with work have a direct negative relationship with both job and life

satisfaction. The results from Perrewé et al. (1999) show that value attainment is a significant

mediating variable between family-work conflicts and job and life satisfaction. The strength

of this negative relationship was decreased by value attainment. This research shows that

environmental factors influence the relationship between job and personal values.

Figure 3.1: Improved version of the conceptual model of the hypothesized mediating effects

of value attainment in the relationship between work-family conflict and job life satisfaction.

(Adams, King, and King, 1996; Thomas and Ganster, 1995)

-

- - +

(Adams et al., 1996;

+ Wiley, 1987)

+ (Adams et al., 1996;

Duxbury and Higgins, 1991)

- -

-

(Perrewé et al., 1999)

Retrieved from Perrewé, P. L., Hochwarter, W. A. and Kiewitz, C. (1999). Value attainment:

An explanation for the negative effects of work-family conflict on job and life satisfaction.

Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4 (4), p. 320.

The improvements made to this figure are the (added) dotted lines that indicate a direct

relationship between the constructs as well. Between brackets are the authors that have

written about these relationships.

Work

interference

with family

Family

interference

with work

Value attainment

Job satisfaction

Life

satisfaction



- 31 -

The next category is the model that falls under the heading of equity. In this model,

satisfaction is a function of how an employee perceives to be treated at work (Kinicki and

Kreitner, 2003). One can see that this model is referred to as the equity theory as discussed in

the chapter on motivational theories. An employee reflects on how much he has put in his job

against how much he receives and compares this to other employees from the company.

When an employee thinks that his input-output ratio is equal to others, he has the impression

that he has been treated fairly (Cosier and Dalton, 1983). This feeling of being treated fairly is

a feeling of satisfaction. Witt and Nye (1992) show, by means of a meta-analysis, that

employees’ perceived fairness is significantly related to job satisfaction. Furthermore, the

results of this study show that there is no difference between men and women with regard to

the relationship between perceived fairness and job satisfaction.

The last category are the dispositional or genetic components. This model centres around the

belief that job satisfaction is for some part a function of both genetic factors and personal

traits (Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003). Arvey, Bouchard, Segal and Abraham (1989) show with

their study of monozygotic twins that at least some part of job satisfaction can be attributed to

genetic components. Arvey et al. (1989) even prove that monozygotic twins try to a find a job

in the same environment with the same characteristics. Moreover, genetic components

influence subjective well-being (Diener and Diener, 1996). This is why most people report

that they are happy in general, even when they are situated in disadvantaged groups such as

poor people, handicapped people and unemployed people. Lykken and Tellegen (1996) add

that the variance in adult happiness is about equally determined by effects of experiences

special for a single individual and by genetic components.

3.3 Correlations of job satisfaction with other variables

3.3.1 Job involvement

Job satisfaction has a number of relationships with other constructs in the organizational

behaviour variables. Kinicki and Kreitner (2003) categorize these variables as consequences

of job satisfaction. Next to the classification of Kinicki and Kreitner (2003), the literature will

be scanned for correlations between the variables). The first variable where job satisfaction is

correlated with is job involvement. Job involvement refers to the degree that employees



- 32 -

psychologically identify themselves with their job, or to the extent of the importance of the

job in an employee’s self-image (Lodahl and Kejner, 1965 in Chiu and Tsai, 2006).

Interesting is that Lodahl and Kejner (1965, in Kanungo, 1979) give another definition on job

involvement. They depict that job involvement is the degree to which an individual’s

performance at work has an influence on his or her self-esteem. Strangely, they do not make

any attempt to show how and if the two definitions are related to another and they used the

two definitions whenever it suited them (Kanungo, 1979). According to Kanungo (1979), job

involvement is looked upon as a generalized cognitive state of psychological identification

with the job insofar as the job is supposed to have the potentiality to please an individual’s

expectations and prominent needs. Weissenberg and Gruenfeld (1968) investigated the

relationship between job satisfaction and several job factors and job involvement. They

concluded that higher job involvement is significant positively correlated with job-content or

motivators (Herzberg, 1966 in Kanungo, 1979) like independence, responsibility,

achievement and so on. Brown (1996) conducted a meta-analysis that investigated the

relationships of job involvement with other organizational-related constructs. He found that

job involvement was strongly correlated to work satisfaction and moderately correlated to

overall job satisfaction (including work satisfaction, pay satisfaction, supervisor satisfaction,

co-worker satisfaction and so on). Kinicki, McKee-Ryan, Schriesheim and Carson (2002)

conducted a meta-analysis and investigated, among other relationships, the relationship

between job satisfaction and job involvement. Kinicki et al. (2002) found a moderate to strong

relationship between the two variables.

Strangely, Knoop (1995) found that the relationship between job satisfaction and involvement

was weak and he retrieved this conclusion from a sample of nurses. According to him, this

may be due to the nature of work causing employees to feel more obligated than satisfied in

what they do. In contrast, Rose and Wright (2005) found a moderately strong relationship

between involvement and satisfaction in call centres and they mention that employees lacked

a feeling of commitment and involvement from their supervisors and managers regarding

their work. Workman and Bommer (2004) and Workman (2003) conducted experiments in

computer technological call centres and found that when processes were used that increased

involvement of their employees, this would lead to higher job satisfaction. This is of course

relevant to organizations, because employees that are involved to the organization tend to

have a higher job satisfaction.



- 33 -

3.3.2 Organizational citizenship behaviour

The next variable that is correlated to job satisfaction is organizational citizenship behaviour.

Organizational citizenship behaviour refers to those actions and behaviours that go beyond the

call of duty and standardized work (Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003). There are a number of

gestures that can fall under the heading of organizational citizenship behaviour. These are

making suggestions for improvements at work, training new employees and colleagues

outside work hours, making constructive statements about the department and the firm in

general, care for organizational property and belongings of colleagues, attendance and

punctuality well beyond standard and enforceable levels, expression of personal interests in

the work and private life of peers, subordinates and supervisors, keeping the work floor clean,

and so forth (Organ, 1990). Organ (1990) refers to organizational citizenship behaviour as

that behaviour by an individual employee that is discretionary and not directly rewarded by

the formal reward system in a company, but that behaviour that improves the effective

functioning of the company. Moreover, this behaviour is not part of the job description but

merely occurs because of the personal choice of an individual employee. Organ and Ryan

(1995) conducted a meta-analysis covering over 55 studies investigating the attitudinal and

dispositional predictors of organizational citizenship behaviour and found that there is a

significant relationship between organizational citizenship behaviour and job satisfaction.

This is interesting for this research since organizational citizenship behaviour shows similar

characteristics as intrinsic motivation (and the relationship between intrinsic motivation and

job satisfaction is part of the central aim of this paper). In addition, this is attention-grabbing

for companies since employees become more satisfied with their jobs when they get a chance

to exhibit behaviours that are beyond normal work standards.

Interesting is that Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Paine and Bachrach (2000) show that

organizational citizenship behaviours displayed by employees were determined more by skills

of their leaders and the situational factors of the work environment than by the personal

characteristics of an employee. This means that companies can enhance this organizational

citizenship behaviour by embedding this in their cultures. Offering security to employees, for

example by means of long-term contracts, can create some organizational citizenship

behaviour as well (Van Dyne and Ang, 1998). Therefore, managers should create this feeling

of attachment to the company in order to increase this type of behaviour.



- 34 -

Regarding call centres and the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational

citizenship behaviour, there is only one study that showed a direct and significant correlation

between the two variables. Wegge, van Dick, Fisher, Wecking and Moltzen (2006) conducted

2 studies and found a significant positive relationship between job satisfaction and

organizational citizenship behaviour. Concerning nursing, only Cohen and Kol (2004)

conducted a research on organizational citizenship behaviour with nurses. However, the

research did not focus on satisfaction and no direct or indirect relationship with organizational

citizenship behaviour was found. Wegge et al (2006) used the study of Van Dyne and Ang

(1998) for the call centre industry and found that part-time employees with a higher

organizational identification showed more organizational citizenship behaviour than part-time

employees with a lower organizational identification.

3.3.3 Organizational commitment

The third variable that will be discussed is organizational commitment, which is related to

organizational citizenship behaviour and involvement as well. According to Kinicki and

Kreitner (2003), organizational commitment refers to the degree that an employee identifies

with the company where he is working at and is committed to the goals of the company.

Another definition of commitment is provided by Rayton (2006), who defines commitment as

the degree to which an individual feels committed to a company. Committed employees feel a

big sense of loyalty to the organization, feel very personally defensive when the good

functioning of the organization is threatened and they stay at the same company even when

there are interesting opportunities to leave the company for a competitor (Fang, 2001).

Although there are many differences in the literature available between psychological and

organizational researchers on the exact relationship between job satisfaction and

organizational commitment, it is now generally accepted that global job satisfaction is one of

the most prominent predictors of organizational commitment (Lincoln and Kalleberg, 1996;

Mueller and Price, 1990; Staw, Sutton and Pelled, 1994; Yoon and Thye, 2002). This is

backed up by the meta-analysis conducted by Tett and Meyer (1993), who found a strong

positive correlation between job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Logically,

supervisors and managers need to focus on satisfying employees in order to make them more

committed. This can be done by giving the employee more control over his job and giving

him some autonomy (Yoon and Thye, 2002). Another meta-analysis conducted by Kinicki et



- 35 -

al. (2002) come to the same conclusion, namely that organizational commitment and job

satisfaction are strongly positive correlated.

Knoop (1995) conducted a research with a sample of nurses to investigate the relationship of

satisfaction and commitment and found that this relationship was moderately high. This is

backed up by DeGroot, Burke and George (1998, in McNeese-Smith, 2001) and Acorn,

Ratner and Crawford (1997, in McNeese-Smith, 2001). Patient care plays an important

positive mediating role in the relationship between job satisfaction and organizational

commitment (McNeese-Smith, 1999). Commitment is a big problem in call centres when

employees are driven too hard with the quantitative output measurements that are

implemented in most call centres (Taylor and Bain, 1999). Furthermore, too much control has

a negative effect on commitment (and indirectly on satisfaction) of call centre employees.

Figure 3.2: Turnover model as manifest for call centre representatives

Retrieved from Zhong, M., Siong, B., Mellor, D., Moore, K. A. and Firth, L. (2006).

Predicting intention to quit in the call centre industry: Does the retail model fit? Journal of

Managerial Psychology, 21(3), p. 237.



- 36 -

Zhong, Siong, Mellor, Moore and Firth (2006) applied a model of turnover to the call centre

industry. The model they used in their research summarizes their findings of a turnover model

applied to the call centre environment represented here as Figure 3.2. They suggest that call

centre environments are highly stressful environments and the so-called stressors (like role

ambiguity, work overload, and work-family conflicts) play a more important role in call

centres than in other industries investigated with the turnover model. Relevant for the

relationship of job satisfaction and organizational and job commitment, one can see that the

two are positively (and significant) correlated to each other. The arrow between job

satisfaction and job commitment shows .42, indicating a significant relationship. Moreover,

job satisfaction is both direct and indirect (through the variable of job commitment)

negatively related to intention to quit. In other words, employees that are satisfied with their

jobs have a lower tendency to leave the organization for a competitor or a different type of

job.

3.3.4 Turnover

Another relevant variable that is correlated with job satisfaction is turnover. Satisfaction and

commitment have been reported to be negatively related to turnover while at the same time be

positively correlated to another (Bluedorn, 1982; Hollenbeck and Williams, 1986). Turnover

is a very important issue to managers and companies in general because it costs many

financial and non-financial resources, like knowledge. Employee turnover is the ratio of

employees that are leaving the company compared to the average number of total employees

working at that company (Griffeth, Hom and Gaertner, 2000). According to Kinicki and

Kreitner (2003), turnover is very important to any organization not only because it costs a lot

of money but also because it disrupts continuity, which is crucial for the success of an

organization. Turnover has more disadvantages than just a higher financial burden. It has

negative effects on employee continuity, organizational stability, and organizational

productivity (Zhong et al., 2006). Griffeth et al. (2000) conducted a meta-analysis on turnover

and found that that there is a moderate negative relationship between job satisfaction and job

turnover. Zhong et al. (2006) actually found a strong negative correlation between job

satisfaction and intention to quit. According to Alexander, Lichtenstein, Oh and Ullman

(1998, in Zhong et al., 2006), intention to quit is good predictor of turnover, confirming that

there is at least a moderate (in)direct link between job satisfaction and turnover.



- 37 -

Nursing turnover has been a problem for decades, especially with the shortages in the health

care industry (Price and Mueller, 1981). This high turnover rate of nurses has severe negative

problems concerning the efficiency of the hospitals (Alexander, Bloom and Nuchols, 1994).

Price and Mueller (1981) conducted a research among nurses investigating several

relationships with job satisfaction. They found that job satisfaction only influenced job

turnover very weakly, but played an important mediating role between turnover and other

determinants, like organizational commitment. Job satisfaction could have both a positive and

a negative effect on the relationships between job turnover and other constructs. Armstrong-

Stassen and Cameron (2003) proposed that nurses need a stable work environment and found

that hospital downsizing had a severe negative effect on nurses job satisfaction and turnover.

Turnover is costing the call centre industry billions of dollars (Bain et al., 2002; , "Employee

turnover costing U.S. industry billions", 2000; Hillmer, Hillmer and McRoberts, 2004; King,

2003; Lewig and Dollard, 2003; Tuten and Neidermeyer, 2004; Wallace et al., 2000; Zhong et

al., 2006). Stuller (1999, in Tuten and Neidermeyer, 2004) even mentioned that the average

turnover rate for call centres of over 30 percent. James (1998, in Tuten and Neidermeyer,

2004) estimates that the high turnover rate in the call centre industry costs the call centres

10,000 dollars per employee. Van Dyne and Ang (1998) mention that, especially for

organizations with a high turnover rate, offering employees a long term/full time contract and

therefore some security and control can create some organizational citizenship behaviour.

This can result in decreasing the turnover rates of organizations. Another interesting point

regarding the relationship between job satisfaction and intention to quit/turnover is offered by

Babin and Boles (1998), who conducted a research among employee behaviour in the service

industry. They came to the conclusion that gender plays an important moderating role in this

relationship. Babin and Boles (1998) found that there is a stronger relationship between job

satisfaction and intention to quit (which is directly related to turnover) for men than for

women. When looking at job satisfaction in general when environmental conditions are

stable, men tend to be more satisfied with their jobs that women (Savery, 1989).

3.3.5 Absenteeism

The fifth variable that is correlated to job satisfaction is absenteeism. Like turnover,

absenteeism is a costly business and organizations will try anything to reduce it. Absenteeism



- 38 -

is referred to as unscheduled employee absences from the job ("Tackling absenteeism in the

workplace", 2006). There are several disadvantages that come from absenteeism of

employees. These are inability to provide services, low morale will result in lower

productivity, additional staff hours or overtime to make up for the hours lost, reduction in the

range or standard or services, an increase in hours of supervisors that have to deal with absent

employees, and an increase in demands on the organization’s sick pay system (Haswell, 2003;

, "Tackling absenteeism in the workplace", 2006). Many causes of absenteeism are legitimate

like personal illness, pregnancy, or death in the family but some causes are related to bad

work environment or simply not being committed to one’s work (Haswell, 2003). Some have

almost funny causes. The Superbowl, the final of American football, causes serious

absenteeism ratings all over the US ("Study: Super Bowl affects worker absenteeism the day

after the game", 2005). The day after the Super Bowl, 1 percent of the total work force

planned to call in sick. In the two cities of the teams playing in the Super Bowl, an enormous

8 percent planned to call in sick. Another reason for absenteeism can be that employees think

it is waste not to use all of their sick days available ("Unscheduled absenteeism on the rise",

2005). Hackett, Bycio and Guion (1989) mention that when one or more absence-inducing

events occur, employees go through some kind of mental process where they are consciously

evaluating the advantages and disadvantages of going to work. Organizational commitment

and organizational involvement also play a role here. Several meta-analyses have been

conducted in order to investigate the subject of absenteeism and its correlations with other

variables. Scott and Taylor (1985) depict that there are some moderate associations between

employee absenteeism and the work itself, absence frequency and satisfaction with

colleagues, and absenteeism and overall satisfaction. Scott and Taylor (1985) continue with

stating that they found some correlations between those variables but certainly not any causal

relationships. Hackett (1989) synthesized three meta-analyses regarding the relationship

between absenteeism and job satisfaction and came to the conclusion that there is a weak

negative relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism.

This is backed up by Lewig and Dollard (2003), who confirm that they could not find a direct

link between job satisfaction and absenteeism but they could establish a direct significant link

between emotional exhaustion and absenteeism (for call centres in Australia). Management

Today (1999, in Tuten and Neidermeyer, 2004) reported an absenteeism rate of 5 percent in

the call centre industry compared to the average rate of 3.5 percent in the United States.

Hackett and Bycio (1996) mention that the absenteeism rate for nurses is also higher



- 39 -

compared to other professions but this is also due to physical injuries and stress. Therefore, as

Hackett and Bycio (1996) suggest, by staying away nurses appeared to gain control over

intolerable levels of fatigue (emotional and physical), like some kind of maintenance function.

3.3.6 Perceived stress

Another variable that is correlated to satisfaction is (perceived) stress. Stress is a dynamic

condition in which a person is confronted with a demand, a constraint, or an opportunity

associated with what this person wants and for which the result is perceived to be both

important as well as uncertain (Jackson and Schuler, 1985; Robbins, 2003). Employees are

more complaining about stress at home and at work, causing enormous amounts of dollars in

absenteeism and turnover each year (Lu, 1999; Verespej, 2000). Although stress is often

discussed in a negative context, it can also be positive (Robbins, 2003). Quick and Quick

(1984, in Broadbridge, 2002) explain that stress, when it has a negative outcome, is called

distress, and that stress, when it has a positive outcome, is called eustress. Stress can lead to a

better performance in sports for example. It can help to achieve a superior performance at

crucial moments (Robbins, 2003). When relating stress to employees, there are several

symptoms that can indicate that an employee is experiencing too much stress. The employee

can lose his appetite, develop high blood pressure, get headaches, gain or lose weight, get

confused and has trouble making decisions, get depressed, sleep too much or too little, get

digestive problems, and so forth (Adler, Kalb and Rogers, 1999; Robbins, 2003). According

to Robbins (2003), these symptoms can be classified in three categories: Psychological,

physiological, and behavioural. For companies, the psychological symptoms are the most

important. Stress can cause dissatisfaction. According to Griffeth et al. (2000), stress is

positively related to turnover, absenteeism, viral infections, and coronary heart disease. There

have been several meta-analyses concerning the relationship of job satisfaction and stress.

Adler et al. (1999) conducted a meta-analysis and showed that stress has a strong negative

relationship with job satisfaction. Babin and Boles (1998) conducted another meta-analysis

and the results regarding the relationship between the same variables is the same. Congruent

with the findings of the meta-analysis, several regular research articles confirm this strong

negative (or inverse) relation between job satisfaction and stress (Hollon and Chesser, 1976;

R. H. Miles, 1975; R. H. Miles and Petty, 1975).



- 40 -

Tetrick and LaRocco (1987) conducted a research among physicians, dentists and nurses and

found that understanding and control have an important moderating role on the relationship

between job satisfaction and perceived stress. They mention that when nurses get more

control over their jobs and have a better understanding of what is happening and what is

needed, the negative relationship between job satisfaction and perceived stress will weaken.

Stress is an important factor in call centres. Employees at call centres experience stress as a

result of conflicting demands of the company, supervisors, and the customers (de Ruyter,

Wetzels and Feinberg, 2001; Franklin, 2000; Marquez, 2006; Tuten and Neidermeyer, 2004).

This occurs because supervisors focus on technology to speed up the process of customer

interaction without realizing that the most important aspect of working in a call centre of an

organization is to satisfy the customer (de Ruyter et al., 2001; Lewig and Dollard, 2003;

Taylor and Bain, 1999; Tuten and Neidermeyer, 2004). When employees feel more

controlled, there is a decrease in intrinsic motivation. Moreover, employees of call centres are

mainly monitored by electronic means, which is also a major factor of work stress (Aiello and

Kolb, 1995; de Ruyter et al., 2001). De Ruyter et al. (2001) conducted research in call centres

and confirmed the negative relationship between job satisfaction and stress. In Figure 3.2 this

relationship between stress and job satisfaction can also be seen. As mentioned before,

stressors play an important role in the call centre environment and seem to have a higher

influence than in other industries, like the retail industry (Zhong et al., 2006).

3.3.7 Job performance

Next variable that is correlated to job satisfaction is job performance. This is one of the most

researched topics in the organizational behaviour field. Important to add is that most of the

correlations between job satisfaction and a particular construct is two-way. Vroom (1964, in

House and Wigdor, 1967) examined 20 studies to investigate the strength of the relationship

between job satisfaction and performance. He found that 17 studies revealed a moderate

positive relationship and only three found a negative relationship. One of the first to conduct a

meta-analysis on this relationship were Petty, McGee and Cavender (1984). Petty et al. (1984)

provided a limited meta-analysis and found that job satisfaction and job performance were

positively correlated (moderately high). Petty et al. (1984) conducted their study over 20

years in only 5 journals and only to 16 studies. However, at this point, Petty et al. (1984)

admit that there was not sufficient data to conduct a proper meta-analysis on the research of



- 41 -

job satisfaction and job performance. Still they concluded that their analysis and results were

stronger than any research that had been conduced to that date. A year later, another meta-

analysis was conducted on this relationship. Iaffaldano and Muchinsky (1985) conducted a

meta-analysis from 74 studies. In contrast to the meta-analysis conducted by Petty et al.

(1984), Iaffaldano and Muchinsky (1985) found only a small positive relationship between

the constructs of job satisfaction and job performance. The results of the Iaffaldano and

Muchinsky study are more significant and relevant than the study conducted by Petty et al.

(1984) because this study was far more comprehensive. Still, if the strength of this correlation

is only weak, organizations have to keep in mind that it matters whether their employees are

satisfied.

The most current meta-analysis conducted on this relationship is the meta-analysis of Judge,

Thoresen, Bono and Patton (2001). Judge et al. (2001) found that the average correlation of

job satisfaction and job performance was substantially higher in their research than in the

meta-analysis conducted by Iaffaldano and Muchinsky (1985). This was due to the fact that

Iaffaldano and Muchinsky (1985) used correlations at the single satisfaction facet (Judge et

al., 2001) and not at multiple facets of job satisfaction. In other words, Iaffaldano and

Muchinsky (1985) compared single facets of job satisfaction to job performance while Judge

et al. (2001) compared multiple facets of job satisfaction to job performance, resulting in

higher correlations.

Furthermore, Judge et al. (2001) investigated several relationships that job performance and

job satisfaction can have and represented this in one figure for future research. These

relationships were presented in different models in the article. Figure 3.3 shows their ‘total’ or

complete model of the various models on the relationships between job performance and job

satisfaction. In Figure 3.3, one can see that job satisfaction can exert a causal effect on job

performance. This also holds for the other way around. Moreover, there may be potential

moderating variables influencing these bidirectional relationships. Next, there may be causal

relationships between job satisfaction and job performance that are explained by

psychological processes (represented in Figure 3.3). There are two models that are not

included in the figure, namely a model that job satisfaction and job performance are not

related to each other and a model that embeds all alternative conceptualizations of job

satisfaction and job performance.



- 42 -

Figure 3.3: Integrative model of the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance

Retrieved from Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E. and Patton, G. K. (2001). The job

satisfaction-job performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review.

Psychological Bulletin, 127(3), p. 390.

The relationship between job satisfaction and job performance has also been researched in the

two fields that are interesting for this research. Wanous (1974) was one of the first to set up

his research in a call centre environment. The sample used in this research contained 80 newly

hired female telephone operators (Wanous, 1974). He found that there was a reciprocal

positive relationship between job satisfaction and job performance. De Ruyter et al. (2001)

conducted their research in call centres as well and they wanted to investigate the antecedents

and consequences of stress on employees, supervisors and customers. The research shows that

Job

satisfaction

Job

performance

Mediators

§ Success and

achievement

§ Task specific

self efficacy

§ Goal progress

§ Positive mood

Mediators

§ Behavioral

intentions

§ Low

performance as

withdrawal

§ Positive mood

Moderators

§ Performance-reward

contingency

§ Job characteristics

§ Need for

achievement

§ Work centrality

§ Aggregation

Moderators

§ Personality/self

concept

§ Autonomy

§ Norms

§ Moral obligation

§ Cognitive

accessibility

§ Aggregation

§ Level of analysis



- 43 -

job satisfaction is indeed positively related to job performance. Therefore, it is important for

call centre managers to undertake steps to satisfy their employees.

Concerning the health care industry and in particular the employment of nurses, there have

been several research articles that investigate the relationship between job satisfaction and job

performance. While Brief and Aldag (1976) and London and Klimoski (1975) only refer to

the relationship between job satisfaction and job performance in an indirect manner, Porac,

Ferris and Fedor (1983) show a direct positive relationship between the two variables. Crow,

Hartman and Henson (2006) look at the relationship between job satisfaction and job

performance in an interesting perspective. They depict that job dissatisfaction leads to a

decrease in job performance. In other words, when an employee feels dissatisfied and is

frustrated about how things go at work, he or she is not functioning as effectively as he or she

could have done when he or she would be happy and satisfied (Crow et al., 2006). They stress

that organizations should also try to decrease dissatisfying factors and not only to add

satisfying factors. According to Crow et al. (2006), dissatisfying factors are the main reason

why there is a shortage of nurses. The next construct that will be discussed is productivity, as

this construct is rather similar as job performance.

3.3.8 Productivity

Another variable that is correlated to job satisfaction is productivity. The concepts of job

performance and productivity are seemingly correlated. Productivity is the ratio of what is

produced by a person, machine, office, company, and so on, to what is required to produce.

Job performance is about those behaviours and actions that an employee controls and that

contribute to the goals of a company. The difference between those concepts lies in the fact

that productivity can apply to machines, offices, and persons while job performance usually

only applies to a single person. Moreover, productivity measures only quantitative aspects

while job performance also embraces qualitative aspects. The relationship between job

satisfaction and productivity is something that employers have kept busy for a long time.

They are wondering whether satisfied employees actually produce more than when they are

dissatisfied. Brayfield and Crockett (1955) found that for employees that were working at a

yard that the most satisfied employees worked at the most productive yard. They mention that

there was a big difference in productivity but not that big difference between yards in morale



- 44 -

or satisfaction. Brayfield and Crockett (1955) refer to the relationship between job satisfaction

and productivity as an important one, but not as a strong one. Katzell, Yankelovich, Fein,

Ornati and Nash (1975) were interested in finding possibilities for increasing job satisfaction

and productivity at the same time. They mention that there is evidence that the two constructs

are related to each other and that they are not independent of each other. Katzell et al. (1975)

depict that under certain environmental conditions improving satisfaction will lead to an

increase in productivity and an increase in productivity could lead to an improvement in

worker satisfaction. This could also be due to an increase of extrinsic motivation because of

higher salary. Katzell et al. (1975) explain that the relationship between job satisfaction and

productivity is so weak and that there are so many links between them, that efforts that aimed

at increasing productivity or job satisfaction will only increase the other variable marginally

at best. Weiss (2002) mentions that job satisfaction and productivity can go hand in hand

when a total quality system is implemented. Job satisfaction and productivity are also related

in an indirect way. Job satisfaction and productivity are significantly negatively related via

burnout, indicating an indirect relationship (Baruch-Feldman, Brondolo, Ben-Dayan and

Schwartz, 2002).

Robbins (2003) mentions that the introduction of moderating variables in statistical analysis

benefited the relationship between job satisfaction and productivity. He continues by

explaining that this relationship is stronger when the behaviour of employees are not

controlled or limited by environmental factors. An example could be that when an individual

is working at an assembly line, it does not matter that much whether the employee is satisfied

or not, because the speed of the assembly line is what mostly determines the production in

this case. Concerning causality between the two constructs, Robbins (2003) depicts that

productivity is more likely to lead to satisfaction than the other way round. There remains a

gap in current research regarding the relationship between job satisfaction and productivity in

the health care and the call centre industry.

3.3.9 Life satisfaction

An additional variable that is correlated to job satisfaction is life satisfaction. Job satisfaction

is researched before life satisfaction. One of the first to explore this research area are

Brayfield, Wells and Strate (1957), who investigated the relationship between job satisfaction



- 45 -

and general satisfaction. They were the ones to suggest that more research was needed of the

relationship between job and life satisfaction. Near, Rice and Hunt (1978) suggested that job

satisfaction would be a subordinate (component) of life satisfaction. Two years later Rice,

Near and Hunt (1980) reviewed the existing literature on the relationship between the two

variables and found that individuals that are satisfied with their jobs tend to be satisfied with

other parts of their lives and life in general. Similarly, individuals that are not satisfied with

their current work situation tend to be dissatisfied with other parts of their lives as well (Rice

et al., 1980). However, Rice et al. (1980) mention that the relationships found in their review

were not particularly strong. Chacko (1983) found that job satisfaction and life satisfaction

were indeed related to each other and he found that the results were more supportive to the

idea that job satisfaction has a bigger impact on life and non-work satisfaction than the other

way around. Tait, Padgett and Baldwin (1989) made an ending to the statement that life and

job satisfaction were only weakly correlated. They showed, by means of a meta-analysis, that

the two variables were stronger correlated than previous research had suggested. However,

the issue of causality of the two variables remained unclear. Another meta-analysis that

researched the relationship between job and life satisfaction is the research conducted by

Kinicki et al. (2002). Kinicki et al. (2002) agreed with Tait et al. (1989) that the two are more

strongly correlated than many researchers thought. They show a moderate positive correlation

between the two constructs. In addition, Adams, King and King (1996) depict that job

satisfaction has a positive influence on life satisfaction.

Judge and Watanabe (1993) succeeded partially in decreasing confusion regarding the

causality of the two constructs. They proposed a figure that clarified the relationship between

the two variables, which is depicted as Figure 3.4. The results of this study by Judge and

Watanabe (1993) back up that there is a significant positive relationship between job and life

satisfaction. Both variables seem to mutually reinforce each other, as can be seen in Figure

3.4 (the two vertical arrows between job satisfaction and life satisfaction) (Judge and

Watanabe, 1993). The cross sectional results (the horizontal lines representing the 5-year time

lagged period) suggest a strong bidirectional relationship that is similar in size. Figure 3.4 also

shows that both cross-lagged regression coefficients were significant (the two crossed arrows)

but that life satisfaction had a significantly stronger lagged effect (a time period of five year)

on job satisfaction than the other way round. Regarding the two environments that are crucial

for this research, the call centre industry and the health care industry, there has not been any

research conducted on the relationship of job satisfaction and life satisfaction. Figure 3.4 is



- 46 -

also relevant for this research since the influence of several control variables on job

satisfaction is investigated. As with Figure 3.4, tenure, education, age, and gender are

included as moderating variables in this study to see what their effects are on the relationship

between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on the one hand and job satisfaction on the other

hand. In this paper, the influence of the moderating variables whether an employees has a full

time contract (or a part time contract) and whether an employee has a full time job (or a part

time job) will also researched.

Figure 3.4: Causal model estimates of job and life satisfaction (*p < .05, one-tailed; **p < .01,

one-tailed)

Retrieved from Judge, T. A. and Watanabe, S. (1993). Another look at the job satisfaction-life

satisfaction relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(6), p. 946.



- 47 -

3.3.10 Mental health

The next variable that is correlated to job satisfaction and will be discussed is mental health.

Furnham and Schaeffer (1984) investigated the relationship between person-environment fit,

job satisfaction and mental health. They were one of the first to investigate the relationship

between job satisfaction and mental health. The study was conducted among full-time

working adults and 82 were selected. Furnham and Schaeffer (1984) found that when a

correlation was carried out between job satisfaction and a number of variables, a high

significant correlation was found between job satisfaction and mental health. They suggest

that the better an employee’s health was, the more satisfied he was with his job. This is

backed up by Hesketh and Shouksmith (1986), who conducted their research among

veterinarians in New Zealand with as main goal to examine the relationship between job and

non-job activities, job satisfaction and mental health. Furthermore, also non-job activities

(like life satisfaction) were positively correlated to mental health. Clegg, Wall and Kemp

(1987) also found a significant correlation between job satisfaction and mental health. They

showed that assembly line (female) workers who where dissatisfied with their jobs also tend

to suffer from lower mental health conditions. Clegg et al. (1987) depicted that assembly

workers that were dissatisfied increased their frequency of day dreaming, and day dreaming

is directly negatively correlated to mental health. The most current research that investigated

the relationship between job satisfaction and mental health is from Williams, Konrad,

Scheckler, Pathman, Linzer, McMurray, Gerrity and Schwartz (2000). They predicted and

found a moderate positive two-way relationship between the two variables. They also found

an indirect relationship between job satisfaction and mental health that went through stress.

Both satisfaction and mental health were highly negatively correlated to stress (Williams et

al., 2000). Furthermore, job satisfaction is indirectly related to physical health as well (Ilardi,

Leone, Kasser and Ryan, 1993). This indirect relationship between the two variables runs

through experienced feelings of autonomy, competence and relatedness in the work

environment.

The only relevant study concerning the health care industry that used nurses and investigated

the relationship between the two constructs is the study conducted by Elovainio, Kivimäki,

Steen and Kalliomäki-Levanti (2000). Over 75 percent of the 2600 employees of several

wards in different hospitals used for this research were nurses (Elovainio et al., 2000). The

results found in this study are congruent with what previous studies regarding the relationship



- 48 -

between job satisfaction and mental health suggested. There is a clear positive relationship

between the two variables (Elovainio et al., 2000). Concerning the call centre sector, there has

no research been conducted on the relationship between job satisfaction and mental health.

3.3.11 Motivation

The most relevant variable for this study that is correlated to job satisfaction is motivation.

Since this research is investigating the relationship between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation

and job satisfaction, the construct of motivation should be seen as the most significant of the

various constructs discussed in this chapter. One of the first that tried to link satisfaction and

motivation are Brayfield and Crockett (1955). They found that satisfaction with an

individual’s position in a social network of relationships needs not to imply that there is a

strong motivation to perform within that network of relationships. Herzberg (1966, in House

and Wigdor, 1967) seems to have found a relationship between motivation and job

satisfaction when he developed his two-factor theory. This two factor theory has as main

propositions that satisfiers (motivators) and dissatisfiers (hygiene) are unidimensional and

independent and that satisfiers have more motivational force than dissatisfiers (Herzberg,

1966 in House and Wigdor, 1967). Herzberg’s theory has been used and criticised very often

(see for example Bassett-Jones and Lloyd, 2005; Boe, 1970; Brenner, Carmack and

Weinstein, 1971; Crompton, 2003; Farr, 1977; Gardner, 1977; Haywood and Wachs, 1966;

Herzberg, Mathapo, Wiener and Wiesen, 1974; House and Wigdor, 1967; Leach and

Westbrook, 2000; Maidani, 1991; Shipley and Kiely, 1988; Timmreck, 2001). Both

propositions are highly damaged by House and Wigdor (1967) who showed that some

components that are classified as satisfiers, like recognition and achievement, can also be

classified as dissatisfiers. Moreover, any attempt to distinguish between the two constructs

created by Herzberg requires an arbitrary definition of the classifications of satisfiers and

dissatisfiers and even when there can be a good classification of those two constructs, the

proposition is untestable (House and Wigdor, 1967). Normal logic can play a role here as

well. The issue of unidimensional is out of question since a satisfying factor for one employee

can be a dissatisfying factor for another.

Locke (1976, in Tietjen and Myers, 1998) also criticised Herzberg’s motivators and hygiene

factors. He mentioned several criticisms like that Herzberg made a distinction between



- 49 -

psychological and biological processes, which is impossible, that there is no such thing as

unidirectional needs (a man can do things with several reasons and not just one), that there is

a gap between the motivation and hygiene factors and an individual’s needs that needs to be

filled, that there an incident classification systems (that he is inconsistent in categorizing

factors of satisfaction) (which is similar to the critique by House and Wigdor (1967)), that

there is defensiveness (where employees take credit for what goes right but blame others

when it goes wrong), that he used frequency data, and last that there is a denial of individual

differences.

Drake and Mitchell (1977) investigated the effects of horizontal and vertical power on

motivation and satisfaction and found that both vertical and horizontal power had a significant

influence on motivation and satisfaction. Vertical linkages refer to the supervisor-subordinate

relationship and horizontal linkages refer to relation between sub groups and peers. This

research suggests that managers should balance power among sub groups and within

subgroups to ensure a maximum of motivation and satisfaction among employees (Drake and

Mitchell, 1977). Philips and Freedman (1984) conducted their research to find out what and

how situational constraints influenced motivation and satisfaction. Philips and Freedman

(1984) build on the ideas of Peters and O’Connor (1980), namely that situational constraints

have a negative effect on both motivation to perform and satisfaction. Furthermore,

motivational strategies designed to increase motivation are limited by those situational

constraints (Peters and O'Connor, 1980). Phillips and Freedman (1984) showed a significant

moderate positive relationship between job satisfaction and motivation. The results of their

study indicate that the presence of situational constraints have a serious influence on

motivation and satisfaction. Therefore, it is important for organizations to keep in mind that

the work environment and job design can be crucial on the motivation and satisfaction of their

employees like a cafeteria where employees can eat. Moreover, situational constraints do not

necessarily have to lead to a decrease in motivation and satisfaction when employees think

that those constraints did not reduce the possibility and the ability of reaching desired goals.

Ilardi et al. (1993) agree that organizations need to make sure that satisfaction can be

enhanced within an organization. Managers have to attend also to employees’ experiences of

autonomy, competence and relatedness to the work environment in order to create motivation

and thus satisfaction with their employees. Clearly, when there are too many constraints in the

work environment, the employee will have difficulty feeling related to the job. Beltramini and



- 50 -

Evans (1988) investigated the influence of sales contests on satisfaction and motivation

among sales people. They found that indeed sales contests appeared to have a positive

influence on both satisfaction and (extrinsic) motivation of salespeople. However, those sales

contests should be perceived separately from their regular compensation otherwise sales

people might only become motivated when a sales contest is coming up (Beltramini and

Evans, 1988). Lambert (1991) conducted her research in order to find out what the combined

effects were of family and job characteristics on intrinsic motivation, job satisfaction and job

involvement of men and women employees. Lambert (1991) found a relationship between

satisfaction and motivation and she found that women’s jobs are less stressful and rewarding

but also provide greater social rewards than men’s jobs. This is due to the higher intrinsic

motivation of women compared to men and women may therefore be also more satisfied than

men in similar jobs.

A current meta-analysis on the relationship between job satisfaction and motivation has been

conducted by Kinicki et al. (2002). They investigated the construct validity of the Job

Descriptive Index by reviewing and using a meta-analysis on studies that examined

antecedents, correlated and consequences of job satisfaction. The Job Descriptive Index is

created to measure the construct of job satisfaction (Kinicki et al., 2002). They found that job

satisfaction was positively moderately correlated to motivation, as has been suggested by

other authors. This is of course relevant for organizations and this backs up what common

sense already suggested, namely that managers need to enhance employees’ motivation in

order to increase satisfaction.

Timmreck (2001) mentions that for the health care industry, motivation and satisfaction are

key concepts to reduce turnover, producing high quality work, keeping costs within

reasonable limits, and developing and maintaining worthwhile and productive working

relations with colleagues, supervisors and subordinates. Timmreck (2001) depicts that there

are 8 areas for which motivation (and its relation to satisfaction) is important in the health

care industry. These eight areas are when commitment to work is a relevant part of the job,

when the job is central to an employee’s identity and life, when employees with a higher

education have high expectations of the job, when the employee is not valued, when

employees are easily alienated by performing dull and standard tasks, when there is a lack of

responsibility and stifling bureaucratic approaches, when job satisfaction and work motivation

are thought of as unimportant work-related topics, and when bad treatment of workers is



- 51 -

avoidable due to working with professional personnel. The first three areas show a positive

influence on motivation and the last five show a negative impact on motivation. Timmreck

(2001) concludes with explaining that health care managers need to treat their employees with

fairness, dignity and respect together with motivators in order to create satisfaction among

their employees, better communication, improvement in quality and an increase in production.

When managers fail to create satisfaction among their nursing personnel, hospitals experience

high turnover rates, increased rates of absenteeism, and a decrease in motivation of the

employees. More importantly, this can have negative consequences for the patient.

Sargiacomo (2002) acknowledges the importance (and correlation) of both concepts and

proposed the Deming cycle (Deming, 1982 in Sargiacomo, 2002), known for the application

in total quality management, for benchmarking in the health care industry in Italy, which is

represented in Figure 3.5. Sargiacomo (2002) proposed this cycle in order to create a focus on

quality and to improve therewith motivation and satisfaction among health care employees in

Italy. This should be done through the ‘plan’-step (to declare what the intention is and to plan

the project), the ‘do’-step (which deals with the search of data), the ‘check’-step (report of the

results and determine the gaps and improvements needed), and the ‘act’-step (choosing and

implementing improvements identified). Logically, a cycle does not end and therefore this

focus on quality is a never-ending process. Sargiacomo (2002) depicts that the focus on

quality in every aspect of the organization will lead to an increase in motivation for the

employees that are involved in this process. A problem could be that too much quality control

can lead to a decrease in intrinsic motivation.

Kavanaugh, Duffy and Lilly concur with Sargiacomo (2002) that satisfaction and motivation

are important in establishing quality in the health care industry. Kavanaugh et al. (2006)

investigated the relationship between job satisfaction and a number of demographic variables.

They found that of all demographic variables that could have an influence on job satisfaction

years of working on the job was the most important variable. Kavanaugh et al. (2006) suggest

that mentoring and coaching is needed in the health care environment for those employees

that are somewhat dissatisfied in order to retain their talents and to decrease turnover rates in

hospitals. Nurses that are working very long on the job tend to be very consistent and can be

very helpful in teaching and educating their younger colleagues. A critical element in this

analysis is that these older nurses need to be motivated as well otherwise they will not really

educate and help their younger colleagues.



- 52 -

Figure 3.5: The Deming cycle applied to benchmarking in the health care industry

Retrieved from Sargiacomo, M. (2002). Benchmarking in Italy: The first case study on

personnel motivation and satisfaction in a health business. Total Quality Management, 13(4),

p. 491.

Savery (1989) conducted his research in Australia investigating the perceived influence of

several factors on job satisfaction of nurses. Using a sample of 100 state registered nurses,

Savery (1989) found that factors that have been identified as intrinsic motivators and meeting

expectations seem to have an important part of achieving high levels of job satisfaction for a

specific individual or at least preventing job dissatisfaction. Some of these intrinsic

motivators include mentally challenging work with which the employee can deal successfully,

personal interest in the job itself, high self-esteem on the part of the employee, and so on

(Savery, 1989).

A common stereotype regarding call centre work is an employee sitting behind a desk

answering to questions of the customer all day and doing work that is neither complicated nor

challenging (Taylor and Bain, 1999). The opposite is true however; call centre work is very

demanding, both in physical labour as well as in emotional labour (Taylor and Bain, 1999;

Wegge et al., 2006; Zhong et al., 2006). Call centre employees are instructed to be friendly,



- 53 -

enthusiastic, helpful, calm and polite even when consumers are very rude and impatient, and

this results in conflicting emotions when employees have to deal with these customers

(Wegge et al., 2006). Lewig and Dollard (2003) refer to this state of mind as emotional

dissonance. Emotional dissonance requires high amounts of emotional labour. Wegge et al.

(2006) conducted two studies in several call centres to research a number of hypotheses that

have been tested before in other industrial areas but not the call centre environment. They

found that high motivating potential was significantly correlated to work motivation (which

includes high job satisfaction, organizational citizenship behaviour, personal

accomplishments, and low turnover intentions) and better well-being (which includes lower

health complaints and low emotional exhaustion). Regarding the relationship of job

satisfaction and work motivation, they found that the two are significantly positively

correlated to each other.

- 54 -

Chapter 4: Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation

In this chapter, the concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation will be discussed. First,

intrinsic motivation is defined and described. Next, the concept and construct of extrinsic

motivation will be clarified. Then the focus will shift to several authors depicting the

relationships concerning intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Fourth, the debate whether or not

extrinsic rewards have a negative influence on intrinsic motivation will be extensively

elaborated. Last, the two concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are applied to the two

samples used in this research, namely nurses and call centre agents.

4.1 Intrinsic motivation

Human motivation is one of the key issues in the field of organizational behaviour and

psychology (Bénabou and Tirole, 2003). Understanding why we do the things that we do has

been investigated and researched in order to find the major drives behind this concept.

Motivation energises and directs certain behaviour toward reaching a specific goal (Sansone

and Harackiewicz, 2000). Motivation is often referred to as either intrinsic or extrinsic.

Intrinsic motivation is the motivation to do or act in one’s own interests or simply for the

enjoyment of the activity itself (Hennessey and Amabile, 2005). Robbins (2003) depicts that

it is the desire to work on something that is interesting, challenging, satisfying, exciting or

involving. Intrinsic motivation is the innate and natural propensity to engage an individual’s

interests and exercise an individual’s skills and capabilities, and in so doing, to look for and

achieve optimal opportunities and challenges (Deci and Ryan, 1985). This motivation comes

from internal tendencies and can direct and motivate behaviour without the presence of

constraints or rewards (Deci and Ryan, 1985). Translating intrinsic motivation to the work

environment, it holds that employees genuinely care about their work, that employees search

for better ways to get their work done, and that employees are enthusiastic and committed to

perform well at their jobs (Thomas, 2000). According to Amabile (1993), intrinsic motivators

are necessarily bound up with work itself. The intrinsic motivation of having pleasure in a

certain activity may cause the individual to spend many days practising a sport, an instrument,

and so on. Many government agencies and educating organizations emphasize the advantages

of intrinsic motivation and depict that students should do everything and work hard on tests,

Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation


- 55 -

projects, regular classes, and such because they want to learn for joy and not because of

constraints or rewards (Dreikurs Ferguson, 2000).

Intrinsic motivation is defined as performing an activity for its intrinsic satisfactions rather

than for some distinguishable consequence (Deci and Ryan, 1985). When an individual is

intrinsically motivated he or she will move for the challenge or the enjoyment instead of the

promise of rewards or avoiding punishment (Deci and Ryan, 1985). From birth on, humans

are active, curious, and interested animals, when they are not held back by illness, and they

show an ever-present eagerness to explore and learn (Dreikurs Ferguson, 2000). Thus, there is

no need for extrinsic motivations to move them. According to Ryan and Deci (2000a),

research on intrinsic motivation has focused most on certain conditions that elicit, sustain, and

enhance this type of motivation against those conditions that undermine or decrease it. The

cognitive evaluation theory, as part of the self-determination theory, specifies factors in social

contexts that cause variability in intrinsic motivation (Deci and Ryan, 1985). This cognitive

evaluation theory states that those interpersonal events and structures (like feedback, rewards,

communication and so on) that lead to feelings of competence during a certain action can

increase intrinsic motivation for the specific action since these feelings permit satisfaction of

the innate psychological need for competence that is inherent for humans (Deci and Ryan,

1985). The cognitive evaluation theory states furthermore that feelings of competence need to

be combined by a sense of autonomy (or internal perceived locus of causality) in order to

increase intrinsic motivation (Deci and Ryan, 1985). In other words, individuals must

perceive their behaviour to be self-determined and not guided by rewards or constraints.

Individuals have to experience a fulfilment of the needs of competence and autonomy.

According to Deci and Ryan (1985), it is critical to understand that intrinsic motivation will

occur only for situations that contain intrinsic interests for a person. For those situations that

do not have this appearance, the principles of the cognitive evaluation theory do not apply

(Deci and Ryan, 1985). In the research at hand, the cognitive evaluation theory will be linked

to intrinsic (and extrinsic) motivation to see what the relationship between the two constructs

is.

There is disagreement about the proper and right construct of intrinsic motivation between

several researchers. Lepper, Green and Nisbett (1973) and Deci and Ryan (1985) agree that

intrinsic motivation refers to an activity that meets basic human needs for control and for

competence, which makes the activity interesting, challenging and fun and therefore more



- 56 -

likely to be performed for its own sake than as a means to some end result (Sansone and

Harackiewicz, 2000). Shah and Kruglanski (in Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000) depict that

there are two ways to define intrinsic motivation. The first is defined in terms of structure,

which is when an activity is related to a single goal. The second is defined in terms of

substance, which is when the content of the goal matters. Sansone and Harackiewicz (2000)

define intrinsic motivation as a process as well as a result and suggest that it is a process

situated in our normal regulation of behaviour. Moreover, motivation to perform activities

that are goal directed at a certain point in time could depend on the level to which we

experience enjoyment and interest. These are just some of the differences in the construct of

intrinsic motivation available. Logically, this will result in some debate between various

authors on the relationship of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation, which will be

discussed later on.

4.2 Extrinsic motivation

Next to intrinsic motivation is extrinsic motivation. Extrinsic motivation refers to performing

an activity with a feeling of being pressured, tension, or anxiety just to make sure that one

would achieve the result that he or she desires (Lindenberg, 2001). Hennessey and Amabile

(2005) depict that extrinsic motivation is the motivation to do something to make sure that

some external goal is attained or that some external imposed constraint is met. Extrinsically

motivated behaviours are actions that cause the attainment of rewards that are externally

imposed, including material possessions, salary, additional bonuses, positive feedback and

evaluations from others, fringe benefits, and prestige (Ryan and Deci, 2000b). Extrinsic

motivation can easily be seen in everyday life; employees that only go to work because of the

salary they receive or students that are obliged to go to university simply because their parents

make them go.

Although intrinsic motivation is a very crucial type of motivation, most of the activities

performed by humans are not intrinsically motivated activities. This can be seen after the

early years of a human being, when the freedom of being moved pure by one’s own interests

becomes overshadowed by social demands and roles one has to play that require persons to

take responsibility for tasks that are not initially intrinsically motivating (Deci and Ryan,

1985). There are some perspectives on extrinsic motivation that view this type of motivation



- 57 -

as non-autonomous, but Deci and Ryan (1985) propose the self-determination theory to vary

in the level to which it is autonomous. An example of different types of extrinsic motivation

can easily be thought of. One could think of a young individual that joined a professional

soccer team. He could be pressured by his parents, friends, family and such to join the club to

boost their egos but he could also have joined the soccer club to think of all the prices and

rewards he could win. Of course, there is the possibility that the young individual is

intrinsically motivated but when one looks at the two examples given, one can see that there

are multiple types of extrinsic motivation.

Within the self-determination theory of Deci and Ryan (1985), a second subtheory called the

organismic integration theory copes with the several types of extrinsic motivation and the

related factors that either increase or decrease internalization and integration of the regulation

for behaviours. Internalization refers to the process through which an individual gets a belief,

attitude or behavioural regulation and progressively changes it into a personal goal or value.

Integration (the final step of internalization) refers to the process by which persons more

totally alter the regulation into their own so that it will come from their sense of self (Deci and

Ryan, 1985). A good example of integration refers to a child that comes to understand that

throwing a ball inside the house is not good (something might brake or his mother might get

upset), overcoming previous thoughts of enjoyment of throwing the ball inside the house.

The organismic integration theory is depicted in Figure 4.1 and shows the taxonomy of types

of motivation. Moving from the left to the right of the figure, there is an increase in the

motivation for an individual’s behaviour that comes from one’s self. At the far left in Figure

4.1 there is amotivation, which refers to a state of lacking an intention to move or act (Ryan

and Deci, 2000a). According to Ryan and Deci (2000a), when an individual is amotivated his

or her behaviour shows no sense of causation and intentionality. Under extrinsic motivation,

there are several subcategories with different levels of autonomy. Just to the right of

amotivation is external regulation, which is the least autonomous form of extrinsic

motivation. Behaviours classified in this category are merely to satisfy an external demand or

to meet an externally imposed constraint. People feel controlled or alienated with this type of

behaviour and their actions have an external perceived locus of causality. DeCharms (1968, in

Ryan and Deci, 2000a) refer to an external perceived locus of causality when the individual is

seen as a ‘pawn’ to heterogeneous forces. With an internal perceived locus of causality the

individual is believed to be an origin of his behaviour (deCharms, 1968 in Ryan and Deci,



- 58 -

2000a). Ryan and Deci (2000a) refer to this type of extrinsic motivation as the extrinsic

motivation used in early lab studies that was used to contrast intrinsic motivation. Next to

external regulation is introjected regulation, which refers to this type of internal regulation

that is still pretty controlling since individuals do these actions with a feeling of being

pressured with as main goal to avoid anxiety or guild or to increase pride.

Figure 4.1: A taxonomy of human motivation

Regulatory

styles

Associated

processes

Perceived non

contingency

Low perceived

competence

Non relevance

Non intentionality

Salience of

extrinsic rewards

or punishments

Compliance /

reactance

Ego

involvement

Focus on

approval from

self and others

Conscious

valuing of

activity

Self-

endorsement of

goals

Hierarchical

synthesis of

goals

Congruence

Interest /

Enjoyment

Inherent

satisfaction

Perceived locus

of causality

Impersonal External Somewhat

external

Somewhat

internal

Internal Internal

Retrieved from Ryan, R. M. and Deci, E. L. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations:

Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, p. 61

To the right of introjected regulation is identification, which is a more autonomous and self-

determined form of extrinsic motivation. With this type of extrinsic motivation, the individual

has related to the personal importance of a behaviour and therefore has accepted its regulation

as his or her own behaviour. Ryan and Deci (2000a) give an example that clarifies this type of

Extrinsic

motivation

External

regulation

Integra-

tion

Identifi-

cation

Amotivation

Introjec-

tion

Intrinsic

motivation



- 59 -

extrinsic motivation. They mention a young individual that studies spelling lists since he

perceives them to be relevant for writing (which he considers a life goal) has identified with

the value of this learning activity. The last, and most autonomous, type of extrinsic motivation

is integrated regulation. This occurs when identified regulations have been completely

assimilated to the self of that individual. This is still extrinsic motivation because behaviour

motivated by internal regulation has still been done for some value in order to obtain some

result or to avoid punishment (Ryan and Deci, 2000a).

As it is the case with the construct and definition intrinsic motivation (as can be read earlier in

this chapter), there has been much disagreement in defining the construct and the definition of

extrinsic motivation. There seem to be two major definitions available in the research on this

topic (Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000). The first one is when motivation is derived from

something extrinsic to the individual and the second one refers to when motivation is derived

from something extrinsic to the activity. Ryan and Deci (2000a) agree with the second

definition that extrinsic motivation is based on something extrinsic to the activity. They

suggest that individuals can have multiple kinds of extrinsic motivation that are different in

terms of the level to which the individual is self-determined. This kind of extrinsic motivation

(self-determined) can be strong enough to motivate persons to be persistent in activities that

are not intrinsically motivating. Hidi (in Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000) agrees with the

first definition on extrinsic motivation. She depicts that persons are extrinsically motivated

when the source of this extrinsic motivation is extrinsic or outside to the individual. She

mentions that persons could be motivated by a certain level of interest that is created by the

features of the activity but she stresses that this is extrinsic motivation. There has been some

confusion about the several definitions of extrinsic motivation. This has an influence on the

debate regarding the influence of rewards on intrinsic motivation between proponents of

intrinsic motivation and proponents of extrinsic motivation. This discussion will be elaborated

later in this chapter.

Calder and Staw (1975) were one of the first to examine the relationship between intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation. They tested this relationship from the angle of the self perception theory.

The self-perception theory (not discussed in the chapter on theories of motivation due to

limited time and space of this research) is developed by Bem (1967; 1972) and holds that

individuals develop attitudes by looking at their own behaviour and then concluding what

attitudes might have caused them. In other words, individuals kind of observe their own



- 60 -

behaviour and then conclude why they have acted in such ways. An example could be that if

an individual keeps on watching a specific programme on television because his parents

watch it and he sees that he does not dislike the programme, he can conclude that he likes the

programme himself. Calder and Staw (1975) proposed a figure using the self-perception

theory on the relationship of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, which is represented here as

Figure 4.2.

Figure 4.2: A means-end analysis of the self-perception of motivation

Affect of ends

Negative or neutral Positive

Negative or neutral No motivation Extrinsically

motivated behaviour

Affect of means

Positive Intrinsically motivated

behaviour

Unstable

Retrieved from Calder, B. J. and Staw, B. M. (1975). Self-perception of intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(4), p. 604.

When looking at Figure 4.2, one can see that extrinsic motivation can be attributed most

obviously when the means are negative or neutral and the ends are positive and intrinsic

motivation can be attributed most obviously when the means are positive and the ends are

negative or neutral (Calder and Staw, 1975). When the means are negative or neutral and the

ends are negative or neutral as well there should be no motivation present (Calder and Staw,

1975). Last, when the means are positive and the ends are positive as well the attribution

maybe unstable. The results of the experiment of Calder and Staw (1975) indicate that the

effect of the intrinsic and extrinsic factors on task persistence and satisfaction indeed suggest

a strong relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Their experiment was

conducted with jigsaw puzzles, either blank or with pictures varying from the American

president to Playboy centrefolds. They created this interaction by manipulating intrinsic

motivation (with black and pictured jigsaw puzzles) and rewarding subjects with dollars.



- 61 -

Having a picture on the puzzle triggered the ‘means’ of the activity while adding a monetary

reward to a blank puzzled triggered the ‘end’.

The problem with finding an appropriate, unique and comprehensible construct for both

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation has result in an even more complex relationship between

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The problem is that even when authors have written

concerning this relationship they have found different results. One of the few sources that

have touched this topic are the authors that have written in Sansone and Harackiewicz (2000).

A summary of what those authors have been depicting regarding this topic will be explained

here. Sansone and Harackiewicz (2000) depict that the same extrinsic motivation, in this case

performance contingent rewards, can at the same time start processes that can lead to an

increase in intrinsic motivation as well as extrinsic motivation. Lepper and Henderlong (in

Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000), however, propose that intrinsic and extrinsic motivation

can operate at the same time and do not essentially have to be reciprocal. Sansone and Smith

(in Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000) depict that extrinsic motivation can enhance intrinsic

motivation when it motivates a person to take part in strategies that increase interests. Deci

and Ryan (1985), Deci et al. (1999), and Ryan and Deci (2000) make a distinction between

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and propose that there are identical factors that can increase

intrinsic motivation by promoting feelings of self-determination but at the same time can

promote self-determined extrinsic motivation (and the other way around) (Sansone and

Harackiewicz, 2000). Despite some differences among these researchers regarding the

relationship of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, Sansone and Harackiewicz (2000) mention

that the researchers no longer focus on mutually exclusive relationships between the two

constructs. Next will be the debate of the effect of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation,

looked upon from different angles.

4.3 The influence of extrinsic motivators on intrinsic motivation

4.3.1 The start of the debate

The origin of this debate started back in the 1970s, when several researchers started to doubt

the additive nature of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation (Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000).

Deci (1971) was one of the first to investigate the relationship between extrinsic rewards and



- 62 -

intrinsic motivation. He found that extrinsic rewards had a negative effect on intrinsic

motivation, when money was used as an extrinsic reward. Positive feedback and verbal

reinforcement, however, tended to have a positive effect on intrinsic motivation (Deci, 1971).

Deci (1972) used undergraduate students with a puzzle called Soma for investigating the

relationship between intrinsic motivation and extrinsic rewards. The students that were

offered extrinsic rewards for puzzling seemed to be less interested in the puzzles than the

students that were not extrinsically rewarded. Deci (1972) found that students who were paid

for doing the puzzle became less likely to do the puzzle in their own free time period. Deci

(1972) suggested that there should not be a focus on external control systems such as

monetary rewards, but on creating and structuring situations that are interesting and

challenging. Calder and Staw (1975) also investigated the relationship between extrinsic

rewards and intrinsic motivation. They proposed that when a task involved high initial

intrinsic motivation, the introduction of extrinsic rewards could lead to the self-perception

that the individual is doing the activity just to get the reward. In contrast, when a task would

involve less initial intrinsic motivation, this self-perception effect should not occur. These

propositions are later on investigated by several authors.

Lepper, Green and Nisbett (1973) conducted their research among nursery school children

regarding drawing pictures. They tested the consequences of shifting an individual’s

perception on his own motivation from being intrinsically motivated to being extrinsically

motivated by adding a reward to a situation where one was intrinsically motivated. The

children were rewarded for drawing some pictures (Lepper et al., 1973). The results show that

individuals in the expected-award condition would show less subsequent intrinsic interest in

the target activity than individuals in the unexpected-award conditions and the no-award

condition. In other words, including an external reward to an activity that was previously on

pure interest makes individuals less intrinsically motivated to perform that activity. Lepper et

al. (1973) refer to this as the over-justification effect. Calder and Staw (1975) concurred with

Lepper et al. (1973) with the fact that extrinsic rewards had a negative influence on subjects

that found the initial activity intrinsically motivating. Pritchard, Campbell and Campbell

(1977) conducted a similar study as Deci (1971) and Deci (1972) but now with a chess

problem task. Again, some students were offered monetary rewards and then later was

checked which students performed the same task. The results support the hypothesis that

extrinsic rewards have a negative influence on intrinsic motivation (Pritchard et al., 1977).

This negative effect is not limited to monetary rewards as several studies have showed



- 63 -

(Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000). One of those studies, by Amabile, DeJong and Lepper

(1976), showed that deadlines had a negative effect on intrinsic motivation as well. Deci and

Ryan (1985) showed that several other factors, like surveillance and competition, also had a

negative effect on intrinsic motivation.

Deci and Ryan (1985) proposed their cognitive evaluation theory depicting that it is not the

external event itself, but the functional significance that is important. According to Deci and

Ryan (1985), the initiation and regulation of behaviour have three aspects that may be

differentially salient to different individuals or to the same individual at different moments.

Those three aspects are informational, controlling and amotivating (Deci and Ryan, 1985). It

is the relative salience of these three aspects to a certain individual that influences changes in

perceived causality and competence and that changes an individual’s intrinsic motivation

(Deci and Ryan, 1985). When the informational aspect is more salient and positive, this can

enhance an individual’s intrinsic motivation because he or she might feel competent. On the

other hand, when the controlling aspect is more salient, this should lead to a decrease in

intrinsic motivation because the individual has a feeling of being controlled, which is negative

(Deci and Ryan, 1985). The findings of Deci (1971; , 1972), Deci, Cascio and Krusell (1975)

and Deci and Ryan (1985) are backed up by Jordan (1986), who confirmed the propositions

made from the cognitive evaluation theory. Jordan (1986) clarifies that the expectation of

extrinsic rewards contingent upon performance decreased initial intrinsic motivation of

individuals.

The emphasis regarding rewards then focused on a different type of reward, namely a reward

offered for achieving a certain level of competence in a situation (Sansone and Harackiewicz,

2000). These so-called performance-contingent rewards had the characteristics of being

highly controlling but at the same time to have the potential to communicate positive

competence feedback (Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000). The research on these performance-

contingent rewards is very mixed. Some depict that performance contingent rewards have a

negative effect on motivation (e.g., Harackiewicz, 1979), some show that these rewards have

a positive effect (e.g., Karniol and Ross, 1977 in Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000), and

others who have found no effect (e.g., Boggiano and Ruble, 1979). One of the criticisms

stated that the negative results of using rewards came from bad operationalizations of the

reward as a reinforcer (See for example: Flora, 1990; Reiss and Sushinsky, 1975; , 1976).

Wiersma (1992) conducted a meta-analysis investigating the relationship and influence of



- 64 -

extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. He continues by suggesting why it is clear that the

findings have not been consistent over the past decades regarding this relationship. The

proposition, based on the cognitive evaluation theory (that is discussed in the motivational

theories section), that contingently applied extrinsic rewards decrease intrinsic motivation, is

indeed supported when task behaviour is calculated during a period of spare time. On the

other hand, this is not supported when task performance is measured when the extrinsic

reward is in effect. Wiersma (1992) continues by suggesting that this effect is strongly tied to

the way intrinsic motivation is operationalized and that situations to which this proposition

could be generalized are limited.

The debate moved a bit to the background until 1996, when it was brought to life by

Eisenberger and Cameron (1996). From that point on there have been several groups of

authors supporting their own way of thinking and criticising other groups. The various groups

are Eisenberger and Cameron (Eisenberger and Cameron, 1996; Eisenberger and Cameron,

1998; Eisenberger et al., 1999a; Eisenberger et al., 1999b), Deci and Ryan (Deci, 1971; ,

1972; Deci et al., 1975; Deci et al., 1999; Deci and Ryan, 1985; Deci et al., 1981; Ryan, 1982;

Ryan and Deci, 2000a; , 2000b; Ryan and Grolnick, 1986; Ryan, Mims and Koestner, 1983),

Amabile and Hennessey (Amabile, 1993; Amabile et al., 1976; Amabile, Hill, Hennessey and

Tighe, 1994; , 1995; Hennessey and Amabile, 1998; , 2005), Sansone and Harackiewicz

(Harackiewicz, 1979; Harackiewicz, Manderlink and Sansone, 1984; Sansone and

Harackiewicz, 1998; , 2000), and Lepper and Henderlong (Henderlong and Lepper, 2002;

Lepper et al., 1973; Lepper et al., 1999; Simon and Holyoak, 2002).

4.3.2 Conclusions of the debate

All else being held constant, Lepper and Henderlong (in Lepper et al., 1999; in Sansone and

Harackiewicz, 2000) depict that there are basically three propositions regarding the discussion

in the literature on the relationship of extrinsic rewards and intrinsic motivation. The first is

that non contingent rewards will be less likely to cause negative effects on intrinsic

motivation and more likely to cause positive effects than otherwise the same rewards that are

contingent of task completion or engagement (and under special conditions on task

performance). Second, unexpected extrinsic rewards are more likely to cause positive effects

than negative effects on intrinsic motivation than rewards that are expected by the individual.



- 65 -

And last, extrinsic rewards that are intangible (like social, verbal, implicit and such) are more

likely to produce positive effects than negative effects on intrinsic motivation compared to

rewards that are more tangible. There are two more propositions in the literature that are

supported by most (Lepper and Henderlong, in Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000). The first

proposition holds that rewards that focus on an individual’s abilities, skills, and competences

will more likely have a positive effect on intrinsic motivation than rewards that do not give

such information. The second is that expected tangible rewards can improve intrinsic

motivation with tasks where the individual has a no or little initial intrinsic interests and

decrease intrinsic motivation with tasks where the individual has high initial intrinsic task

interests. Lepper and Henderlong (in Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000) propose a figure that

summarizes most of the literature on the effects of rewards on motivation, which is

represented here as Figure 4.3.

Figure 4.3: A schematic view of how rewards can affect subsequent intrinsic motivation and

extrinsic motivation via the variables of perceived continued instrumentality, perceived

competence, and perceived autonomy

If yes If yes

If no If yes

If yes

If yes

Retrieved from Lepper, M. R. and Henderlong, J. in Sansone, C. and Harackiewicz, J. M.

(2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and

performance. San Diego: Academic Press. p. 264.

Reward

procedure

Perceived

competence

Perceived

continued

instrumentality

Perceived

autonomy

Extrinsic

performance

requirement?

Intrinsic

performance

requirement?

Sufficient

perceived

competence?

Sufficient

perceived

competence?

Possibility of

learning?

Possibility of

learning?

Subsequent

intrinsic

motivation

Subsequent

extrinsic

motivation



- 66 -

As one can see in Figure 4.3, the receipt of extrinsic rewards can communicate the possibility

of receiving more rewards in similar situations in the future (Lepper and Henderlong, in

Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000). This is what perceived continued instrumental value refers

to. Expectations of continued extrinsic rewards in the future for activities performed can

provide continued extrinsic motivation for a person to keep doing those activities (whether or

not intrinsic motivation is involved). Furthermore, as can be seen in Figure 4.3, extrinsic

rewards could communicate information about the skills and capabilities of an individual at a

certain task. Next, there are two ways from personal competence to either intrinsic motivation

or extrinsic motivation. Increases in personal competence can make an individual continue at

activities for which extrinsic rewards are expected only at certain levels of performance but

increases in personal competence can also lead to an increase in intrinsic motivation (because

individuals tend to like to do things where they are good at). Moreover, as can be seen in the

lower part of Figure 4.3, the receipt of any extrinsic rewards can communicate information

about an individual’s autonomy or personal control in that situation. Ceteris paribus, the

receipt of rewards that gives individuals the idea that their performances are extrinsically

motivated, causes a decrease in intrinsic motivation because individuals dislike the feeling of

being controlled. They conclude by stating that the influence of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic

motivation depends on the characteristics of the situation, nature of the situation and the

initial value to the individual. Moreover, Lepper and Henderlong (in Sansone and

Harackiewicz, 2000) agree with Deci et al. (1999) that the research on intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation shows that the two can be in conflict with each other.

When summarizing the different viewpoints on the relationship of extrinsic rewards on

intrinsic motivation in the articles of Deci, Koestner and Ryan (1999), Eisenberger and

Cameron (1996), Hennessey and Amabile (1998), Lepper, Henderlong and Gingras (1999),

and Sansone and Harackiewicz (1998) one can see that rewards can have positive and

negative effects on intrinsic motivation. These effects depend on the reward contingency,

individuals receiving the rewards, individuals offering the reward, the nature of the activity,

the feedback obtained, and the general context for reward administration (Sansone and

Harackiewicz, 2000). One difference in opinions between various groups of authors is the

negative effect of performance contingent rewards on intrinsic motivation. Deci et al. (1999)

depict that performance contingent rewards have a negative effect on intrinsic motivation.

Eisenberger and Cameron (1996), however, depict that performance contingent rewards that



- 67 -

focus on high performance, exceeding performance of others, and on achieving an absolute

standard of performance can have a positive effect. Sansone and Harackiewicz (1998) add

that performance contingent rewards can have positive as well as negative effects on intrinsic

motivation. This would depend on whether individuals are able to qualify for the reward.

The greatest difference in opinions regarding the researchers is whether and in what way

extrinsic rewards can have a positive influence on intrinsic motivation (Sansone and

Harackiewicz, 2000). As with the research on the possible negative influence of rewards on

intrinsic motivation, the research with the positive influence of rewards on intrinsic

motivation has not reached consensus. Sansone and Harackiewicz (1998) propose that

especially rewards that are focused on performing well can positively influence creativity and

intrinsic motivation through their effects on mediating processes like general task valuation

(Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000). Hennessey and Amabile (1998) depict that rewards that

focus on performance can influence creativity and intrinsic motivation through a mediating

process like competence valuation (Sansone and Harackiewicz, 2000). Deci, Koestner and

Ryan (1999) and Lepper, Henderlong and Gingras (1999) agree that extrinsic rewards can

have a positive effect on intrinsic motivation for boring and dull tasks. In other words, when

the initial intrinsic motivation is low. In some situations, it remains unclear whether positive

effects really outweigh the negative effects. The conclusions of the debate are interesting for

this study since the relationship between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation is part of the

central aim of this research. Whether extrinsic motivation has a negative effect on intrinsic

motivation will be addressed later on in this paper. The last part of this chapter deals with

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in the health care industry and the call centre environment.

4.4 Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in nursing units and call centres

4.4.1 Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in nursing units

The final part of this chapter focuses on the relationships and constructs of intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation in the call centre industry and the health care environment (with as main

emphasis on nursing). Tummers, Van Merode and Landeweerd (2006) investigated

organizational characteristics (like decision authority and environmental uncertainty) as

predictors of psychological work reactions (like job satisfaction and intrinsic work



- 68 -

motivation) of nurses. Tummers et al. (2006) proposed a framework that summarized the

hypothesized relationships of their research. This figure is represented here as Figure 4.4.

Figure 4.4: Hypothesized direct relationships between organizational characteristics and

psychological work reactions (improved)

Organizational Psychological

characteristics work reactions

Direct relationship

Indirect relationship (interaction effect)

The bold line is important for this research and will be investigated

Retrieved and improved from Tummers, G. E. R., Van Merode, G. G. and Landeweerd, J. A.

(2006). Organizational characteristics as predictors of nurses’ psychological work reactions.

Organization Studies (01708406), 27(4), p. 567.

Relevant for this research is that the hypothesis, which states that intrinsic work motivation

and job satisfaction are primarily predicted by decision authority, is supported by the data

(Tummers et al., 2006). Moreover, high environmental uncertainty enhances the positive

Decision

authority

Environmental

uncertainty

Type of unit

(ICU/non-ICU)

Intrinsic work

motivation

Job satisfaction

Emotional

exhaustion

Psychosomatic

health

complaints



- 69 -

effect of decision authority on intrinsic work motivation (only for intensive care units). In

other words, when nurses (especially those in intensive care units) are given more authority in

decision making, the intrinsic motivation of those nurses is tended to increase. The bold line

between intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction is what is relevant for this research.

Another study that investigated intrinsic motivation in a nursing environment is the study

conducted by Heyes (2005). Heyes (2005) comes with the interesting proposition that

increasing the wage of nurses will decrease the proportion of employed nurses that have a

vocation. Vocation refers to a job that one does because he or she has a strong feeling that he

or she should do that job since it is a purpose or goal of one’s life (to help other people). He

stresses that vocation should not be confused with organizational citizenship behaviour. With

organizational citizenship behaviour, the employee is expected to be motivated by some

organizational output, which contrasts with the concept of vocation. The difference between

organizational citizenship behaviour and vocation is perhaps not as clear cut as Heyes (2005)

mentions. There are some actions of organizational citizenship behaviour that do not focus on

some organizational output but can also occur because that person considers it a purpose of

one’s life. Caring for one’s colleagues, punctuality, helping other people, and so forth care

elements of organizational citizenship behaviour but can also be part of vocation. The results

of Heyes (2005) are pretty straightforward but interesting. He suggests that increasing wages

for employees that are employed in sectors where vocation is a common thing can be more

problematic than just an increase in salary costs for the organizations. A nurse that does not

get paid as much as a nurse that receives significantly more and is highly satisfied with her

job, is more likely to have a vocation and to over-perform in his or her role. Therefore,

hospitals should be careful with salary increases because this might attract the wrong kind of

employees. Heyes (2005) proposes that health care organizations should not try to attract

nurses by simply increasing the pay role. Moreover, health care organizations should take in

mind the relationship between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation and the influence of rewards

on this relationship.

4.4.2 Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in call centres

Taylor and Bain (1999) stressed that working in a call centre demands relative high amounts

of emotional labour of the employees compared to several other sectors. In call centres is a



- 70 -

striking paradox of meeting organizational standards (by being as fast as possible in dealing

with the incoming calls) and meeting customer demands (for example to remain friendly

despite the rudeness of some customers) while at the same time being monitored by superiors

(Workman, 2003; Workman and Bommer, 2004). Taylor and Bain (1999) mention that if

operators are pushed too hard with extrinsic targets and quantitative output measurements,

then the quality of the service to the customer might suffer. This occurs because commitment

and motivation are harmed by an overdose of extrinsic motivators and constraints. The

problem, however, is that call centres cannot move away from these ‘big brother’ aspects

because those monitoring techniques are integral to the functioning of the call centres in

evaluating the performances of the employees. Ubaldi (1997) depicts that Danish call centres

succeed in establishing motivation with their employees. He depicts that motivation can be

created by making the employees feel important in the organization. Making the employee

familiar with the products of the organization, training the employee appropriately,

developing a career plan with the employees, letting employees enjoy their work, making the

employees feel responsible, and so on are all motivating techniques that could create

motivation with the employees (Ubaldi, 1997). Moreover, the success of the call centre

depends on the quality of the employees and therefore call centre employees should be

carefully selected in order to fit to a certain idea of how a call centre agent should be.

Wallace, Eagleson and Waldersee (2000) give a somewhat related problem in call centres as

Taylor and Bain (1999). They mention that the management of call centres speaks of a

customer focus but the call centre agents, however, perceive a productivity focus. Call centre

agents are hired for their motivation and communication skills but work with a task and

quantitative focus. Moreover, what the call centre employees least like about their jobs is the

focus on productivity, which is the focus of management. Contrasting, what the call centre

employees like the most about their jobs is the interaction with their peers and with the

customers, which is constrained because of the task focus. Wallace et al. (2000) refer to the

contrasting situation of being monitored but at the same time to be customer-friendly as the

service/efficiency tension within call centres. They propose that call centre management

accepts this tension and its consequences in order to be successful. The call centre managers

acknowledge the tension created with their employees (by the contrasting demands of the

organization and the customers) and accept the high turnover rates that result from it.



- 71 -

Wegge, van Dick, Fisher, Wecking and Moltzen (2006) conducted two studies in call centres

in order to investigate work motivation, well being and organizational identification in call

centre employees. There were basically two important findings that were similar across the

two studies. Higher motivational potential scores for the task were found with employees that

had more training, outbound tasks (this refers to employees calling customers themselves

instead of receiving calls from customers, which is referred to as inbound tasks), and full-time

contracts. These factors can be considered starting points for work motivation, according to

Wegge et al. (2006). The second finding depicts that high motivational potential scores were

related to high work motivation (which includes high job satisfaction, organizational

citizenship behaviour, personal accomplishments, and low turnover intentions) and better

well-being (lower complaints with health and lower emotional exhaustion). Still the research

available does not really stress on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in the professions of

nurses and call centre agents. Hence, there is room for improvement in these areas. This

research will try to clarify the relationship of job satisfaction and intrinsic/extrinsic motivation

with call centre agents and nurses.

- 72 -

Chapter 5: Hypotheses development

The previous chapters have focused on summarizing the literature available on the topics of

motivational theories, job satisfaction, and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. This study is

interested in the relationship between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction,

compared over two different sectors, namely the public sector and the private sector. The

nurses represent the public sector while call centre agents represent the private sector.

Moreover, the relationship between various motivational theories and intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation is researched. In this chapter, the hypotheses relevant for this research will be

formulated.

5.1 Hypotheses 1-8

As depicted above, the distinction between private and public sector is made during this

research to find differences in the relationship of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and job

satisfaction. Reviews of current literature show that (work) motivation is different for

employees that work in the public sector compared to employees that are employed in the

private sector (Ambrose and Kulik, 1999; Boyne, 2002; Buelens and Van den Broeck, 2007;

Rainey and Bozeman, 2000; Wright, 2001). A difference between public and private sector

employees is that public sector employees want to make positive choices. In other words,

public sector employees want appreciation and respect for their family lives, own working

rhythms, and their family priorities (Buelens and Van den Broeck, 2007). They are more

interested in having a work-family balance than private sector employees that want to put

their work above family. Ghinetti (2007) mentions that public sector employees have a

‘welfare premium’ in better working settings, especially a better social climate and higher

perceived job stability (job security). In comparison to private sector employees, public sector

employees try to be more worthwhile for society, put more emphasis on service to

community, and serve the public interest more (Box, 1999; Boyne, 2002; Gabris and Simo,

1995; Houston, 2000; Perry, 2000; Perry and Wise, 1990).

Current literature also shows some differences between public and private sector employees

on extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Concerning extrinsic motivation, economic rewards are

more important to employees working in the private sector than to employees working in the

Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation Hypotheses development


- 73 -

public sector (Buelens and Van den Broeck, 2007; Houston, 2000; Karl and Sutton, 1998;

Khojasteh, 1993; Perry, 2000; Schuster, Colletti and Knowles Jr, 1973; Snyder, Stephan and

Rosenfield, 1976). Crewson (1997) found that, on the basis of fourteen national surveys,

extrinsic motivators are the most essential for employees working in the private sector. There

is some literature contradicting these assumptions. Gabris and Simo (1995) found no

significant difference in the need for monetary rewards between public sector employees and

private sector employees. Lewis and Frank (2002) found that employees that are interested in

high income are more likely to work in the public sector than in the private sector. According

to Maidani (1991), public sector employees rate extrinsic aspects, like salary, as more

important than private sector employees. However, most authors agree that public sector

employees tend to be less extrinsically motivated than private sector employees. Concerning

intrinsic motivation, current literature suggests that public sector employees tend to be more

intrinsically motivated than private sector employees (Buelens and Van den Broeck, 2007;

Crewson, 1997; Leete, 2000). Since the private sector is represented by call centre agents and

the public sector by nurses, call centre agents are expected to be more extrinsically motivated

and less intrinsically motivated than nurses. Hence, the following hypotheses (the alternative

hypotheses are depicted here):

H1a: Call centre agents are more extrinsically motivated than nurses

H1b: Call centre agents are less intrinsically motivated than nurses

As can be read in chapter 3 on job satisfaction, current literature has linked motivation to

satisfaction extensively (Bassett-Jones and Lloyd, 2005; Beltramini and Evans, 1988; Boe,

1970; Brayfield and Crockett, 1955; Brenner, Carmack and Weinstein, 1971; Clark, 1996; ,

1997; Crompton, 2003; Drake and Mitchell, 1977; Eskildsen, Kristensen and Westlund, 2004;

Farr, 1977; Finck, Timmers and Mennes, 1998; Fisher, Schoenfeldt and Shaw, 1999; Gardner,

1977; Gazioglu and Tansel, 2006; Haywood and Wachs, 1966; Herzberg, Mathapo, Wiener

and Wiesen, 1974; House and Wigdor, 1967; Igalens and Roussel, 1999; Ilardi, Leone, Kasser

and Ryan, 1993; Kavanaugh, Duffy and Lilly, 2006; Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003; Kinicki,

McKee-Ryan, Schriesheim and Carson, 2002; Lambert, 1991; Leach and Westbrook, 2000;

Lindenberg, 2001; Maidani, 1991; O'Reilly and Caldwell, 1980; Peters and O'Connor, 1980;

Phillips and Freedman, 1984; Robbins, 2003; Sargiacomo, 2002; Savery, 1989; Shipley and

Kiely, 1988; Thomas, 2000; Tietjen and Myers, 1998; Timmreck, 2001; Wernimont, 1966;

Wolf, 1970). Literature linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to job satisfaction is rather



- 74 -

scarce (Beltramini and Evans, 1988; Lambert, 1991; Lindenberg, 2001). Since the

relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction is investigated in

this paper, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H2: Extrinsic motivation is related to job satisfaction

H3: Intrinsic motivation is related to job satisfaction

In this paper, call centre agents represent the private sector while nurses represent the public

sector. Hypothesis 1 aims to find out whether call centre agents (private sector) are more

extrinsically and less intrinsically motivated than nurses (public sector). Hypotheses 2 and 3

try to link the constructs of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation to job satisfaction. Interesting

would be whether one of the two groups has a greater influence on the relationships of

extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction and intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction.

Therefore, the following hypotheses are:

H4: The effect of extrinsic motivation on job satisfaction is stronger for call centre

agents than for nurses

H5: The effect of intrinsic motivation on job satisfaction is stronger for call centre

agents than for call nurses

There is also some literature investigating whether public sector employees are more satisfied

than private sector employees. Several authors have found that regarding several aspects of

job satisfaction and overall job satisfaction, employees that are working in the public sector

tend to be more satisfied than employees that are employed in the private sector (Demoussis

and Giannakopoulos, 2007; Ghinetti, 2007; Green and Tsitsianis, 2005; Heywood, Siebert and

Wei, 2002; Schneider and Vaught, 1993; Vieira, 2005; Vieira, Menezes and Gabriel, 2005).

The question remains whether this is the same for the two groups in this paper. Hence, the

following hypothesis:

H6: There is a difference in satisfaction between call centre agents working in the

private service sector and nurses working in the public service sector

There are also some demographical and organizational differences between the two groups in

the samples. Those differences will also be researched in this paper. From the literature on



- 75 -

nurses and call centre agents, one can see that the female-male ratio is higher for nurses than

for call centre agents (Aranya, Kushnir and Valency, 1986; Cohen and Kol, 2004; DeLoach

and Monroe, 2004; Kavanaugh et al., 2006; Lewig and Dollard, 2003; McNeese-Smith, 2001;

Pitcher, 2006; Porac, Ferris and Fedor, 1983; Savery, 1989; Sparks, Corcoran, Nabors and

Hovanitz, 2005; Taylor and Bain, 1999; Tummers, Van Merode and Landeweerd, 2006;

Wegge, van Dick, Fisher, Wecking and Moltzen, 2006; Zawacki and Shahan, 1995; Zhong,

Siong, Mellor, Moore and Firth, 2006), that nurses are older than call centre agents (Aranya et

al., 1986; Cohen and Kol, 2004; DeLoach and Monroe, 2004; Fang, 2001; Kavanaugh et al.,

2006; Knoop, 1995; Lewig and Dollard, 2003; McNeese-Smith, 1999; , 2001; Sparks et al.,

2005; Taylor and Bain, 1999; Timmreck, 2001; Tummers et al., 2006; Wegge et al., 2006;

Zhong et al., 2006), and that nurses have more education than call centre agents (nurse also

need more diplomas for being a nurse than call centre agents do) (Aranya et al., 1986; Cohen

and Kol, 2004; DeLoach and Monroe, 2004; Fang, 2001; Kavanaugh et al., 2006; McNeese-

Smith, 1999; Sparks et al., 2005; Zhong et al., 2006). Regarding organizational context,

nurses have been working at the company longer than call centre agents (Cohen and Kol,

2004; DeLoach and Monroe, 2004; Fang, 2001; Hillmer, Hillmer and McRoberts, 2004;

Kavanaugh et al., 2006; Knoop, 1995; Lewig and Dollard, 2003; McNeese-Smith, 1999; ,

2001; Sparks et al., 2005; Tummers et al., 2006; Wegge et al., 2006; Zhong et al., 2006) and

nurses have more full time contracts and full time jobs than call centre agents (Bain, Watson,

Mulvey, Taylor and Gall, 2002; Cohen and Kol, 2004; DeLoach and Monroe, 2004; Franklin,

2000; Lewig and Dollard, 2003; Taylor and Bain, 1999; Wegge et al., 2006). In order to see

whether these differences also hold for this paper, the following hypotheses are proposed:

H7a: There are more women working as a nurse than as a call centre agent

H7b: Nurses are older than call centre agents

H7c: Nurses have a higher educational level than call centre agents

H7d: Nurses stay longer at the same company than call centre agents

H7e: There are more nurses with a full time contract than call centre agents

H7f: There are more nurses with a full time job than call centre agents

Present literature has also investigated the relationship of demographic factors and

organizational context factors on satisfaction. Literature has suggested that women tend to be

more satisfied than men (Bender and Heywood, 2006; Clark, 1997; Sloane and Williams,

2000; Sousa-Poza and Sousa-Poza, 2000; , 2003; Ward and Sloane, 2000; , 2001), that older



- 76 -

employees tend to be more satisfied than younger employees (Clark, 1996; , 1997; Glenn,

Taylor and Weaver, 1977; Kacmar and Ferris, 1989; Kavanaugh et al., 2006; Robison, 2002;

Warr, 1992), and that employees with a higher educational level tend to be more satisfied than

employees with lower a educational level (Clark, 1996; Clark and Oswald, 1996; Florit and

Lladosa, 2007; Meng, 1990). Concerning organizational context factors, literature suggests

that employees with higher tenure tend to be more satisfied than employees with lower tenure

(Bender and Heywood, 2006; Clark, 1997; Hunt and Saul, 1975), employees with a full time

contract tend to be more satisfied than employees with a part time contract (Vieira, 2005), and

employees with a full time job are more satisfied than employees with a part time job

(Eberhardt and Shani, 1984; Miller and Terborg, 1979; Vieira et al., 2005). These findings

will be applied to this study as well (in the analysis, there will also be checked which of the

two groups has a larger impact) and therefore, the following hypotheses are:

H8a. Female nurses and call centre agents have a stronger influence on job satisfaction

than male nurses and call centre agents

H8b. Older nurses and call centre agents have a stronger influence on job satisfaction

than younger nurses and call centre agents

H8c. Nurses and call centre agents with a higher educational level have a stronger

influence on job satisfaction than nurses and call centre agents with a lower

educational level

H8d. Nurses and call centre agents with high tenure have a stronger influence on job

satisfaction than nurses and call centre agents with low tenure

H8e. Nurses and call centre agents with a full time contract have a stronger influence on

job satisfaction than nurses and call centre agents with a part time contract

H8f. The effect of call centre agents and nurses on job satisfaction is stronger for

employees with a full time job than for employees with a part time job

5.2 Hypotheses on motivational theories

This part focuses on formulating the hypotheses that are linking various motivational theories

to intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Literature covering this relationship is hard to find.

Therefore, the hypotheses in this section are exploratory to make suggestions for future

research. The first theory is the equity theory, holding that an employee reflects on how much



- 77 -

effort he has expended and how much he received from the job (Robbins, 2003). Because of

the comparisons of an employee concerning rewards and costs (also with other employees),

the equity theory is expected to be more related to extrinsic motivation than to intrinsic

motivation. In addition, because of the extrinsic motivation aspects present, the theory is

expected to be better applicable to call centre agents than to nurses. However, the

relationships with intrinsic motivation will also be investigated. Consequently, the hypotheses

are:

HQ1: The equity theory is related to extrinsic motivation

HQ2: The equity theory is related to intrinsic motivation

HQ3: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect

of the equity theory on extrinsic motivation

HQ4: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect

of the equity theory on intrinsic motivation

The second theory is the expectancy theory. In the expectancy theory, employees will be

motivated by the probabilities that effort leads to the desired performance and that a particular

performance will lead to certain preferred outcomes (Ferris, 1977; Harder, 1991; Isaac, Zerbe

and Pitt, 2001; Kopelman and Thompson, 1976). The expectancy theory relies mostly on

extrinsic motivators and therefore the link with extrinsic motivation should be greater than the

link with intrinsic motivation (Leonard, Beauvais and Scholl, 1999). From the factor analyses

conducted in the chapter of methodology, two constructs (effort and receivement of rewards)

have been created to represent the expectancy theory. Since the expectancy theory is expected

to be related more to extrinsic motivation than to intrinsic motivation, it is also expected to be

better applicable for call centre agents than for nurses. The hypotheses related to the

expectancy theory are:

HX1: Effort is related to extrinsic motivation

HX2: Effort is related to intrinsic motivation

HX3: The receivement of rewards is related to extrinsic motivation

HX4: The receivement of rewards is related to intrinsic motivation

HX5: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect

of effort on extrinsic motivation



- 78 -


of the receivement of rewards on extrinsic motivation


of effort on intrinsic motivation


of receivement of rewards on intrinsic motivation

The goal-setting theory holds that goals are immediate regulators of human action and that a

goal is an object or aim of a certain action (Locke, Shaw, Saari and Latham, 1981). Specific

and difficult goals, when accepted, can result in higher performance than general and easy

goals (Locke 1968, in Locke et al., 1981). Goal-setting has a link to intrinsic motivation

(Elliot and Harackiewicz, 1994; Hirst, 1988). According to Hirst (1988), goal setting can

increase intrinsic motivation on tasks that are not interesting and decrease intrinsic motivation

on tasks that are interesting to employees. Goal-setting theory also appears to have linkages

with extrinsic motivation (because of its relation to the expectancy theory). Therefore, goal-

setting theory appears to have a relation with intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The

hypotheses are:

HG1: Goal setting is related to extrinsic motivation

HG2: Goal setting is related to intrinsic motivation

HG3: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect

of goal setting on extrinsic motivation

HG4: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect

of goal setting on intrinsic motivation

The next theory that is relevant for this paper is the attribution theory. The attribution theory

suggests that when employees look at the behavior of others, they try to determine whether

this behavior was internally or externally triggered (Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003; Robbins,

2003). Lepper, Greene and Nisbett (1973) linked the attribution theory to extrinsic motivation

and intrinsic motivation by showing that including an external reward to an activity that was

previously based on pure interest makes people less intrinsically motivated to do that activity.

The attribution theory is expected to be related to both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. As

with the expectancy theory, two constructs (derived from factor analyses) will be used to

represent the attribution theory. The hypotheses are:



- 79 -

HA1: Contribution is related to extrinsic motivation

HA2: Contribution is related to intrinsic motivation

HA3: Salary is related to extrinsic motivation

HA4: Salary is related to intrinsic motivation

HA5: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect

of contribution on extrinsic motivation


of salary on extrinsic motivation


of contribution on intrinsic motivation


of salary on intrinsic motivation

Another theory that is included in this research is theory X and Y. Theory X holds a rather

negative and pessimistic view of managers on employees and theory Y holds a more positive

view of managers on employees. Relating theory X and Y to intrinsic motivation and extrinsic

motivation, one could say that theory X is more related to extrinsic motivation (because of the

involvement of punishments) and theory Y is more related to intrinsic motivation (since

employees will become satisfied when they perform well at work). Therefore, theory X and Y

is expected to be related to both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The hypotheses are:

HT1: Theory X and Y is related to extrinsic motivation

HT2: Theory X and Y is related to intrinsic motivation

HT3: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect of

theory X and Y on extrinsic motivation

HT4: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect of

theory X and Y on intrinsic motivation

The sixth theory relevant for this study is cognitive dissonance theory. The theory centers

around the idea that dissonance is a psychological state of tension, which individuals are

motivated to decrease because of the discomfort it brings (Festinger, 1957 in Robbins, 2003).

Because of its relation to the attribution theory, the cognitive dissonance theory is expected to

be related to both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Hence, the following hypotheses:



- 80 -

HD1: The cognitive dissonance theory is related to extrinsic motivation

HD2: The cognitive dissonance theory is related to intrinsic motivation

HD3: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect

of cognitive dissonance theory on extrinsic motivation

HD4: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect

of cognitive dissonance theory on intrinsic motivation

Another theory that is discussed in this paper is the investment model. The investment model

holds that job satisfaction should be greater to the extent that the job offers high rewards and

low costs (Rusbult and Farrell, 1983; Rusbult, Johnson and Morrow, 1986). When the

satisfaction is below a certain point, the motivation of a person to continue at his

job/relationship/activity is decreasing. Because of its relation to the equity theory, the

investment model is expected to be related to extrinsic motivation as well (evaluation of

rewards and costs). However, the investment model is also expected to be related to intrinsic

motivation, because an employee evaluates a relationship (with the job, company, or person)

also on whether this relationship is interesting, important, challenging, satisfying, and so on.

The hypotheses, related to the investment model, are:

HI1: The investment model is related to extrinsic motivation

HI2: The investment model is related to intrinsic motivation

HI3: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect of

investment model on extrinsic motivation

HI4: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect of

investment model on intrinsic motivation

The last theory in this paper is the cognitive evaluation theory. The cognitive evaluation

theory specifies factors in social contexts that cause variability in intrinsic motivation. The

cognitive evaluation theory deals mainly with the influence of extrinsic motivators on

intrinsic motivation. As a result, the cognitive evaluation theory is expected to be related to

both extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. The following hypotheses are:

HE1: The cognitive evaluation theory is related to extrinsic motivation

HE2: The cognitive evaluation theory is related to intrinsic motivation



- 81 -

HE3: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect of

cognitive evaluation theory on extrinsic motivation

HE4: There is a difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning the effect of

cognitive evaluation theory on intrinsic motivation

5.3 Framework

The hypotheses that have been proposed in the previous section can also be put together in

order to clarify the relationships between the various constructs. Hypotheses 1-8 deal with the

first part of the problem statement, investigating the relationship between job satisfaction and

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and the possible moderating variables, and the motivational

hypotheses investigate the link between various motivational theories and intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation. These relationships are presented in Figure 5.1:

Figure 5.1: Framework of constructs and hypotheses of this research

H3 H2

H8

H5 H4

H7

H6

H1b H1a

Intrinsic

motivation

Extrinsic

motivation

Satisfaction

Sector dummy

(nurses/call

center agents)

Theories of

motivation

Control

variables

HQ1 HX1 HX3

HG1 HA1 HA3

HT1 HD1 HI1

HE1

HQ2 HX2 HX4

HG2 HA2 HA4

HT2 HD2 HI2

HE2

HQ3 HX5 HX6

HG3 HA5 HA6

HT3 HD3 HI3

HE3

HQ4 HX7 HX8

HG4 HA7 HA8

HT4 HD4 HI4

HE4

- 82 -

Chapter 6: Methodology

An extensive review of the literature was conducted to identify and clarify several theories of

motivation and job satisfaction. In order to clarify what research design has been used for this

research, the classifications and categorizations made by Blumberg, Cooper, and Schindler

(2005) have been used. The degree to which the research question has been crystallized shows

that this research is a formal study rather than an exploratory study. The method of data

collection follows the principles of an interrogation/communication study and a quantitative

approach by means of questionnaire survey that has been handed out to the participants. Only

primary data will be used in this research. Moreover, there is no power of the researcher to

influence the variables under study, resulting in an ex post facto design. For this research, data

is collected to find out whether there is a difference between nurses working in the public

service sector and call centre agents employed in the private service sector on various topics

like intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, several components of work satisfaction, and different

motivational theories. This research is cross-sectional because it has been carried out once. A

statistical study is used in order to make inferences from the sample in this research and the

research environment is a field setting.

This chapter will focus on and discuss the methodology of this research. It will show the

research design chosen for this research and will elaborate on the design of the questionnaire

handed out to the respondents in the two samples (call centre agents and nurses). Moreover, it

shows which question in the questionnaire is related to which hypothesis. In addition, the

meaning of the different variables in this research will be explained and how they will be

measured. Furthermore, several tests on the data retrieved will show the reliability and

validity of the constructs of this study. Last, there will be an elaboration of which statistical

tests will be used to analyze the hypotheses.

6.1 Questionnaire design

The data collection method chosen in this research is the survey, which falls under the

heading of the communication approach (Blumberg et al., 2005). The greatest advantage of

the survey is its versatility. As Blumberg et al. (2005) mention, a survey has several

advantages as a primary data collection approach. It should be the lowest cost option, it

Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation Methodology


- 83 -

requires minimal staff, it is perceived as more anonymous than other primary collection

methods, it gives respondents more time to think about their answers, and so on. How the

surveys got to the respondents of the call centres and the hospitals has already been described.

The questionnaire that was handed out consisted of several parts relevant for this research.

The complete questionnaire that has been used for this research can be looked at in Appendix

C on page 187. Three versions (English, Dutch and German) have been prepared in order to

make sure that each respondent was given an opportunity to respond to the questions in their

preferred language.

The first part of the questionnaire focused on the concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation. In order to see whether the participants were more intrinsically or extrinsically

motivated, eight questions dealt with intrinsic motivation and seven questions with extrinsic

motivation. All questions were based on a Likert scale, which is the most used variation of the

summated rating scale in research. The answers that the respondents could choose from

ranged from 1 (totally agree) to 5 (totally disagree) and ‘produced’ interval data. The

exception is question 15, where the answers ranged from 1 (very important) to 5 (very

unimportant). The second part of the questionnaire was about satisfaction at work. Seven

questions were asked to find out whether the participants were satisfied with their work. All

questions were based on the five-point Likert scale as in the first part and provided interval

data. The third part of this questionnaire dealt with the several motivation theories that are

interesting for this research. Eight different motivational theories were spread over sixteen

questions, based on the same five-point Likert scale, with as goal to find out what the

respondents’ viewpoints are on these theories. The fourth, and final, part of the questionnaire

focused on general demographic and work related data. The questions in this part aimed for

information concerning gender, age, tenure, education, full time or part time contracts, and

full time or part time jobs of the respondents. The questions on gender (female, male), full

time or part time contract, and full time or part time job follow a simple category scale and

produce nominal data. The questions on age (18-25, 26-35, 36-46, older than 46), tenure

(shorter than 1 year, between 1 and 3 years, between 3 and 5 years, more than 5 years), and

education (secondary school, LBO, MBO, HBO, university) produce ordinal data and follow

a multiple choice single-response scale. Table 6.1 shows which question in the questionnaire

is related to which hypothesis. Important to know is that the research consists of two samples

(call centre agents and nurses) and therefore no additional question has been included in the

questionnaire to determine the profession of the respondent.



- 84 -

Table 6.1: Hypotheses and related questions in this research

Hypotheses Related questions in questionnaire

1a 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14

1b 1, 2, 5, 7, 10-12, 15

2 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 16-22

3 1, 2, 5, 7, 10-12, 15-22

4 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 16-22

5 1, 2, 5, 7, 10-12, 15-22

6 16-22

7a 16-22, 39

7b 16-22, 40

7c 16-22, 41

7d 16-22, 42

7e 16-22, 43

7f 16-22, 44

Q1, Q3 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 23

Q2, Q4 1, 2, 5, 7, 10-12, 15, 23

X1, X5 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 24-26

X2, X7 1, 2, 5, 7, 10-12, 15, 24-26

X3, X6 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 27

X4, X8 1, 2, 5, 7, 10-12, 15, 27

G1, G3 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 28, 29

G2, G4 1, 2, 5, 7, 10-12, 15, 28, 29

A1, A5 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 30, 31

A2, A7 1, 2, 5, 7, 10-12, 15, 30, 31

A3, A6 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 32

A4, A8 1, 2, 5, 7, 10-12, 15, 32

T1, T3 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 33, 34

T2, T4 1, 2, 5, 7, 10-12, 15, 33, 34

D1, D3 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 35, 36

D2, D4 1, 2, 5, 7, 10-12, 15, 35, 36

I1, I3 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 37



- 85 -

I2, I4 1, 2, 5, 7, 10-12, 15, 37

E1, E3 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, 14, 38

E2, E4 1, 2, 5, 7, 10-12, 15, 38

6.2 Variables and measures

6.2.1 Dependent variable

In this research, the relationship between job satisfaction and intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation is investigated. The correlations between the three constructs remain the same but

for the regression analyses, job satisfaction is picked as the dependent variable. Job

satisfaction is an affective or emotional response toward a variety of aspects of one’s job

(Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003). The second part of the questionnaire is related to the construct

of job satisfaction. Job satisfaction is operationalized through seven questions that have been

created for this research filtered through the existing literature. These seven questions (16-22

in the questionnaire) are measured on five-point Likert scale ranging from ‘totally agree’ and

‘totally disagree’. The items that make up the construct of job satisfaction ask respondents to

rate their job satisfaction, their colleagues, their supervisors, the job security at their company,

whether they are glad to work at the company, their salary, and whether they experience stress

from their job.

6.2.2 Independent variables

6.2.2.1 Intrinsic motivation

The first independent variable in this research is intrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation is

the motivation to do something for its own sake, for the pure enjoyment of the activity itself

(Hennessey and Amabile, 2005). It is the desire to work on something or do something since

it is involving, challenging, exciting, interesting, or satisfying (Robbins, 2003). Intrinsic

motivation is operationalized through eight questions that have been created for this research

based on the existing literature. The questions in the questionnaire are questions 1, 2, 5, 7, 10,



- 86 -

11, 12, and 15 and based on a five-point Likert scale ranging from ‘totally agree’ to ‘totally

disagree’ with the exception of question 15, which has a range from ‘very important’ to ‘very

unimportant’. A respondent is asked whether he feels a sense of personal satisfaction when he

does this job well, whether his opinion of himself goes down when he does this job badly,

whether he takes pride in doing the work as well as he can, whether he feels unhappy when

his work is not up to his usual standard, whether he likes to look back on the day’s work with

a sense of a job well done, whether he tries to think of ways of doing his job effectively,

whether enjoying what he does matters most to him, and whether it is important to him that

his work is challenging and interesting.

6.2.2.2 Extrinsic motivation

Another independent variable in this research is extrinsic motivation, which is the motivation

to do something in order to attain some external goal or meet some externally imposed

constraint (Hennessey and Amabile, 2005). Extrinsic motivation is operationalized through

seven questions that have been created for this research based on the existing literature. The

questions in the questionnaire related to this construct are 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 13, and 14. All of them

have been based on a five-point Likert scale ranging from ‘totally agree’ to ‘totally disagree’.

A respondent is asked whether he prefers having someone set clear goals for him in his work,

whether to him success means doing better than other people, whether he is less concerned

with what work he does than what he gets for it, whether he is strongly motivated by the

rewards he can earn, whether he is strongly motivated by the recognition he can earn from

other people, whether he is worried that he does not meet his targets, and whether he would

work harder if he would receive more salary.

6.2.2.3 Motivational theories

The third independent variable in this research is the motivational theories. There are eight

motivational theories that have been picked out of a numerous and growing list of

motivational theories. Respondents were asked to rate sixteen questions (questions 23-38 in

the questionnaire) on one of the eight motivational theories on a five-point Likert scale

ranging from ‘totally agree’ to ‘totally disagree’. The eight motivational theories used in this

research are the equity theory (Adams, 1963, 1965, in Carrell and Dittrich, 1978) in question



- 87 -

23, expectancy theory (Vroom, 1964 in Harder, 1991) in questions 24-27, goal-setting theory

(Locke, 1968 in Austin and Bobko, 1985) in questions 28 and 29, attribution theory (Heider,

1958 in Borkowski and Allen, 2003) in questions 30-32, theory X and Y (McGregor, 1960 in

Burns, 1967) in questions 33 and 34 (from a theory X viewpoint), cognitive dissonance theory

(Festinger, 1957 in Robbins, 2003) in questions 35 and 36, investment model (Rusbult, 1983)

in question 37, and cognitive evaluation theory (Deci, 1971) in question 38.

6.2.2.4 Sector

The last independent variable in this research refers to the two samples used for this research.

A distinction has been made on sector level, namely the public service sector, represented by

nurses, and the private service sector, represented by call centre agents. Since the

questionnaires are handed out directly to either one of the two groups, no question is included

to ask the respondents for their profession. Still, a distinction between the two samples is

made during the analysis of the data.

6.2.3 Control variables

Because the research environment is a field setting the variables cannot be controlled and

therefore not be manipulated. However, additional variables have been included in this

research to make sure that they do not influence the direction and the strength of the

hypothesized relationships. The control variables of this research can be found in the fourth

section of this paper under the heading of ‘general questions’. These general questions can be

further divided in items that are related to the demographics of the individual and to items that

are related to his current situation at work. The questions on demographics (39-41) deal with

gender, age, and educational background. The work-related items are represented in questions

42-44 by tenure, contract, and full time/part time job.

6.3 Validity and reliability tests

For testing the validity and reliability, a number of tests can be used. This research uses factor

analyses for reducing data to account for the validity of the scales used and uses Cronbach’s

Alpha to test a construct’s reliability. A principal component factor analysis was conducted on



- 88 -

the items of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, satisfaction, and the various

motivational theories used in this research. The factor analysis is included to validate the scale

used in the questionnaire for the two samples (n = 439). Important to know is that the factor

analyses on the independent variables intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and

satisfaction are merely used as an indication. These constructs, as can be read earlier in this

chapter, simply have predetermined questions that make up this particular construct. For the

motivational theories however, the factor analyses are used to create new constructs.

Blumberg et al. (2005) depict that a factor analysis can serve to determine construct validity.

Hair, Babin, Money and Samouel (2003) explain that the factor loadings need to be above 0.4,

since a factor value below 0.4 holds that the correlation between the factors and the original

value becomes too low. When looking at the factor analyses of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic

motivation, satisfaction, and the motivational theories in Table 6.2 and in Appendix A on

page 160 (five of eight theories needed factor analyses) there only was one item below 0.4

(the third item of extrinsic motivation: 0.352). In general, the construct validity is given. As

can be seen in Table 6.2, there are ten constructs created by factor analyses. Hence, two

motivational theories (attribution and expectancy theory) are represented by two constructs.

Cronbach’s Alpha (α) is used to test the reliability of the constructs in this research. Important

is to make a distinction between the ‘explanatory’ and the more ‘exploratory’ part of this

research. The concepts of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation and satisfaction are

concepts that have been discussed extensively in the literature. To link various motivational

theories to the concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation can be considered exploratory

since it has (almost) never been done before. Therefore, the Cronbach’s alphas found for these

motivational constructs should be looked at as a possible improvement for future research.

Cronbach’s Alpha is used to measure the conformity of the various variables that make up a

single construct. One can only get a Cronbach’s Alpha value between 0 and 1. A value of 0

would mean that the variables are totally unrelated and a value of 1 would mean that the

variables show total overlap. The problem with Cronbach’s Alpha is that there is no common

agreement which Cronbach’s Alpha values provide reliable constructs. A commonly used rule

of thumb is α ≥ .70 (Hair et al., 2003). But even Cronbach himself depicted that when one

would get a value of α of .60, this would still be acceptable (Dunn, Seaker and Waller, 1994).

The relevant Cronbach’s alpha values can be seen in Table 6.2 and in Appendix A. For the

constructs of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and satisfaction, respectable

Cronbach’s alpha values have been found (.72, .67, and .71 respectively). Regarding the



- 89 -

motivational theories, five composed constructs could be retrieved from factor analyses and

run on Cronbach’s Alpha (four of them gave values around α = .50). The reliability and

validity of the constructs in this research is certainly acceptable but for the constructs,

especially those of the various motivational theories, there is room for improvement.

Table 6.2: Constructs, factor analysis and Cronbach’s Alpha

Factor loadings

(components)

Constructs Questions

1 2

Cronbach’s

Alpha

1. I feel a sense of personal satisfaction when I do this job well

.564 -.146

2. My opinion of myself goes down when I do this job badly .581 -.308

5. I take pride in doing the work as well as I can .634 .084

7. I feel unhappy when my work is not up to my usual standard .591 -.442

10. I like to look back on the day’s work with a sense of a job well

done .754 -.117

11. I try to think of ways of doing my job effectively .563 -.122

12. What matters most to me is enjoying what I do .524 .639

Intrinsic motivation

15. It is important to me that my work is challenging and interesting .541 .537

.7239

3. I prefer having someone set clear goals for me in my work .576 -.268

4. To me, success means doing better than other people .668 .239

6. I’m less concerned with what work I do than what I get for it .352 .665

8. I am strongly motivated by the rewards I can earn .711 -.086

9. I am strongly motivated by the recognition I can earn from other

people .609 -.398

13. I am worried that I do not meet my targets .484 -.438

Extrinsic motivation

14. If I would get more salary, I would work harder .611 .451

.6702

16. I am satisfied with my job .759 -.076

17. My colleagues are great to work with .626 -.408

18. I can get along nicely with my supervisors .685 -.307

19. The job security is high in this organization .638 -.029

20. I am glad to work at this company .723 -.036

21. I am satisfied with the salary I receive .414 .680

Job satisfaction

22. My work is very stressful .465 .580

.7131

Motivation theories

Equity theory 23. I compare what I put into a job and what I get out of it to my

peers

n.a. n.a. n.a.

24. I will put as much into my job as I expect to get from it

.579 -.643

25. If I work hard, I do well

.797 -.167

Expectancy theory 1

26. If I do well, I will be rewarded

.646 .323

.4970



- 90 -

Expectancy theory 2 27. If I will receive a reward, I will like the reward

.450 .659 n.a.

28. I like to set difficult goals for myself

.808 Goal setting theory

29. When the company sets goals I am more motivated to perform .808

.4673

30. When something goes wrong at work, I usually contribute it to

external factors .815 .097 Attribution theory 1

31. When things go right at work, it is because I did something right .819 .011

.5061

Attribution theory 2 32. If you would receive less salary, would you remain at the same

job?

-.089 .995 n.a.

33. Supervisors think of us as lazy, irresponsible, uncreative and

unambitious .784 Theory X and Y

34. I only work for the salary and the rewards I receive .784

.3729

35. I often disagree with things that happen at work .816 Cognitive dissonance

theory 36. I sometimes I have to do things that are unethical to me .816

.4966

Investment model 37. If I am satisfied with my job, I will be less likely to change to

another job although it might pay more n.a. n.a. n.a.

Cognitive evaluation 38. I dislike my work more when there are more targets set by the

organization

n.a. n.a. n.a.

6.4 Data analysis and hypotheses tests

In order to analyze the data collected for this research and to test the hypotheses conducted

the software program ‘Statistical Package for the Social Sciences’ (SPSS) will be used. First,

the complete structure of the questionnaire has been constructed in SPSS to enable the

possibility of importing data. Then, all questionnaires (n = 439) have been imported to SPSS

in combination with the independent variable ‘dummy sector’ to distinguish between the two

samples. In the beginning, the value ‘1’ would mean that the respondent was a nurse in one of

the three hospitals and the value ‘2’ would mean that the respondent was a call centre agent at

one of the two call centres in this research. Later on in the analysis, the values were recoded

into ‘0’ and ‘1’ respectively for simplifying the research. Another grouping variable has been

used in this analysis as well in order to distinguish from which location the respondents come

(1 = hospital Maastricht, 2 = hospital Sittard, 3 = hospital Roermond, 4 = call centre A

Heerlen, and 5 = call centre B Maastricht). This variable will only be used in the descriptive

analysis. The control variables of gender, age, tenure, education, contract, and full time/part

time job were recoded into dummy variables. There was no need to recode the variables of

gender, contract and full/part time job but it simplified the research in this case. After

importing the data of all the respondents in SPSS, the different variables that are part of one

‘total’ variable in the research (like satisfaction, intrinsic motivation, and extrinsic



- 91 -

motivation) are computed into one construct (summated value divided by number of questions

related to that variable). This has been done because a respondent’s opinion on all questions

reflecting that specific topic can be seen. A problem occurred with the construct of

satisfaction. Before computing the total constructs, the various questions making up a single

construct have been checked whether they behave similarly (reliability). One of the items of

the construct of satisfaction, ‘stress’, was negatively related to the other items of satisfaction.

This ‘reverse scale’ problem was solved by adding a new variable (called ‘satstr_a’ in SPSS)

that reversed the answering scale of the respondents for that specific question. Moreover, to

deal with the few missing values in the data set, SPSS has been used to include the mean of

that specific variable for the analysis. This will not influence the results but ensures that the

respondent is still used in the analysis. There were several other constructs created in this

analysis as can be seen earlier in the validity and reliability tests. The various motivational

theories were represented in constructs while some motivational theories (attribution theory

and expectancy theory) even had two constructs. Moreover, interaction variables were created

for investigating relationships between several constructs. These interaction variables,

together with the constructs created, were necessary for analyzing the data.

After importing data into SPSS and defining constructs, the descriptive part of the data

analysis will start. In order to find out the characteristics of the two samples, descriptives will

be run for all variables. Furthermore, the correlations between the dependent, independent,

and control variables will be investigated to give an indication of the strength and direction of

the relationships between the variables. Pearson correlation techniques will be used to show

these correlations. Pearson is used to measure the strength of a linear relationship between

two variables (Bowerman and O'Connell, 2003; McClave, Benson and Sincich, 1998).

Regression analyses and independent t-tests have to be conducted to test the hypotheses

proposed in this research. This will be done with the help of the statistical analyzing program

SPSS (version 11.0.0). The first, sixth, and seventh hypotheses are checked with independent

t-tests. For the first part of this research, hypotheses 2-5, and 8, satisfaction functions as the

dependent variable. The grouping variable (nurses/call centre agents) functions in every

regression analysis as an independent variable. Extrinsic motivation functions as an

independent variable in hypotheses 2 and 4. Intrinsic motivation functions as an independent

variable in hypotheses 3 and 5. Furthermore, interaction variables are included in hypothesis 4

(extrinsic motivation * grouping variable) and hypothesis 5 (intrinsic motivation * grouping



- 92 -

variable). The control variables are included in hypothesis 8. For the second part of this

research, regressions are run on various theories of motivation. Each construct of a

motivational theory (attribution theory and expectancy theory have two constructs)

accompanies four regression analyses. In the first regression, extrinsic motivation functions as

the dependent variable and the motivational theory and grouping variable function as

independent variables. The second regression is the same as the first, except for the dependent

variable, which is intrinsic motivation. The third regression is the same as the first regression

and an interaction variable of the motivational theory and the grouping variable is included.

The fourth regression is the same as the second regression with the inclusion of the relevant

interaction variables.

This chapter depicted the methodology of this research. A review of the literature was needed

for developing an appropriate questionnaire for getting answers to the topics to be researched.

A survey has been chosen for this research because of its main advantages in data collection.

This chapter described how the questionnaire is built up and how the construction of the

questionnaire addresses the variables in this research. Next to the data collection method, the

various variables of this research have been explained. Last, this chapter showed how the data

and hypotheses will be analyzed. The following chapter will show the data analysis and

results of this study.

- 93 -

Chapter 7: Data analysis and results

The previous chapter focused on the research design and questionnaire design of this study. It

showed how the questionnaire is constructed to address the appropriate variables and

hypotheses conducted for this study. In addition, the validity and reliability tests for the

different constructs have been presented. This chapter will show the analysis of the data with

the statistical analyzing program SPSS together with the results of the hypotheses conducted

from the extensive literature review. First, the characteristics of the samples will be depicted

and presented in the shape of descriptives. Then, a correlation test has been used to show the

direction and strength of the relationships between the various constructs used in this

research. Third, the assumptions of the regressions are explained and applied to this research.

Last, the results of the various independent t-tests and regression analyses are presented

7.1 Characteristics of the samples

The populations targeted in this research are employees that are working in the service

industry. To narrow this down, two subpopulations are chosen, namely the public service

sector (in this case nurses), and the private service sector (call centre agents). The

classifications and characteristics of the samples in this research are based on Blumberg,

Cooper, and, Schindler (2005). The samples used in this research are based on a convenient

basis. In other words, this means that the samples are based on non-probability. Non-

probability holds that the members are selected on a non-random and subjective manner. Not

every participant has a known non-zero chance of being selected in the samples. Underlying

reasons for this non-probability sampling are the limited time constraint of this research, the

limited financial funds for this research, and the availability of the participants. Most call

centres contacted refused to let their call centre agents take part in this research for various

reasons. These restrictions resulted in choosing convenient sampling as the most appropriate

tool for this research. The data needed for this sample has been collected at several locations.

Regarding the call centres, data has been collected from two different locations. Both firms

have requested, in order to protect their image, reputation, brand, and such, to stay

anonymous in this research. Sixteen call centres, dispersed over Limburg, have been

contacted and asked whether they wanted to cooperate in this research. Only one, firm A,

Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation Data analysis and results


- 94 -

situated in Heerlen, was interested in cooperating. Firm A is a so-called ‘dispatch pharmacy’

that predominantly sends medicine products to customers (mostly located in Germany) after

being ordered by phone or by Internet. In agreement with the contact at firm A, the

questionnaire (translated in German) was sent to firm A by e-mail. Next, the human resource

manager printed several questionnaires and handed them out to call centre agents that were

able and interested in filling in the questionnaires. Last, the completed forms were then sent

back to the researcher two weeks later. After a couple of months firm B decided to cooperate

as well in this research. Firm B is an international mobile network operator with the head

office of the Netherlands located in Maastricht. In agreement with the contact at firm B, a

personal assistant of one of the top managers, the questionnaires were printed out and left

behind at firm B for call centre agents to fill in. After three weeks, the completed

questionnaires were collected and used for analysis. From the start on, it has been made clear

that the questionnaires could be filled in anonymously.

Concerning the hospitals, a somewhat similar path was chosen to collect data. Three hospitals

were used for this research. The respondents that were included in this research are employed

at the ‘Academisch Ziekenhuis’ in Maastricht, at the ‘Maasland Ziekenhuis’ in Sittard, and at

the ‘Laurentius Ziekenhuis’ in Roermond. The choice for these hospitals was mainly because

of location advantages. The procedure for collecting data from respondents was the same for

every hospital. The head nurses of the wards were given general information regarding this

thesis and they were asked whether nurses could fill in this questionnaire. Almost all

responded positive and agreed was that the completed questionnaires were picked up one to

two weeks later. Like the questionnaires for the call centre agents, the nurses were able to fill

in the questionnaire anonymously.

Table 7.1, presented below, shows the frequencies of the two samples used in this research.

First, one can see how the respondents are spread over the various locations. Next, one can

see how many men and women are working in the samples. Third, the age categories of the

respondents are presented followed by the educational level of the respondents. Then, the

various categories of tenure are presented. Sixth, one can see what type of contract the

respondents of the two samples have. Last, one can see whether the respondents have a full

time job or a part time at that company.



- 95 -

Table 7.1: Frequencies of the samples

GROUP2

142 32,3 32,3 32,3

64 14,6 14,6 46,9

26 5,9 5,9 52,8

31 7,1 7,1 59,9

176 40,1 40,1 100,0

439 100,0 100,0

Maastricht hospital

Sittard hospital

Roermond hospital

Firm A Heerlen callcentre

Firm B Maastricht

callcentre

Total

Valid

Frequency Percent Valid Percent

Cumulative

Percent

GROUP2 * 39. What is your gender? * GROUP Crosstabulation

107 35 142

46,1% 15,1% 61,2%

49 15 64

21,1% 6,5% 27,6%

21 5 26

9,1% 2,2% 11,2%

177 55 232

76,3% 23,7% 100,0%

27 4 31

13,0% 1,9% 15,0%

122 54 176

58,9% 26,1% 85,0%

149 58 207

72,0% 28,0% 100,0%

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Maastricht hospital

Sittard hospital

Roermond hospital

GROUP2

Total


Firm B Maastricht

callcentre

GROUP2

Total

GROUP

Nurses

Callcenter agents

Female Male

39. What is your

gender?

Total

GROUP2 * 40. What is your age? * GROUP Crosstabulation

38 39 32 33 142

16,4% 16,8% 13,8% 14,2% 61,2%

9 20 18 17 64

3,9% 8,6% 7,8% 7,3% 27,6%

3 12 7 4 26

1,3% 5,2% 3,0% 1,7% 11,2%

50 71 57 54 232

21,6% 30,6% 24,6% 23,3% 100,0%

14 11 6 31

6,8% 5,3% 2,9% 15,0%

49 60 39 28 176

23,7% 29,0% 18,8% 13,5% 85,0%

63 71 45 28 207

30,4% 34,3% 21,7% 13,5% 100,0%

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Maastricht hospital

Sittard hospital

Roermond hospital

GROUP2

Total


Firm B Maastricht

callcentre

GROUP2

Total

GROUP

Nurses

Callcenter agents

18-25 26-35 36-46 Older than 46

40. What is your age?

Total

GROUP2 * 41. What is your educational background? * GROUP Crosstabulation

18 1 49 71 3 142

7,8% ,4% 21,1% 30,6% 1,3% 61,2%

4 1 24 33 2 64

1,7% ,4% 10,3% 14,2% ,9% 27,6%

1 15 10 26

,4% 6,5% 4,3% 11,2%

23 2 88 114 5 232

9,9% ,9% 37,9% 49,1% 2,2% 100,0%

13 5 5 1 6 1 31

6,3% 2,4% 2,4% ,5% 2,9% ,5% 15,0%

34 5 93 34 10 176

16,4% 2,4% 44,9% 16,4% 4,8% 85,0%

47 10 98 1 40 11 207

22,7% 4,8% 47,3% ,5% 19,3% 5,3% 100,0%

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Maastricht hospital

Sittard hospital

Roermond hospital

GROUP2

Total


Firm B Maastricht

callcentre

GROUP2

Total

GROUP

Nurses

Callcenter agents

Secondary

school LBO MBO 3,1 HBO University

41. What is your educational background?

Total



- 96 -

GROUP2 * 42. How many years have you been working at this job? * GROUP Crosstabulation

17 19 28 78 142

7,3% 8,2% 12,1% 33,6% 61,2%

5 6 14 39 64

2,2% 2,6% 6,0% 16,8% 27,6%

1 4 5 16 26

,4% 1,7% 2,2% 6,9% 11,2%

23 29 47 133 232

9,9% 12,5% 20,3% 57,3% 100,0%

8 9 11 3 31

3,9% 4,3% 5,3% 1,4% 15,0%

58 39 17 62 176

28,0% 18,8% 8,2% 30,0% 85,0%

66 48 28 65 207

31,9% 23,2% 13,5% 31,4% 100,0%

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Maastricht hospital

Sittard hospital

Roermond hospital

GROUP2

Total


Firm B Maastricht

callcentre

GROUP2

Total

GROUP

Nurses

Callcenter agents

Shorter

than 1 year

Between 1

and 3 years

Between 3

and 5 years

More than

5 years

42. How many years have you been working at this

job?

Total

GROUP2 * 43. Do you have a … ? * GROUP Crosstabulation

98 44 142

42,2% 19,0% 61,2%

40 24 64

17,2% 10,3% 27,6%

19 7 26

8,2% 3,0% 11,2%

157 75 232

67,7% 32,3% 100,0%

26 5 31

12,6% 2,4% 15,0%

76 3 97 176

36,7% 1,4% 46,9% 85,0%

102 3 102 207

49,3% 1,4% 49,3% 100,0%

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Maastricht hospital

Sittard hospital

Roermond hospital

GROUP2

Total


Firm B Maastricht

callcentre

GROUP2

Total

GROUP

Nurses

Callcenter agents

Full time

contract 1,4

Part time

contract

43. Do you have a … ?

Total

GROUP2 * 44. My current job is a … * GROUP Crosstabulation

94 48 142

40,5% 20,7% 61,2%

34 30 64

14,7% 12,9% 27,6%

15 11 26

6,5% 4,7% 11,2%

143 89 232

61,6% 38,4% 100,0%

24 7 31

11,6% 3,4% 15,0%

63 113 176

30,4% 54,6% 85,0%

87 120 207

42,0% 58,0% 100,0%

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Count

% of Total

Maastricht hospital

Sittard hospital

Roermond hospital

GROUP2

Total


Firm B Maastricht

callcentre

GROUP2

Total

GROUP

Nurses

Callcenter agents

Full time job Part time job

44. My current job is a …

Total



-

97 -

Tab

le 7

.2

Correlations

1,270**

-,495**

,178**

,049

-,148**

-,246**

-,337**

,179**

,196**

,,000

,000

,000

,303

,002

,000

,000

,000

,000

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

,270**

1-,052

,419**

,127**

-,022

-,029

-,048

,096*

,117*

,000

,,272

,000

,008

,653

,542

,315

,044

,014

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

-,495**

-,052

1-,162**

-,130**

,149**

,174**

,258**

-,060

-,025

,000

,272

,,001

,006

,002

,000

,000

,209

,596

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

,178**

,419**

-,162**

1,044

,068

,056

,041

,007

,078

,000

,000

,001

,,361

,156

,241

,388

,885

,104

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

,049

,127**

-,130**

,044

1-,081

-,028

-,111*

-,143**

-,248**

,303

,008

,006

,361

,,091

,559

,020

,003

,000

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

-,148**

-,022

,149**

,068

-,081

1,125**

,613**

,000

,204**

,002

,653

,002

,156

,091

,,009

,000

,994

,000

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

-,246**

-,029

,174**

,056

-,028

,125**

1,195**

-,067

-,009

,000

,542

,000

,241

,559

,009

,,000

,162

,844

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

-,337**

-,048

,258**

,041

-,111*

,613**

,195**

1-,243**

-,019

,000

,315

,000

,388

,020

,000

,000

,,000

,697

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

,179**

,096*

-,060

,007

-,143**

,000

-,067

-,243**

1,695**

,000

,044

,209

,885

,003

,994

,162

,000

,,000

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

,196**

,117*

-,025

,078

-,248**

,204**

-,009

-,019

,695**

1

,000

,014

,596

,104

,000

,000

,844

,697

,000

,

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

439

Pearson Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)

N Pearson Correlation

Sig. (2-tailed)


Sig. (2-tailed)


Sig. (2-tailed)


Sig. (2-tailed)


Sig. (2-tailed)


Sig. (2-tailed)


Sig. (2-tailed)


Sig. (2-tailed)


Sig. (2-tailed)

N

GROUP

Computed intr. motiv.

(sum of intr. mot. factors /

total numb. of intr. mot.

questions)

Computed extr. mot. (sum

extri. mot. factors / total

numb. extr. mot.

questions)

Computed sat. (total fact.

sat. incl reverse stress /

total numb. sat.

questions)

39. What is your gender?


41. What is your

educational background?

42. How many years have

you been working at this

job?



GROUP

Computed

intr. motiv.

(sum of intr.

mot. factors /

total numb.

of intr. mot.

questions)

Computed

extr. mot.

(sum extri.

mot. factors /

total numb.

extr. mot.

questions)

Computed

sat. (total

fact. sat. incl

reverse

stress / total

numb. sat.

questions)

39. What is

your gender?

40. What is

your age?

41. What is

your

educational

background?

42. How

many years

have you been

working at this

job?

43. Do you

have a … ?

44. My current

job is a …

Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

**. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).

*.



- 98 -

7.2 Correlations

The correlations between the dependent variable, independent variables, and control variables

in Table 7.2 show the strength and direction of the relationships between the variables. For

this research, they serve as indication for the regression analyses later on. Important to add is

that the various motivational theories are not represented in one single construct. This is

because the motivational theories are too different and therefore it would be illogical to

combine them in one single construct. Next, the following part deals with the assumptions

needed for using a regression analysis.

7.3 Regression assumptions

In this part, the assumptions of the regression analyses of this research are presented. There

are several regression assumptions that need to be met in order to run a proper regression. The

first is about the central limit theorem, which explains that if the sample size is large, then the

sampling distribution is approximately normal, even if the sampled population is not normally

distributed (Bowerman and O'Connell, 2003). This research has two samples that are large

enough to pass this assumption. The sample of the call centre agents contains 207 respondents

and the sample of the nurses consists of 232 respondents. The independence assumption is the

second assumption in regression analyses. Independence is usually violated in time series but

it can also occur in cross-sectional data. For this research, the possible violation of

independence would lie in the fact that there could be clusters within the samples. These

clusters would be the different firms. To clarify this, one firm could have more ‘older’

employees than the other firms. One way to check this is to make dummy variables of the

control variables and to run a regression where the constructs of satisfaction, intrinsic

motivation, and extrinsic motivation function as dependent variable. When a dummy variable

is significant this means that there could be violation of independence. This occurred only

once, namely with the dummy gender on intrinsic motivation. Still this could bias the results a

bit. The third assumption in regression analyses refers to the concept of normality. This can be

checked with histograms of the dependent and independent variables, represented in

Appendix A on page 166. One can see that the normal curves are slightly skewed to the right,

indicating a possible violation of the normality assumption. However, when examining the

skewness tests and QQ plots in SPSS (depicted in Appendix A), there is no real indication



- 99 -

that the normality assumption is violated. The last and most important assumption refers to

the concept of multicollinearity. Multicollinearity refers to a too high interdependence

between the independent variables in a research (Blumberg et al., 2005; Bowerman and

O'Connell, 2003). Several methods can check for multicollinearity, like correlations, factor

analysis, and variance inflation factors. For correlations, several researchers, like (Hair et al.,

2003), use correlations of 0.7 and higher as indications of possible multicollinearity between

variables. Although the variables do not give correlations above 0.5, the variance inflation

factors (VIF) test is used to make sure that there is not any multicollinearity in this research.

With this test, multicollinearity exists when the tolerance levels of the variables are smaller

than 0.1. The formula used for the VIF tests is: VIF = 1 / Tolerance (= R2). When the VIF is

above 10, there is an indication for multicollinearity. An average tolerance level of higher

than 1 indicates multicollinearity as well. Appendix A (on page 168) shows the VIF scores of

the variables. Important to add is that the constructs of the motivational theories are included

as well to see whether they show multicollinearity between them. Fortunately, all variables

give VIF scores between 1.1 and 1.8 so the assumption of multicollinearity is not violated.

Next, the results of the hypotheses will be presented. As already depicted before, this research

can be separated into two parts, namely an explanatory part (hypotheses 1-8) and an

exploratory part (hypotheses on motivational theories).

7.4 Testing hypotheses

7.4.1 Hypothesis 1

When looking at the results table of SPSS in Appendix B on page 169 for testing the first

hypothesis, there is an explanation needed in order to understand the results. The left part

focuses on assessing the homogeneity of variance between the populations. If the p-value is

less than 0.05, the Levene’s test depicts that the variances between the populations are not

equal. This holds that one should look in the row of ‘equal variances not assumed’ to find the

answer to the first hypothesis. If one would find the related p-value of the appropriate row

(equal variances or not) in the right part of the table, one can conclude what the answer to the

hypothesis will be. If the p-value is below 0.05, the null hypothesis can be rejected and the

means of the two populations are significantly different from each other. When one looks at

the table of hypothesis 1a and 1b, one can see, in the column of the Levene’s test, that both



- 100 -

hypotheses can assume ‘equal variances assumed’ (.145 and .899 respectively). Then, staying

in the appropriate rows, one can see that both of the related p-values are .000, indicating that

both null hypotheses can be rejected. This means that call centre agents working in the private

service sector are more extrinsically motivated and less intrinsically motivated than nurses

working in the public service sector.

7.4.2 Hypotheses 2 and 3

The second hypothesis investigated the relationship between extrinsic motivation and job

satisfaction. When one looks at the results of the regression run to test this hypothesis in

Appendix B, it can be seen that the B (unstandardized coefficients) is -.134 and with a

significance level of .005 and therefore the null hypothesis (there is no relation between

extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction) can be rejected. From this table, one can see that

extrinsic motivation is negatively related to job satisfaction. The third hypothesis investigated

the relationship between intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction. When reviewing the

regression table in Appendix B, the B is .515 and has a .000 significance level indicating that

the null hypotheses (there is no relationship between the two constructs) can be rejected. The

results show that there is a significant positive relationship between intrinsic motivation and

job satisfaction. The grouping variable (nurses-call centre agents) has a p-value of .946 and

therefore there is no significant difference between nurses and call centre agents concerning

the relationships of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation on job satisfaction.

7.4.3 Hypotheses 4 and 5

The fourth and fifth hypothesis investigated the relationships between extrinsic motivation

and job satisfaction and intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction respectively. The results of

the regressions run are presented in Appendix B. The fourth hypothesis assumed a null

hypothesis that there is no difference between call centre agents and nurses concerning the

effect of extrinsic motivation on job satisfaction. One can see in the row of the interaction

variable (extrinsic motivation * group) that the B is rather small (.076) and that the p-value is

.417. Therefore, the null hypotheses (there is no difference between the groups) cannot be

rejected. Regarding the fifth hypothesis, one has to look at the row of the interaction variable

(intrinsic motivation * group). The B shows a value of .192 and a p-value of .089. Thus, the



- 101 -

null hypothesis can be rejected (only at a 10% significance level) indicating that the effect of

intrinsic motivation on job satisfaction is stronger for call centre agents than for nurses.

7.4.4 Hypotheses 6, 7, and 8

Hypothesis 6 tested whether there was a difference in satisfaction between call centre agents

working in the private service sector and nurses working in the public service sector. For

testing this hypothesis, an independent t-test is used. When one is interested in general

satisfaction between the two groups, an independent t-test is sufficient. When one is interested

in understanding why (what the reasons are), a regression analysis is needed. From the

various items that make up the construct of satisfaction, only two of seven items indicate a

significant difference between the nurses and call centre agents. Satisfied with one’s job

(question 16) and job security (question 19) indicate that nurses score higher than call centre

agents. For both questions, one has to look in the lower row and one can find a p-value of

.000 in Appendix B. Furthermore, an independent t-test has been conducted to check whether

there is a difference in the computed construct of satisfaction between the two groups. When

checking the lower row of the construct, (equal variances not assumed), there is p-value of

.000, indicating that there is a significant difference between the two groups. In this case

(when looking at the means of groups), nurses are more satisfied than call centre agents.

As with hypothesis 6, an independent t-test is needed for hypothesis 7. When checking the

descriptives and independent t-tests with the dummies of the control variables, one gets a

clear indication what the demographics of the two samples are. One can see that there is no

clear significant difference in gender between nurses and call centre agents (p-value of .303)

and therefore the null of hypothesis 7A cannot be rejected. Concerning a difference in age,

two out of three categories (dummy variables) show no significant difference between the two

groups. However, when one takes into account the reference category (older than 46), one can

see that there is a difference in demographics between nurses and call centre agents. In this

case, nurses are older than call centre agents (there are significantly more call centre agents in

the youngest category and significantly more nurses in the oldest category). Therefore, the

null of hypothesis 7B can be rejected. Concerning hypothesis 7C, whether nurses have a

higher educational level than call centre agents, one can see in the descriptives that especially

for ‘HBO’ nurses score enormously higher than call centre agents. This can also be seen in the



- 102 -

independent t-tests on the dummy variables (p-values of .000, .014, .042, and .000).

Therefore, the null of hypothesis 7C can also be rejected indicating that nurses have a higher

educational level than call centre agents. Hypothesis 7D deals with tenure (number of years

one is working at a specific company). When one looks at the descriptives and the

independent t-tests (and the reference category of the dummy variable tenure), one can see

that the p-values are reasonably significant (.000, .004, .059 respectively). Together with the

reference category, this indicates that the null hypothesis can be rejected, which means that

nurses, compared to call centre agents, stay longer at the same company. Hypothesis 7E is

about the type of contract an employee has and whether there is a difference between the two

samples concerning the type of contract. In the independent t-test table one can see that

relevant p-value is .000, indicating that the null hypothesis can be rejected. In other words,

nurses have more full time contracts than call centre agents. Regarding hypothesis 7F

(whether nurses have more full time jobs than call centre agents), one can see in the same

table that this null hypothesis can also be rejected (p-value is .000). Thus, there are more

nurses with full time jobs than call centre agents.

For hypothesis 8 (A-F), a regression has been run with the dummy variables of the control

variables and the interaction variables related to them. When looking at the regression tables

in Appendix B, one can see that the first table has no significant p-values. This indicates that

the various dummy variables show no significant differences from their reference categories.

All dummy variables have the highest category of the construct set as their reference category.

Although no significant values have been found, the directions of the variables will be

explained. Concerning gender, the direction of the ‘B’ is as expected. The number -.057

indicates that satisfaction is higher for women than for men. Concerning age, the directions of

the three ‘Bs’ (-.110, .057, .029) show some mixed results. As the categories are compared to

the highest reference category (in this case the oldest age category: ‘over 46 years’), one can

say that the older employees are more satisfied than the youngest group of employees.

Regarding educational level, one can see that the highest category (university level) is the

most satisfied with the exception of ‘LBO’ category. The expectations were that the

employees with the highest educational level would be the most satisfied. When looking at the

‘Bs’ of tenure (-.048, -.010, and -.017), one can see that those are confirming the expectations.

The employees with the highest tenure are indeed the most satisfied. Strangely, when

examining the ‘B’ of full time/part time contract (.053), the employees with a part time

contract are the most satisfied, which is contradicting the expectation. The last ‘B’ (-.071)



- 103 -

confirms the expectation that employees with a full time job are more satisfied than

employees with a part time job. However, as depicted above, none of the results was found

significant. Therefore, the null hypotheses of hypotheses (8A-F) regarding the effects of one

of two groups on a category can therefore not be rejected.

The interaction variables indicate whether there is a difference between the two groups

regarding a specific category. This indicates that there is no significant difference between the

two groups. Only one dummy of a construct shows a significant difference (interaction

variable between tenure dummy 2 and group with a p-value of .025). This would indicate that

for this category, the call centre agents have a greater effect on satisfaction.

7.4.5 Hypotheses of motivational theories

The hypotheses on the various motivational theories check whether the motivational theories

have a significant influence on the constructs of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and they

check whether one of the two groups (nurses or call centre agents) has a greater impact on this

relationship. As mentioned before, each construct of a motivational theory (expectancy and

attribution theories have two constructs as result of the factor analyses) is used in four

regression analyses to investigate its affect. The important numbers (the ‘B’s’ of

‘unstandardized coefficients’ and their significance levels) of these regressions are

represented in Table 7.3 on page 105. The entire regression tables are depicted in Appendix B

(page 169 and further). Next to the information whether the motivational theories have a

significant (positive/negative) influence on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, one can also see

whether they have a stronger effect on intrinsic or extrinsic motivation. Again, one has to look

at the B’s and the significance levels. The two columns on the left (in Table 7.3), under the

headings of ‘extrinsic motivation’ and ‘intrinsic motivation’, depict whether the construct of a

motivational theory is related to one of the two constructs. When the ‘B’ in one of these two

columns is negative, this would indicate that the construct of a motivational theory is

negatively related to either intrinsic or extrinsic motivation. When the ‘B’ is positive, the

construct is positively related to intrinsic or extrinsic motivation. In the third and fourth

column, the ‘B’ represents something different. If the ‘B’ is negative, this means that the

motivational theory construct is better suited for the first group under investigation, in this

case the nurses. Is the ‘B’ positive, the theory is better applicable to call center agents.



- 104 -

Concerning the equity theory, one can see that the influence of the theory is only significant

on extrinsic motivation. Moreover, there is no significant difference between call centre

agents and nurses concerning the influence of the equity theory on intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation. For the expectancy theory constructs, the regressions show that both constructs do

have a significant influence on both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. However, only the

second construct shows a significant difference on the relationship of the expectancy theory

and extrinsic motivation between the two groups. Concerning the relationship between

extrinsic motivation and the expectancy theory, call centre agents score, as expected, higher

(.123) than nurses.

Next, the goal setting theory has a significant influence on extrinsic and intrinsic motivation

but none of the groups has a higher influence on either of them. Regarding the attribution

theory, mixed results have been found. Concerning the first construct, the attribution theory

only seems to have a positive influence on extrinsic motivation but no significant relationship

has been found been the attribution theory and intrinsic motivation. However, concerning the

relationship between extrinsic motivation and the attribution theory, call centre agents seem to

have a higher influence on this relationship than nurses. For the relationship between intrinsic

motivation and the theory, nurses seem to have a higher influence than call centre agents (for

α = 0.1). Strikingly, the second construct shows different results. First, the attribution theory

seems to have a significant negative relationship with extrinsic motivation but a positive

relationship with intrinsic motivation as well. However, with the second construct, there

seems to be no difference between nurses and call centre agents about their influence on the

relationships.

Theory X and Y appears to have a significant positive effect on extrinsic motivation and a

negative effect on intrinsic motivation and the nurses have a stronger influence on the

relationship between theory X and Y and intrinsic motivation. For the cognitive dissonance

theory, only a small significant negative effect (at a 10 percent significance level) has been

found on intrinsic motivation.

The regression results for the investment model are a bit contradicting as well. The investment

model shows a significant negative relationship with extrinsic motivation while showing a

significant positive relationship with intrinsic motivation.



- 105 -

Last, the cognitive evaluation theory does not appear to have an influence on extrinsic or

intrinsic motivation but regarding the relationship between the cognitive evaluation theory

and intrinsic motivation, the theory is better applicable to nurses than to call centre agents.

Logically, further research is needed to investigate this relationship between the cognitive

evaluation theory and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Naturally, the same holds for the

other motivational theories included in this paper.

Table 7.3

Extrinsic

motivation

Intrinsic

motivation

Interaction group

with extrinsic

motivation

Interaction group

with intrinsic

motivation

Ext. mot. = b0 +

b1*mot. theory +

b2*group + ε

Int. mot. = b0 +

b1*mot. theory +

b2*group + ε

Ext. mot. = b0 +

b1*mot. theory +

b2*group + b3*ext.

mot.*group + ε

Int. mot. = b0 +

b1*mot. theory +

b2*group + b3*int.

mot.*group + ε

Regressions

Hypotheses B (unstand. coeff.) B (unstand. coeff.) B (unstand. coeff.) B (unstand. coeff.)

Q (equity) .142*** .008 -.070 -.056

X1 (expectancy 1) .074*** .025** .038 -.022

X2 (expectancy 2) .118*** .061** .123** .079

G (goal setting) .104*** .054*** -.001 -.000

A1 (attribution 1) .047** .016 .078** -.055*

A2 (attribution 2) -.105*** .072*** .004 .042

T (theory x and y) .058*** -.091*** .039 -.073***

D (cognitive dis.) .013 -.022* .010 .006

I (investment mod.) -.064** .126*** -.097* .071*

E (cognitive evalu.) .034 -.002 .019 -.129***

* : α = 0.1, ** : α = 0.05, *** : α = 0.01 (all two-tailed)

This chapter showed the descriptives of the data from the samples of the nurses and call

centre agents. Moreover, correlational tests, independent t-tests, and regression analyses have

been conducted to investigate the hypotheses constructed for this research. The next chapter

will discuss the findings of this study.

- 106 -

Chapter 8: Discussion and conclusion

This chapter deals with discussing the research findings of the study conducted. First, there

will be a review of the problem statements of this research. Next, the theoretical and empirical

findings of the various motivational theories included in this research will be addressed

followed by implications for academic literature and practice. Last, a general conclusion will

be provided.

8.1 Addressing the problem statements

The goals of this study have been to investigate the relationship between job satisfaction and

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and the link of several theories of motivation with intrinsic

and extrinsic motivation. More and more firms are realizing the importance of having

motivated and satisfied employees. Originating from the ancient Latin verb ‘movere’,

motivation is what drives individuals to do what they do (Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003).

Employees that are motivated to work long and hard will produce more than employees that

are not motivated (Daniels and Radebaugh, 2001). Motivation can be further ‘divided’ into

several types of motivation. In the literature, authors make the distinction between the two

constructs of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation is the motivation to do

something for its own sake, for the pure enjoyment of the activity itself (Hennessey and

Amabile, 2005). Extrinsic motivation is the motivation to do something in order to obtain

some external goal or meet some externally imposed constraint (Hennessey and Amabile,

2005).

Satisfaction is related to motivation but is considered to be a different construct. Job

satisfaction is an affective or emotional response toward a variety of aspects on an employee’s

job (Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003). On the one hand, it is possible for employees to be satisfied

but not to be motivated at all. On the other hand, an employee can be motivated to perform

but totally not be satisfied with the current situation at a particular firm. As mentioned in the

chapters on motivation and satisfaction, many authors acknowledge the link between the two

concepts but have trouble defining and clarifying it. This link is even harder to find between

the two concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction. This study tried to

clarify the relationship of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction and to apply it

Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation Discussion and conclusion


- 107 -

to two different groups in different sectors. For the public service sector, nurses have been

chosen while for the private service sector call centre agents have picked. The central

questions is this paper were therefore:

What is the relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on the one hand and job

satisfaction on the other hand and the possible moderating variables influencing this

relationship in two different sectors, namely men and women working as a nurse in hospitals

(public service sector) and men and women working in call centres (private service sector)?

Furthermore, what is the relationship between several motivational theories, included in this

research, with the constructs of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation?

Many authors have written about the link between job satisfaction and motivation (like Drake

and Mitchell, 1977, Philips and Freedman, 1984, Kinicki et al., 2002, Timmreck, 2001, and

Kavanaugh et al., 2006). In the literature, one can see that total motivation consists of intrinsic

and extrinsic motivation. This distinction has also been made in this research paper. However,

there has been strikingly little literature on the link between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation

and job satisfaction. This paper tried to investigate the relationship and to shed a new light on

the constructs. As can be seen in the correlation table (Table 7.3) in the chapter of data

analyses and results, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation are negatively correlated to each other.

This backs up the original ideas of Deci (1971; 1972), Deci and Ryan (1985) and others, that

extrinsic motivation can have harmful effects on intrinsic motivation and one needs to be

careful with implementing rewards that try to enhance this type of motivation. As can be read

in the chapter of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, there are several types of rewards that

have an influence on extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. This research found a relationship

between job satisfaction on the one hand and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation on the other

hand. Both motivation constructs have a significant relationship with job satisfaction. When

examining the ‘direction’ of the two constructs, it becomes clear, as expected, that intrinsic

motivation has a positive influence on job satisfaction while extrinsic motivation has a

negative impact.

Although there are significant differences between the two groups under investigation in this

research (call centre agents and nurses), there are no significant effects of either of the two

groups on the relationship between extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction. Important to add

is that any difference between the two groups could also be the result of the influence of the



- 108 -

sector the employees are working in, next to the employees themselves. Call centre agents

have a greater influence on the relationship between extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction

but the relationship is not significant. For the relationship between intrinsic motivation and

job satisfaction (only at a 10 percent significant level though), the conclusion is that call

centre agents have a greater effect on this relationship. In other words, nurses have a smaller

influence on the relationship between job satisfaction and intrinsic motivation than call centre

agents. One could also say that the relationship between job satisfaction and intrinsic

motivation is better applicable to call centre agents. This is contrasting the expectations of this

research. Expected was that nurses would have a greater impact on the relationship between

job satisfaction and intrinsic motivation while call centre agents would have a greater effect

on the relationship between job satisfaction and extrinsic motivation.

Concerning the control variables in this study, there are significant differences between the

two samples but no significant effects were found on the relationship between job satisfaction

and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. When inspecting the two samples, one can see that the

nurses are more satisfied than the call centre agents. The influence of two (out of seven)

items, job satisfaction and job security, is in such a manner that the difference between the

nurses and call centre agents becomes significant. Especially the item of job security

(certainty that one can keep his or her job) showed a high difference between the two groups.

This could be due to the situational influences at the company besides a general difference in

attitude of the two groups. Regarding intrinsic motivation of the two groups, nurses are

clearly more intrinsically motivated than call centre agents (for only two of eight items, the

differences between call centre agents and nurses were not significant). The difference is even

greater for extrinsic motivation between the two groups. Call centre agents are more

extrinsically motivated than nurses (for all seven items, the differences were significant). This

was congruent with the expectations. Nurses were expected to be more intrinsically motivated

while the call centre agents were expected to be more extrinsically motivated. As to the

demographics and the organizational context of the two groups, there is no significant

difference in gender between nurses and call centre agents. There are more women than men

working in both groups. On average, nurses are older than call centre agents, stay longer at

the same company, and are higher educated. Moreover, the relative percentage of full time

contracts and full time jobs is higher among nurses. The next part discusses the findings of the

research on the motivational theories. These results confirm the expectations regarding the

control variables used in this research.



- 109 -

8.2 Addressing the motivational theories

The various motivational theories included represent the exploratory part of this study.

Current literature has not tried to link the constructs of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation to

several motivational theories. With the help of factor analyses, several constructs represent

the motivational theories in regression analyses to test the relationships with intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation. The equity theory was found to have an effect on extrinsic motivation.

The equity theory centers on the perceived fairness of an employee (Adams, 1963; 1965 in

Harder, 1991; Robbins, 2003). Employees compare how much effort they have expended to

what they receive from their jobs. Furthermore, they compare this to their colleagues,

supervisors and subordinates. Since these comparisons are mostly on the things they can

observe, like rewards, promotions, hours at the job, and so on, it is no surprise that there is a

significant relationship between extrinsic motivation and the equity theory.

The expectancy theory holds that the strength of a tendency to act in a specific way depends

on the strength of an expectation that the act will have a certain consequence and on the

attractiveness and value of that specific outcome to the employee (Vroom, 1964 in Kinicki

and Kreitner, 2003). The results confirm the expectations of the relationship between

expectancy theory and extrinsic motivation. Although the expectancy theory seems to relate

more to extrinsic motivation, it can function for intrinsic motivation as well. One can engage

in an activity for the pure enjoyment of the perceived expectations of that activity. As

expected, the expectancy theory is better applicable to call centre agents than to nurses (call

centre agents score higher than nurses on extrinsic motivation).

The goal-setting theory assumes that goals are immediate regulators of human action (Locke

et al., 1981). Specific goals lead to increased performance and difficult goals, when accepted,

result in higher performance than easy goals (Locke, 1968 in Robbins, 2003). Being related to

the expectancy theory, goal-setting setting is expected to show some relation with extrinsic

motivation. However, Elliot and Harackiewicz (1994) link goal setting also to intrinsic

motivation. The results of this study confirm the expectations. Goal-setting theory has both a

significant positive influence on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.

The attribution theory suggests that when employees look at the behaviour of their colleagues

at work, they try to determine whether this behaviour was internally or externally triggered



- 110 -

(Kinicki and Kreitner, 2003). The results were very mixed regarding the relationship between

intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. One construct (the first attribution theory

construct: ‘contribution’) suggests that there is a strong positive relationship between the

theory and extrinsic motivation and the other construct (the second attribution theory

construct: ‘salary’) suggests a strong positive relationship with intrinsic motivation.

Concerning the relationship with extrinsic motivation, the attribution theory is better

applicable for call centre agents than for nurses.

Theory X explains that employees dislike work and will avoid work whenever they can, that

employees must be threatened with punishment in order to make them work, that employees

need and want direction and guidance, that employees have little or no ambition, and that they

are only interested in security (McGregor, 1960 in Robbins, 2003). Theory Y holds a far more

positive view on employees. When looking at the assumptions of theory X and Y, one could

say that theory X is more related to extrinsic motivation and theory Y more to intrinsic

motivation. The questions in the questionnaire were asked from the viewpoint of theory X.

This can be seen in the results as well. Theory X (and Y) shows a clear positive relation to

extrinsic motivation and a negative relation to intrinsic motivation. Moreover, the theory is

better suited for nurses than for call centre agents, which is contradicting the expectations of

the previous relationships found between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and the theory.

Theory X was expected to be better applicable to extrinsic motivation and therefore also to

call centre agents.

Another theory included in the study is the cognitive dissonance theory. This theory states

that dissonance is a psychological state of tension, which individuals are motivated to

decrease because of the discomfort it brings (Festinger, 1957 in Robbins, 2003). Only at a ten

percent significance level, the theory seems to be related to intrinsic motivation. Clearly, this

would need further research.

The investment model is about how an employee evaluates his or her job, mainly to the extent

that the job offers high rewards and low costs (Rusbult and Farrell, 1983). Seemingly related

to the equity theory, the investment model should be related to extrinsic motivation. However,

the results show that the theory is negatively related to extrinsic motivation while positively

related to intrinsic motivation. An explanation for these findings might be that the rewards

and costs can be viewed as intangible as in romantic relationships. Employees might evaluate



- 111 -

their jobs in terms of whether they enjoy it, whether the job is challenging, whether the

workplace is fun to work at, and so on, than merely to compare how much hours they work to

how much salary they receive. The last motivational theory, cognitive evaluation, shows no

significant relationship with either extrinsic motivation or intrinsic motivation, but seems to

be better applicable for nurses than for call centre agents. The next part focuses on

implications of this research for academic literature and managerial practice.

8.3 Implications

8.3.1 Implications for academic literature

As described before, motivation can be separated into intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Most

research on job satisfaction and motivation elaborates on either of the two constructs and

many authors agree that the two constructs are at least weakly correlated to each other. A gap

in current academic literature is the coverage of the relationship between intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction. It is clear that there is not much (if any) literature on

these relationships in the call centre industry and the health care industry. This study

acknowledges the negative relationship between extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation.

This could suggest that certain (extrinsic) rewards indeed undermine intrinsic motivation. In

addition, both constructs have a significant effect on job satisfaction, as expected. Intrinsic

motivation has a positive effect on job satisfaction while extrinsic motivation has a negative

effect. Important to add is that different types of professions and/or different sectors (public

versus private) might have an influence on the relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation and job satisfaction. Another gap that this study was aiming at is the link between

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and motivational theories. Although there was some

coverage, this study tries to extend current literature. Future research could focus on

investigating the influence of other motivational theories on the relationship between intrinsic

and extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction.

8.3.2 Implications for managerial practice

In general, managers are to some extent aware of the possible impact that the constructs of

motivation and job satisfaction can have on the performance of employees in the company.



- 112 -

Likewise, most have some idea what the difference is between intrinsic and extrinsic

motivation and how these types of motivation influence satisfaction and performance. A

critical issue for managers is to understand how these types of motivation (and the usage of

rewards) influence behaviour of their employees. From the debate of the effects of extrinsic

rewards on intrinsic motivation, it is clear that some extrinsic rewards do have a negative

effect on intrinsic motivation. From this study, one can see that extrinsic motivation and

intrinsic motivation are negatively correlated and that extrinsic motivation has a negative

impact on job satisfaction. Clearly, managers need to be careful with implementing (extrinsic)

rewards. As can be read in the chapter of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation, managers have to

try to avoid contingent rewards, expected rewards, and tangible rewards. In addition, intrinsic

motivation has a longer lasting effect than extrinsic motivation (Frey and Jegen, 2001).

Focusing on intrinsic motivation seems to be the smartest thing to do for managers. If

managers do want to make use of rewards, it would be wise to focus on rewards that have a

positive impact on intrinsic motivation.

Another aspect that managers need to consider is the type of industry they are working in. As

can be seen in this research, dissimilarities in intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and

job satisfaction can result from differences in the nature of profession, differences in the type

of industry, whether a company is a private or public firm, differences in organizational

context and environmental conditions, and so on. These aspects can be seen in the study

conducted on call centre agents and nurses. Nurses seem to be more satisfied, more

intrinsically motivated, and less extrinsically motivated than call centre agents. The fact that

none of the control variables was found significant in this research does not hold that

demographic and organizational aspects such as gender, age, tenure, educational background,

type of contract, type of job, and so forth, will not have an impact on the relationship between

intrinsic and extrinsic motivation and job satisfaction. Managers working in either of these

two sectors have to consider these facts when implementing rewards and, in general, when

they want to motivate the employees in their companies. There is also a difference in job

requirement. A fact is that almost everyone can work in a call centre as a call centre agent but

working in a hospital as a nurse requires some educational certificates. Of course not

everyone can work at a call centre, there are still some requirements like being customer-

friendly, having a good voice, being representative, and so forth. Therefore, the results

concerning the difference concerning education between the two groups was not surprising.

Nurses have, on average, more educational certificates than call centre agents.



- 113 -

Furthermore, managers have to take into account the possible impact of the various

motivational theories on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Although only a couple

motivational theories were selected from an extensive list, almost all of them had some

impact on at least one of the types of motivation. Of the eight motivational theories selected

for this research, the only theory that did not have a significant influence on intrinsic or

extrinsic motivation is the cognitive evaluation theory. Therefore, managers have to consider

the possible influences of motivational theories on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation when

they want to motivate colleagues and employees. Managers need to understand that

motivation is composed of extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation and that several

aspects of motivational theories have an influence on these constructs.

8.4 Conclusion

This study has shown the importance of motivation and job satisfaction in the work

environment. When investigating the relationship of intrinsic motivation and extrinsic

motivation and job satisfaction in the public and the private service sector, this research has

come to similar conclusions to what other authors have found. Undoubtedly, extrinsic

motivation can have the possibility to harm intrinsic motivation and job satisfaction. Intrinsic

motivation is found to be positively related to job satisfaction. Therefore, companies have to

be careful how to implement reward systems for their employees. If they do decide to use

rewards in order to increase performance, it would be the most fruitful if they focus on

rewards that enhance intrinsic motivation or at least do not harm intrinsic motivation. Call

centre agents are clearly more extrinsically motivated than nurses and less intrinsically

motivated. Moreover, one can see that nurses are more satisfied than call centre agents. This

difference was mainly due to two items, namely satisfaction with the job and job security. The

differences between call centre agents and nurses in intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation,

and satisfaction could be due to being employed in a different sector. An example could be

that the difference in job security between the two samples results from a dynamic and

competitive environment the call centres are facing compared to a relative stable environment

the hospitals are situated in. Call centres and hospitals experience relatively high turnover

rates and logically, creating motivation and satisfaction among their employees remains

critical in their sectors. Concerning the relationship between intrinsic motivation and job



- 114 -

satisfaction, the conclusion is that call centre agents have a greater effect on this relationship

than nurses. One could also say that the relationship between job satisfaction and intrinsic

motivation is better applicable to call centre agents.

Clearly, the influence of motivational theories on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is

significant as well. Although the number of theories used in this paper is relatively small

compared to the total number of motivational theories available in the academic literature, its

influence should not be underestimated. Several theories have showed significant correlations

with intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The underlying thoughts and psychological processes

that come along with those motivational theories should be used to the best of managerial

capabilities to benefit from them. Obviously, having motivated employees can result in

having satisfied employees. Satisfaction is the key to decrease turnover rates and to attract

new employees. It is when employees cannot get any satisfaction, they start singing (, and

leave).

- 115 -

Chapter 9: Limitations

During this research, it was attempted to generate a trustworthy analysis of the several

theories and data. Although the results and conclusions presented extend current literature on

job satisfaction, intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, every research conducted has limitations to

reflect on. These limitations however, can be used as directives for future research on this

topic.

The first limitation of this research is about the availability of resources for this research. Due

to time and financial constraints, the two samples, one of the public service sector and one of

the private service sector, generated only 439 respondents spread over five entities (two call

centres and three hospitals). Although the number of respondents in this research is beyond

acceptable, the external validity of this research would increase when there would be more

respondents in the two samples.

Secondly, the samples used for this research follow the principles of convenience sampling.

Convenience sampling falls under the heading of non-probability sampling, or non-random

sampling. This means that not every member has a non-zero chance of being included in the

sample (Blumberg et al., 2005). Non-probability sampling techniques decrease the precision

of the results, because it is arbitrary and subjective in nature. Although convenience sampling

decreases the precision and the external validity (and therefore the generalizability of the

results), this was the only feasible manner in reaching respondents for this study. This is due

to lack of financial, time-related, and scope-related resources, lack of cooperation from firms

in especially the private industry, and lack of an appropriate statistical tool and appropriate

data to select and reach suitable respondents.

Thirdly, and related to the second limitation, are the disadvantages accompanied with the

usage of a survey for this research (Blumberg et al., 2005). The greatest advantages of the

survey are its versatility, its relative low costs, it does not cost as much time as experiments

and observations, its possibility to ask for opinions, attitudes, expectations, and so on, and it is

easier to compile data with the standardized data. However, survey research suffers from

several disadvantages that can have an impact on the results. The biggest disadvantage is

undoubtedly the non-response error, which is typical for survey research. Non-response error

holds that people refuse to take part in the research or are unable to take part in the research.

Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation Limitations


- 116 -

Unwillingness of the respondents can have several reasons. Respondents do not see any value

in participating in the research, they might view the research as too sensitive and therefore too

embarrassing to take part in, or they might be suspicious for the underlying thoughts of the

research. Another problem that comes along with questionnaires is that respondents

sometimes do not understand the question or misinterpret the question. Lastly, there are

always respondents that do not take the questionnaire completely serious and try to get the

survey finished as fast as possible.

The next limitation is the possible misrepresentation of the samples from the population and

therefore the decrease in generalizability (external validity). No distinction has been made

between the several wards of the hospitals or even the hospitals in general. From the three

hospitals (‘Academisch Ziekenhuis Maastricht’, ’Maasland Ziekenhuis Sittard’ and

‘Laurentius Ziekenhuis Roermond’) in this research, ‘Academisch Ziekenhuis Maastricht’ is

the hospital that is the most focused on educating students to nursing, doctoring, or other

professions. Most nurses are working on general wards, but even between general wards there

can be several differences. The same holds for the two call centres (Firm A from Heerlen and

Firm B from Maastricht) involved in this research. Including the different size of the two call

centres and the different sector they are targeting (distribution of medicine versus mobile

network operator), there are different departments of the call centres agents available. Another

possible misrepresentation of the samples compared to the population lies in the female-male

ratio in the two samples. Regarding the call centre agents, the percentages vary from 58.7

percent (41.3 percent) to 67.4 percent (32.6 percent) women (men) working in the call centres

(Lewig and Dollard, 2003; Taylor and Bain, 1999; Wegge et al., 2006; Zhong et al., 2006). In

this research, 61 percent of the respondents is female and 39 percent is male. Concerning the

nurses, the percentages of women and men vary from 64 percent and 36 percent respectively

(Tummers et al., 2006), to 74-75 percent and 26-25 percent respectively (Kavanaugh et al.,

2006; Zawacki and Shahan, 1995), and up to 87-92 percent and 13-8 percent respectively

(Cohen and Kol, 2004; DeLoach and Monroe, 2004; McNeese-Smith, 2001; Pitcher, 2006;

Savery, 1989; Tummers et al., 2006). One can see that the focus is more towards 90 percent.

In this research, 69 percent is female and 31 percent is male. Therefore, the women, compared

to the men in this study might be underrepresented and this might influence the

generalizability of the results. However, no clear data is available on the female-male ratio in

Limburg or the Netherlands.



- 117 -

Another limitation of this research addresses the cross sectional nature of the research design.

The respondents are asked to give their opinion on several topics at a single point in time,

which normally limits the generalizability of the research. Since this research deals with

questions that are related to emotional states such as motivation and satisfaction, respondents

can give two different answers to the same question. Moreover, one cannot forget the possible

influence of the work environment on this research. When a firm is experiencing tough times

economically speaking and, for example, employees have to be fired, this could influence the

way respondents answers certain questions like the question in this research on job security.

Interesting would be to see whether the results would be the same when this would be a

longitudinal study. The problem of a longitudinal study for this research lies in the fact that

this could bias the respondents. Moreover, the concept of a longitudinal study was not

possible for this research, because it has been conducted on an anonymous basis and no

database has been made of the respondents. The surveys have been handed out to the head of

each department/ward and therefore it is impossible to trace who has filled in the

questionnaire.

The next limitation refers to the assumptions of the regressions used in this research. The

assumptions of independence and normality are slightly violated. The dummy gender was

found significant on the variable intrinsic motivation and this could bias the results somewhat.

Moreover, regarding the normality assumption, one can see that the ‘normality’ curve is

slightly skewed in two of the three variables. Like with the independence assumption, this

could bias the results found in this research. Important to add is that the assumptions and the

interpretation of the results function as a rule of thumb.

The last limitation relates to the reliability and validity of the constructs used in this research.

Although the reliability and validity of the constructs of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic

motivation and satisfaction are acceptable for analyzing data and running regressions, they

could have been higher. Regarding the various constructs of the motivational theories, it is

clear that the reliability and validity of those constructs can be improved for further research.

One example would be the construct of theory X and Y. The questions in the survey were

both more related to theory X than to theory Y. On the other hand, this part of the research is

relatively new and in its exploratory part. In combination with an increase in validity and

reliability measures (this can be done by formulating more questions for each motivational



- 118 -

theory), more motivational theories could be used to check whether they are related to the

constructs of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, and satisfaction.

- 119 -

References

Ambrose, M. L. and Kulik, C. T. (1999). Old friends, new faces: Motivation research in the

1990s. Journal of Management, 25(3), 231-292.

Acorn, S., Ratner, P. A. and Crawford, M. (1997). Decentralization as a determinant of

autonomy, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment among nurse managers.

Nursing Research 46(1), 52-58. In McNeese-Smith, D. K. (2001). A nursing shortage:

Building organizational commitment among nurses. Journal of Healthcare

Management, 46(3), 173.

Adams, J. S. (1963). Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social

Psychology, 67, 422-436. In Cosier, R. A., & Dalton, D. R. (1983). Equity theory and

time: A reformulation. Academy of Management Review, 8(2), 311.


Psychology, 67, 422-436. In Harder, J. W. (1991). Equity theory versus expectancy

theory: The case of major league baseball free agents. Journal of Applied Psychology,

76(3), 458-464.


Psychology, 67, 422-436. In Huseman, R. C., Hatfield, J. D., & Miles, E. W. (1987). A

new perspective on equity theory: The equity sensitivity construct. Academy of

Management Review, 12(2), 222.

Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in

experimental social psychology (pp. 267-299). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Noll

(Ed.), Government and the sports business (pp. 221 -273). Washington, DC:

Brookings Institution. In Cosier, R. A., & Dalton, D. R. (1983). Equity theory and

time: A reformulation. Academy of Management Review, 8(2), 311.




Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation References


- 120 -

Brookings Institution. In Harder, J. W. (1991). Equity theory versus expectancy

theory: The case of major league baseball free agents. Journal of Applied Psychology,

76(3), 458-464.




Brookings Institution. In Huseman, R. C., Hatfield, J. D., & Miles, E. W. (1987). A

new perspective on equity theory: The equity sensitivity construct. Academy of


Adams, G. A., King, L. A. and King, D. W. (1996). Relationships of job and family

involvement, family social support, and work-family conflict with job and life

satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(4), 411-420.

Alderfer, C. (1972). Existence, relatedness, & growth. New York: Free Press.

Adler, J., Kalb, C. and Rogers, A. (1999). Stress. Newsweek, 133(24), 56.

Aiello, J. R. and Kolb, K. J. (1995). Electronic performance monitoring and social

context: Impact on productivity and stress. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80(3), 339-

353.

Alexander, J. A., Bloom, J. R. and Nuchols, B. A. (1994). Nursing turnover and hospital

efficiency: An organization-level analysis. Industrial Relations, 33(4), 505.

Alexander, J. A., Lichtenstein, R., Oh, H. J. and Ullman, E. (1998). A causal model of

voluntary turnover among nursing personnel in long-term psychiatric settings. Research

in Nursing and Health, 21, 415-427. In Zhong, M., Siong, B., Mellor, D., Moore, K. A.

and Firth, L. (2006). Predicting intention to quit in the call centre industry: does the

retail model fit? Journal of Managerial Psychology, 21(3), 231-243.

Allyn, J. and Festinger, L. (1961). The effectiveness of unanticipated persuasive

communications. Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 62(1), 35-40.



- 121 -

Amabile, T. M. (1993). Motivational synergy: Toward new conceptualizations of intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation in the workplace. Human Resource Management Review, 3(3), 185.

Amabile, T. M., DeJong, W. and Lepper, M. R. (1976). Effects of externally imposed

deadlines on subsequent intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 34(1), 92-98.

Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A. and Tighe, E. M. (1994). The Work Preference

Inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of

Personality and Social Psychology, 66(5), 950-967.

Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A. and Tighe, E. M. (1995). 'The Work Preference

Inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations': Correction.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68(4), 580-580.

Ames, C. and Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning

strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3), 260-267.

Anderson, R., Manoogian, S. T. and Reznick, J. S. (1976). The undermining and enhancing of

intrinsic motivation in preschool children. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 34(5), 915-922.

Aranya, N., Kushnir, T. and Valency, A. (1986). Organizational commitment in a male-

dominated profession. Human Relations, 39(5), 433.

Argyris, C. (1957). Personality and organization. New York: Harper. In Salancik, G. R. and

Pfeffer, J. (1977). An examination of need-satisfaction models of job attitudes.

Administrative Science Quarterly, 22(3), 427.

Armstrong-Stassen, M. and Cameron, S. J. (2003). Nurses' job satisfaction and turnover

intentions over a six-year period of hospital downsizing and amalgamation.

International Journal of Public Administration, 26(14), 1607-1620.



- 122 -

Aronson, E. (1968). Dissonance theory, progress and problems. In Abelson, R. P., Aronson,

E., McGuire, W. J., Newcomb, T. M., Rosenberg, M. J. & Tannenbaum P. H. (Eds.),

Theories of cognitive consistency: A sourcebook (pp. 5–27). Chicago: Rand McNally.

Arvey, R. D., Bouchard, T. J., Segal, N. L. and Abraham, L. M. (1989). Job satisfaction:

Environmental and genetic components. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(2), 187-192.

Austin, J. T. and Bobko, P. (1985). Goal-setting theory: Unexplored areas and future research

needs. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 58(4), 289-308.

Babin, B. J. and Boles, J. S. (1998). Employee behavior in a service environment: A model

and test of potential differences between men and women. Journal of Marketing, 62(2),

77-91.

Bain, P., Watson, A., Mulvey, G., Taylor, P. and Gall, G. (2002). Taylorism, targets and the

pursuit of quantity and quality by call centre management. New Technology, Work &

Employment, 17(3), 170.

Bandura, A. (1977a). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. .

Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.

Bandura, A. (1977b) Social Learning Theory. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Baruch-Feldman, C., Brondolo, E., Ben-Dayan, D. and Schwartz, J. (2002). Sources of social

support and burnout, job satisfaction, and productivity. Journal of Occupational Health


Bassett-Jones, N. and Lloyd, G. C. (2005). Does Herzberg's motivation theory have staying

power? Journal of Management Development, 24(10), 929-943.

Beltramini, R. F. and Evans, K. R. (1988). Salesperson motivation to perform and job

satisfaction: A sales contest participant perspective. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales




- 123 -

Bem, D. J. (1967). Self-perception: An alternative interpretation of cognitive dissonance

phenomena. Psychological Review, 74(3), 183-200.

Bem, D. J. (1972). Self-perception theory. Advances in Experimental Social psychology, 6, 1-

62.

Bénabou, R. and Tirole, J. (2003). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Review of Economic

Studies, 70(244), 489-520.

Bender, K. A. and Heywood, J. S. (2006). Job satisfaction of the highly educated: The role of

gender, academic tenure, and earnings. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 53(2),

253-279.

Bluedorn, A. C. (1982). Managing turnover strategically. Business Horizons, 25(2), 6.

Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: Wiley. In Rusbult, C. E.,

& Farrell, D. (1983). A longitudinal test of the investment model: The impact on job

satisfaction, job commitment, and turnover of variations in rewards, costs,

alternatives, and investments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(3), 429-438.

Blumberg, B., Cooper, D. R. and Schindler, P. S. (2005). Business research methods.

Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education UK Limited.

Boe, E. S. (1970). Job attitudes: The motivation-hygiene theory. Journal of Accountancy,

130(4), 99-101.

Boggiano, A. K. and Ruble, D. N. (1979). Competence and the overjustification effect: A

developmental study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(9), 1462-1468.

Borkowski, N. M. and Allen, W. R. (2003). Does attribution theory explain physicians'

nonacceptance of clinical practice guidelines? Hospital Topics, 81(2), 9-21.



- 124 -

Bowerman, B. L. and O'Connell, R. T. (2003). Business statistics in practice (third ed.). New

York, New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.

Box, R. C. (1999). Running government like a business. American Review of Public

Administration, 29(1), 19.

Boyne, G. A. (2002). Public and private management: What's the difference? Journal of

Management Studies, 39(1), 97.

Bradley, G. W. (1978). Self-serving biases in the attribution process: A reexamination of the

fact or fiction question. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 36(1), 56-71.

Brayfield, A. H. and Crockett, W. H. (1955). Employee attitudes and employee performance.

Psychological Bulletin, 52(5), 396-424.

Brayfield, A. H., Wells, R. V. and Strate, M. W. (1957). Interrelationships among measures of

job satisfaction and general satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 41(4), 201-205.

Brehm, J. W. (1966). A theory of psychological reactance. New York: Academic Press

Brenner, V. C., Carmack, C. W. and Weinstein, M. G. (1971). An empirical test of the

motivation-hygiene theory. Journal of Accounting Research, 9(2), 359-366.

Brief, A. P. (1998). Attitudes in and around organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications. In Kinicki, A. and Kreitner, R. (2003). Organizational behavior: Key

concepts, skills and best practices (international ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill

Companies, Inc.

Brief, A. P. and Aldag, R. J. (1976). Correlates of role indices. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 61(4), 468-472.

Broadbridge, A. (2002). Retail managers: their work stressors and coping strategies. Journal

of Retailing & Consumer Services, 9(3), 173.



- 125 -

Brown, S. P. (1996). A meta-analysis and review of organizational research on job

involvement. Psychological Bulletin, 120(2), 235-255.

Bryan, J. F. and Locke, E. A. (1967). Goal setting as a means of increasing motivation.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 51(3), 274-277.

Buelens, M. and Van den Broeck, H. (2007). An analysis of differences in work motivation

between public and private sector organizations. Public Administration Review, 67(1),

65-74.

Burns, J. E. (1967). Theory X. Industrial Management, p. 1.

Calder, B. J. and Staw, B. M. (1975). Self-perception of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(4), 599-605.

Call centers under pressure to change sweatshop image (1999). Management Today, 9.

Cameron, J. and Pierce, W. D. (1994). Reinforcement, reward and intrinsic motivation: A

meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 64, 363-423. In Lindenberg, S. (2001).

Intrinsic Motivation in a New Light. Kyklos, 54(2/3).

Cameron, J. and Pierce, W. D. (1996). The debate about rewards and intrinsic motivation:

Protests and accusations do not alter the results. Review of Educational Research, 66,

39-51. In Lindenberg, S. (2001). Intrinsic Motivation in a New Light. Kyklos, 54(2/3).

Carrell, M. R. and Dittrich, J. E. (1978). Equity theory: The recent literature, methodological

considerations, and new directions. Academy of Management Review, 3(2), 202.

Carson, C. M. (2005). A historical view of Douglas McGregor's theory Y. Management

Decision, 43(3), 450-460.

CBS-Statline. (2007a). Vestigingen naar activiteit, provincie en corop. In Download581F.xls

(Ed.) (Vol. 20.1 kb). Voorburg/Heerlen: Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek.



- 126 -

CBS-Statline. (2007b). Ziekenhuizen: exploitatie, personeel, capaciteit, patiënten en

productie. In Download56a3.xls (Ed.) (Vol. 158 kb). Voorburg: Centraal Bureau voor

de Statistiek.

Chacko, T. I. (1983). Job and life satisfactions: A causal analysis of their relationships.

Academy of Management Journal, 26(1), 163-169.

Chiu, S.-F. and Tsai, M.-C. (2006). Relationships among burnout, job involvement, and

organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Psychology, 140(6), 517-530.

Clark, A. E. (1996). Job Satisfaction in Britain. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 34(2),

189-217.

Clark, A. E. (1997). Job satisfaction and gender: Why are women so happy at work? Labour

Economics, 4(4), 341-372.

Clark, A. E. and Oswald, A. J. (1996). Satisfaction and comparison income. Journal of Public

Economics, 61(3), 359.

Clark, A. E., Oswald, A. J. and Warr, P. B. (1996). Is job satisfaction U-shaped in age?

Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 69, 57-81.

Clegg, C., Wall, T. and Kemp, N. (1987). Women on the assembly line: A comparison of

main and interactive explanations of job satisfaction, absence and mental health. Journal

of Occupational Psychology, 60(4), 273-287.

Clegg, C. W. (1983). Psychology of employee lateness, absence, and turnover: A

methodological critique and an empirical study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(1),

88-101.

Cohen, A. and Kol, Y. (2004). Professionalism and organizational citizenship behavior: An

empirical examination among Israeli nurses. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 19(4),

386-405.



- 127 -

Cosier, R. A. and Dalton, D. R. (1983). Equity theory and time: A reformulation. Academy of


Crewson, P. E. (1997). Public-service motivation: Building empirical evidence of incidence.

Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory (Transaction), 7(4), 499.

Crompton, J. L. (2003). Adapting Herzberg: A conceptualization of the effects of hygiene and

motivator attributes on perceptions of event quality. Journal of Travel Research, 41(3),

305.

Crow, S. M., Hartman, S. J. and Henson, S. W. (2006). Satisfaction for health care

employees: A quest for the holy grail? Health Care Manager, 25(2), 142-154.

Dam, K., van. (2005). Employee attitudes toward job changes: An application and extension

of Rusbult and Farrell's investment model. Journal of Occupational & Organizational

Psychology, 78(2), 253-272.

Daniels, J. D. and Radebaugh, L. H. (2001). International business. Environments and

operations (Vol. 9th edition). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc.

de Ruyter, K., Wetzels, M. and Feinberg, R. (2001). Role stress in call centers: its effects on

employee performance and satisfaction. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 15(2), 23-35.

deCharms, R. (1968). Personal causation. New York: Academic Press. Ryan, R. M. and Deci,

E. L. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions.

Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.

Deci, E. L. (1971). Effects of externally mediated rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of


Deci, E. L. (1972). Intrinsic motivation, extrinsic reinforcement, and inequity. Journal of




- 128 -

Deci, E. L., Cascio, W. F. and Krusell, J. (1975). Cognitive evaluation theory and some

comments on the Calder and Staw critique. Journal of Personality and Social


Deci, E. L., Koestner, R. and Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review of experiments

examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological

Bulletin, 125(6), 627-668.

Deci, E. L. and Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human

behavior. New York: Plenum Press.

Deci, E. L., Schwartz, A. J., Sheinman, L. and Ryan, R. M. (1981). An instrument to assess

adults' orientations toward control versus autonomy with children: Reflections on

intrinsic motivation and perceived competence. Journal of Educational Psychology,

73(5), 642-650.

DeGroot, H. A., Burke, L. J. and George, V. M. (1998). Implementing the differentiated pay

structure model. Journal of Nursing Administration, 28(5), 28-38. In McNeese-Smith,

D. K. (2001). A nursing shortage: Building organizational commitment among nurses.

Journal of Healthcare Management, 46(3), 173.

DeLoach, R. and Monroe, J. (2004). Job satisfaction among hospice workers. Health Care

Manager, 23(3), 209-219.

Deming, W. E. (1982). Out of the crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. In Sargiacomo, M.

(2002). Benchmarking in Italy: The first case study on personnel motivation and

satisfaction in a health business. Total Quality Management, 13(4), 489-505.

Demoussis, M. and Giannakopoulos, N. (2007). Exploring job satisfaction in private and

public employment: Empirical evidence from Greece. LABOUR: Review of Labour

Economics & Industrial Relations, 21(2), 333-359.

Diener, E. and Diener, C. (1996). Most people are happy. Psychological Science, 7(3), 181-

185.



- 129 -

Drake, B. and Mitchell, T. (1977). The effects of vertical and horizontal power on individual

motivation and satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 20(4), 573-591.

Dreikurs Ferguson, E. (2000). Motivation: A biosocial and cognitive integration of motivation

and emotion. New York: Oxford University Press Inc.

Drigotas, S. M., Safstrom, C. A. and Gentilia, T. (1999). An investment model prediction of

dating infidelity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(3), 509-524.

Dunn, S. C., Seaker, R. F. and Waller, M. A. (1994). Latent variables in business logistics

research: Scale development and validation. Journal of Business Logistics, 15(2), 145-

172.

Duxbury, L. E. and Higgins, C. A. (1991). Gender differences in work-family conflict.


Eberhardt, B. J. and Shani, A. B. (1984). The effects of full-time versus part-time

employment status on attitudes toward specific organizational characteristics and

overall job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 27(4), 893-900.

Eisenberger, R. and Cameron, J. (1996). Detrimental effects of reward: Reality or myth?

American Psychologist, 51(11), 1153-1166.

Eisenberger, R. and Cameron, J. (1998). Reward, intrinsic interest, and creativity: New

findings. American Psychologist, 53(6), 676-679.

Eisenberger, R., Pierce, W. D. and Cameron, J. (1999a). Effects of reward on intrinsic

motivation--Negative, neutral, and positive: Comment on Deci, Koestner, and Ryan

(1999). Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 677-691.

Eisenberger, R., Rhoades, L. and Cameron, J. (1999b). Does pay for performance increase or

decrease perceived self-determination and intrinsic motivation? Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 77(5), 1026-1040.



- 130 -

Elliot, A. J. and Harackiewicz, J. M. (1994). Goal setting, achievement orientation, and

intrinsic motivation: A mediational analysis. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 66(5), 968-980.

Elovainio, M., Kivimäki, M., Steen, N. and Kalliomäki-Levanto, T. (2000). Organizational

and individual factors affecting mental health and job satisfaction: A multilevel analysis

of job control and personality. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5(2), 269-

277.

Employee turnover costing U.S. industry billions. (2000). Warehousing Management, 7(9), 5.

Eskildsen, J. K., Kristensen, K. and Westlund, A. H. (2004). Work motivation and job

satisfaction in the Nordic countries. Employee Relations, 26(2), 122-136.

Fang, Y. (2001). Turnover propensity and its causes among Singapore nurses: an empirical

study. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 12(5), 859-871.

Farr, R. M. (1977). On the nature of attributional artifacts in qualitative research: Herzberg's

two-factor theory of work motivation. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 50(1), 3-14.

Feldman, J. M., Reitz, H. J. and Hilterman, R. J. (1976). Alternatives to optimization in

expectancy theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61(6), 712-720.

Ferris, K. R. (1977). A test of the expectancy theory of motivation in an accounting

environment. Accounting Review, 52(3), 605.

Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto,

CA. In Robbins, S. P. (2003). Essentials of organizational behavior (7th ed.). Upper

Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Festinger, L. and Carlsmith, J. M. (1959). Cognitive consequences of forced compliance.

Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology, 58(2), 203-210.



- 131 -

Finck, G., Timmers, J. and Mennes, M. (1998). Satisfaction vs. motivation. Across the Board,

35(9), 55.

Finlay, W., Martin, J. K., Roman, P. M. and Blum, T. C. (1995). Organizational structure and

job satisfaction. Administration and Society, 27(3), 427-450. In Eskildsen, J. K.,

Kristensen, K. and Westlund, A. H. (2004). Work motivation and job satisfaction in the

Nordic countries. Employee Relations, 26(2), 122-136.

Fisher, C. D., Schoenfeldt, L. F. and Shaw, J. B. (1999). Human resource management (4th

ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Flora, S. R. (1990). Undermining intrinsic interest from the standpoint of a behaviorist.

Psychological Record, 40(3), 323.

Florit, E. F. and Lladosa, L. V. (2007). Evaluation of the effects of education on job

satisfaction: Independent single-equation vs. structural equation models. International

Advances in Economic Research, 13(2), 157-170.

Försterling, F. (1985). Attributional retraining: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 98(3), 495-

512.

Franklin, D. (2000). Call centre employees tackle high stress levels, frustrated members and

industry changes. Credit Union Management, 23(9), 24.

Freeman, R. B. (1978). Job satisfaction as an economic variable. American Economic Review,

68(2), 135.

Freidson, E. (1970). Profession of medicine. New York: Harper and Row. In Gray, D. E.

(1984). Job satisfaction among Australian nurses. Human Relations, 37(12), 1063-1077.

Frey, B. S. and Jegen, R. (2001). Motivation crowding theory. Journal of Economic Surveys,

15(5), 589.



- 132 -

Furnham, A. and Schaeffer, R. (1984). Person-environment fit, job satisfaction and mental

health. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 57(4), 295-307.

Gabris, G. T. and Simo, G. (1995). Public sector motivation as an independent variable

affecting career decisions. Public Personnel Management, 24(1), 33.

Gaertner, S. and Robinson, J. M. (1999). Structural determinants of job satisfaction and

organizational commitment in turnover models. Human Resource Management Review,

9(4), 479.

Gardner, G. (1977). Is there a valid test of Herzberg's two-factor theory? Journal of

Occupational Psychology, 50(3), 197-204.

Gazioglu, S. and Tansel, A. (2006). Job satisfaction in Britain: individual and job related

factors. Applied Economics, 38(10), 1163-1171.

George, J. M. and Jones, G. R. (1996). The experience of work and turnover intentions:

Interactive effects of value attainment, job satisfaction, and positive mood. Journal of

Applied Psychology, 81(3), 318-325.

Ghinetti, P. (2007). The public-private job satisfaction differential in Italy. LABOUR: Review

of Labour Economics & Industrial Relations, 21(2), 361-388.

Glasser, W (1984). Control Theory: A new explanation of how we control our lives. New

York: Harper and Row.

Glenn, N. D., Taylor, P. A. and Weaver, C. N. (1977). Age and job satisfaction among males

and females: A multivariate, multisurvey study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(2),

189-193.

Gray, D. E. (1984). Job satisfaction among Australian nurses. Human Relations, 37(12),

1063-1077.



- 133 -

Green, F. and Tsitsianis, N. (2005). An investigation of national trends in job satisfaction in

Britain and Germany. British Journal of Industrial Relations, 43(3), 401-429.

Griffeth, R. W., Hom, P. W. and Gaertner, S. (2000). A meta-analysis of antecedents and

correlates of employee turnover: Update, moderator tests, and research implications for

the next millennium. Journal of Management, 26(3), 463-488.

Groot, W. and van de Brink, H. M. (1999). Job satisfaction of older workers. International

Journal of Manpower, 20(5/6), 343.

Hackett, R. D. (1989). Work attitudes and employee absenteeism: A synthesis of the

literature. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 62(3), 235-248.

Hackett, R. D. and Bycio, P. (1996). An evaluation of employee absenteeism as a coping

mechanism among hospital nurses. Journal of Occupational & Organizational

Psychology, 69(4), 327-338.

Hackett, R. D., Bycio, P. and Guion, R. M. (1989). Absenteeism among hospital nurses: An

idiographic-longitudinal analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 32(2), 424-453.

Hair, J. F. J., Babin, B., Money, A. H. and Samouel, P. (2003). Essentials of business

research methods. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley.

Harackiewicz, J. M. (1979). The effects of reward contingency and performance feedback on

intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(8), 1352-1363.

Harackiewicz, J. M., Manderlink, G. and Sansone, C. (1984). Rewarding pinball wizardry:

Effects of evaluation and cue value on intrinsic interest. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 47(2), 287-300.

Harder, J. W. (1991). Equity theory versus expectancy theory: The case of major league

baseball free agents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(3), 458-464.



- 134 -

Haswell, M. (2003). Dealing with employee absenteeism. Management Services, 47(12), 16-

17.

Haywood, H. C. and Wachs, T. D. (1966). Size-discrimination learning as a function of

motivation-hygiene orientation in adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology,

57(5), 279-286.

Heider, F. (1944). Social perception and phenomenal causality. Psychological Review, 1944,

51, 358-374. In Schlenker, B. R., & Miller, R. S. (1977). Egocentrism in groups: Self-

serving biases or logical information processing? Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 35(10), 755-764.

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: New York: John

Wiley & Sons. In Borkowski, N. M., & Allen, W. R. (2003). Does attribution theory

explain physicians' nonacceptance of clinical practice guidelines? Hospital Topics,

81(2), 9-21.

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: New York: John

Wiley & Sons. In Kelley, H. H., & Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution theory and

research. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 457-501.

Henderlong, J. and Lepper, M. R. (2002). The effects of praise on children's intrinsic

motivation: A review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 128(5), 774-795.

Hennessey, B. A. and Amabile, T. M. (1998). Reality, intrinsic motivation, and creativity.


Hennessey, B. A. and Amabile, T. M. (2005). Extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. Blackwell

Encyclopedic Dictionary of Organizational Behavior, 1-1.

Herzberg, F. (1966). Work and the nature of man. Cleveland, Ohio: World Publishing. In

Kanungo, R. N. (1979). The concepts of alienation and involvement revisited.




- 135 -

Herzberg, F., Mathapo, J., Wiener, Y. and Wiesen, L. E. (1974). Motivation-hygiene

correlates of mental health: An examination of motivational inversion in a clinical

population. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42(3), 411-419.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Synderman, B.S. (1959). The motivation to work. New York:

Wiley.

Hesketh, B. and Shouksmith, G. (1986). Job and non-job activities, job satisfaction and

mental health among veterinarians. Journal of Occupational Behavior, 7(4), 325-339.

Heyes, A. (2005). The economics of vocation or `why is a badly paid nurse a good nurse'?

Journal of Health Economics, 24(3), 561-569.

Heywood, J. S., Siebert, W. S. and Wei, X. (2002). Worker sorting and job satisfaction: The

case of union and government jobs. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 55(4), 595-

609.

Hidi, S. in Sansone, C. and Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation:

The search for optimal motivation and performance. San Diego: Academic Press.

Higgins, E. T., Bond, R. N., Klein, R. and Strauman, T. (1986). Self-Discrepancies and

Emotional Vulnerability: How Magnitude, Accessibility, and Type of Discrepancy

Influence Affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 51:5-15.

Hillmer, S., Hillmer, B. and McRoberts, G. (2004). The real costs of turnover: Lessons from a

call centre. Human Resource Planning, 27(3), 34-41.

Hirst, M. K. (1988). Intrinsic motivation as influenced by task interdependence and goal

setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73(1), 96-101.

Hollenbeck, J. R. and Williams, C. R. (1986). Turnover functionality versus turnover

frequency: A note on work attitudes and organizational effectiveness. Journal of




- 136 -

Hollon, C. J. and Chesser, R. J. (1976). The relationship of personal influence dissonance to

job tension, satisfaction and involvement. Academy of Management Journal, 19(2), 308-

314.

Homans, G. C. (1961). Social behaviour: Its elementary forms. New York: Harcourt, Brace,

& World. In Rusbult, C. E., & Farrell, D. (1983). A longitudinal test of the investment

model: The impact on job satisfaction, job commitment, and turnover of variations in

rewards, costs, alternatives, and investments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(3),

429-438.

House, R. J. and Wigdor, L. A. (1967). Herzberg's dual-factor theory of job satisfaction and

motivation: A review of the evidence and a criticism. Personnel Psychology, 20(4), 369-

389.

Houston, D. J. (2000). Public-service motivation: A multivariate test. Journal of Public

Administration Research & Theory (Transaction), 10(4), 713.

Hull, C. L. (1952). A behavior system. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Hunt, J. W. and Saul, P. N. (1975). The relationship of age, tenure, and job satisfaction in

males and females. Academy of Management Journal, 18(4), 690-702.

Huseman, R. C., Hatfield, J. D. and Miles, E. W. (1987). A new perspective on equity theory:

The equity sensitivity construct. Academy of Management Review, 12(2), 222.

Iaffaldano, M. T. and Muchinsky, P. M. (1985). Job satisfaction and job performance: A

meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 97(2), 251-273.

Igalens, J. and Roussel, P. (1999). A study of the relationships between compensation

package, work motivation and job satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Behavior,

20(7), 1003.

Ilardi, B. C., Leone, D., Kasser, T. and Ryan, R. M. (1993). Employee and supervisor ratings

of motivation: Main effects and discrepancies associated with job satisfaction and



- 137 -

adjustment in a factory setting. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23(21), 1789-

1805.

Isaac, R. G., Zerbe, W. J. and Pitt, D. C. (2001). Leadership and motivation: The effective

application of expectancy theory. Journal of Managerial Issues, 13(2), 212.

Jackson, S. E. and Schuler, R. S. (1985). A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research

on role ambiguity and role conflict in work. Organizational Behavior & Human

Decision Processes, 36(1), 16.

James, D. (1998). Stress takes its toll at call centers, Business Review Weekly, 20, 87-79. In

Tuten, T. L. and Neidermeyer, P. E. (2004). Performance, satisfaction and turnover in

call centers: The effects of stress and optimism. Journal of Business Research, 57(1),

26-34.

Jones, E.E., & Davis, K. E., (1965). From Acts to Dispositions: The Attribution Process in

Person Perception. In Leonard Berkowitz, ed., Advances in Experimental Social

Psychology, Vol. 2 (New York: Academic Press, 1965), p. 225.

Jordan, P. C. (1986). Effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation: A field experiment.

Academy of Management Journal, 29(2), 405-412.

Judge, T. A., Thoresen, C. J., Bono, J. E. and Patton, G. K. (2001). The job satisfaction-job

performance relationship: A qualitative and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin,

127(3), 376-407.

Judge, T. A. and Watanabe, S. (1993). Another look at the job satisfaction-life satisfaction

relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(6), 939-948.

Kacmar, K. M. and Ferris, G. R. (1989). Theoretical and methodological considerations in the

age-job satisfaction relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(2), 201-207.



- 138 -

Kahle, L. R. (1980). Stimulus condition self-selection by males in the interaction of locus of

control and skill-chance situations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 38(1),

50-56.

Kanungo, R. N. (1979). The concepts of alienation and involvement revisited. Psychological

Bulletin, 86(1), 119-138.

Kaplan, S. E., Reckers, P. M. J. and Reynolds, K. D. (1986). An application of attribution and

equity theories to tax evasion behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 7(4), 461.

Karl, K. A. and Sutton, C. L. (1998). Job values in today's workforce: A comparison of public

and private sector employees. Public Personnel Management, 27(4), 515.

Karniol, R. and Ross, M. (1977). The effect of performance relevant and performance

irrelevant rewards on children’s intrinsic motivation. Child Development, 48, 482-487.

In Sansone, C. and Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The

search for optimal motivation and performance. San Diego: Academic Press.

Katzell, R. A., Yankelovich, D., Fein, M., Ornati, O. A. and Nash, A. (1975). Improving

productivity and job satisfaction. Organizational Dynamics, 4(1), 69-80.

Kavanaugh, J., Duffy, J. A. and Lilly, J. (2006). The relationship between job satisfaction and

demographic variables for healthcare professionals. Management Research News, 29(6),

304-325.

Kelley, H. H. (1967) Attribution theory in social psychology. In Levine, D. (1967). Nebraska

symposium on motivation. University of Nebraska Press, 15, 192-238. In Kaplan, S. E.,

Reckers, P. M. J. and Reynolds, K. D. (1986). An application of attribution and equity

theories to tax evasion behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology, 7(4), 461.

Kelley, H. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28(2), 107-

128.



- 139 -

Kelley, H. H. and Michela, J. L. (1980). Attribution theory and research. Annual Review of

Psychology, 31, 457-501.

Kelley, H. H. and Thibaut, J. (1978). Interpersonal relations: A theory of interdependence.

New York: Wiley. In Rusbult, C. E. and Farrell, D. (1983). A longitudinal test of the

investment model: The impact on job satisfaction, job commitment, and turnover of

variations in rewards, costs, alternatives, and investments. Journal of Applied

Psychology, 68(3), 429-438.

Khojasteh, M. (1993). Motivating the private vs. public sector managers. Public Personnel


King, J. (2003). Call centre makeovers are still not happening. Personnel Today, 2-2.

Kinicki, A. and Kreitner, R. (2003). Organizational behavior: Key concepts, skills and best

practices (international ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Kinicki, A., McKee-Ryan, F. M., Schriesheim, C. A. and Carson, K. P. (2002). Assessing the

construct validity of the Job Descriptive Index: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of


Klein, H. J. (1991). Further evidence on the relationship between goal setting and expectancy

theories. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 49(2), 230.

Knoop, R. (1995). Relationships among job involvement, job satisfaction, and organizational

commitment for nurses. Journal of Psychology, 129(6), 643.

Konopaske, R. and Werner, S. (2002). Equity in non-North American contexts adapting

equity theory to the new global business environment. Human Resource Management

Review, 12(3), 405.

Kopelman, R. E. (1976). Organizational control system responsiveness, expectancy theory

constructs, and work motivation: Some interrelations and causal connections. Personnel

Psychology, 29(2), 205-250.



- 140 -

Kopelman, R. E. and Thompson, P. H. (1976). Boundary conditions for expectancy theory

predictions of work motivation and job performance. Academy of Management Journal,

19(2), 237-258.

Kopf, J. M. (1992). Force versus force, or force and choice? An integrative model of

expectancy theory. Human Resource Management Review, 2(2), 131.

Lambert, S. J. (1991). The combined effects of job and family characteristics on the job

satisfaction, job involvement, and intrinsic motivation of men and women workers.

Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12(4), 341-363.

LaPorte, R. E. and Nath, R. (1976). Role of performance goals in prose learning. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 68(3), 260-264.

Leach, F. J. and Westbrook, J. D. (2000). Motivation and job satisfaction in one government

research and development environment. Engineering Management Journal, 12(4), 3.

Leete, L. (2000). Wage equity and employee motivation in nonprofit and for-profit

organizations. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 43(4), 424.

Leonard, N. H., Beauvais, L. L. and Scholl, R. W. (1999). Work motivation: The

incorporation of self-concept-based processes. Human Relations, 52(8), 969-998.

Lepper, M. R., Greene, D. and Nisbett, R. E. (1973). Undermining children's intrinsic interest

with extrinsic reward: A test of the 'overjustification' hypothesis. Journal of Personality

and Social Psychology, 28(1), 129-137.

Lepper, M. R and Henderlong, J. in Sansone, C. and Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance. San Diego:

Academic Press.



- 141 -

Lepper, M. R., Henderlong, J. and Gingras, I. (1999). Understanding the effects of extrinsic

rewards on intrinsic motivation--Uses and abuses of meta-anlysis: Comment on Deci,

Koestner, and Ryan (1999). Psychological Bulletin, 125(6), 669-676.

Lewig, K. A. and Dollard, M. F. (2003). Emotional dissonance, emotional exhaustion and job

satisfaction in call centre workers. European Journal of Work & Organizational

Psychology, 12(4), 366-392.

Lewis, G. B. and Frank, S. A. (2002). Who wants to work for the government? Public

Administration Review, 62(4), 395-404.

Lincoln, J. R. and Kalleberg, A. L. (1996). Commitment, quits, and work organization in

Japanese and U.S. plants. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 50(1), 39-59.

Lindenberg, S. (2001). Intrinsic Motivation in a New Light. Kyklos, 54(2/3).

Locke, E. A. (1968) .Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives. Organizational

Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 157-189. In Austin, J. T., & Bobko, P. (1985).

Goal-setting theory: Unexplored areas and future research needs. Journal of

Occupational Psychology, 58(4), 289-308.


Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 157-189. In Kinicki, A., & Kreitner, R. (2003).

Organizational behavior: Key concepts, skills and best practices (international ed.).

New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.


Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 157-189. In Locke, E. A. (1978). The ubiquity

of the technique of goal setting in theories of and approaches to employee motivation.

Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 594.


Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 157-189. In Locke, E. A. (2004). Guest editor's



- 142 -

introduction: Goal-setting theory and its applications to the world of business.

Academy of Management Executive, 18(4), 124-125.


Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 157-189. In Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P.

(2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-

year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717.


Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 157-189. In Locke, E. A., Shaw, K. N., Saari,

L. M., & Latham, G. P. (1981). Goal setting and task performance: 1969-1980.



Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 157-189. In Robbins, S. P. (2003). Essentials of

organizational behavior (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson

Education, Inc.

Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In Dunette, M. D. (1976).

Handbook of industrial psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1297-1349. In Perrewé, P.

L., Hochwarter, W. A. and Kiewitz, C. (1999). Value attainment: An explanation for the

negative effects of work-family conflict on job and life satisfaction. Journal of

Occupational Health Psychology, 4(4), 318-326.

Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In Dunette, M. D. (1976).

Handbook of industrial psychology. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1297-1349. In Tietjen, M.

A. and Myers, R. M. (1998). Motivation and job satisfaction. Management Decision,

36(3/4), 226.

Locke, E. A. (1978). The ubiquity of the technique of goal setting in theories of and

approaches to employee motivation. Academy of Management Review, 3(3), 594.

Locke, E. A. (2004). Guest editor's introduction: Goal-setting theory and its applications to

the world of business. Academy of Management Executive, 18(4), 124-125.



- 143 -

Locke, E. A., & Bryan, J. F. (1969). The directing function of goals in task performance.

Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4, 35-42. In Locke, E. A., Shaw,

K. N., Saari, L. M., & Latham, G. P. (1981). Goal setting and task performance: 1969-

1980. Psychological Bulletin, 90(1), 125-152.

Locke, E. A. and Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting

and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey. American Psychologist, 57(9), 705-717.

Locke, E. A., Shaw, K. N., Saari, L. M. and Latham, G. P. (1981). Goal setting and task

performance: 1969-1980. Psychological Bulletin, 90(1), 125-152.

Lodahl, T. and Kejner, M. (1965). The definition and measurement of job involvement.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, 24-33. In Chiu, S.-F. and Tsai, M.-C. (2006).

Relationships among burnout, job involvement, and organizational citizenship behavior.

Journal of Psychology, 140(6), 517-530.

Lodahl, T. and Kejner, M. (1965). The definition and measurement of job involvement.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 49, 24-33. In Kanungo, R. N. (1979). The concepts of

alienation and involvement revisited. Psychological Bulletin, 86(1), 119-138.

London, M. and Klimoski, R. J. (1975). A study of perceived job complexity. Personnel


Lu, L. (1999). Work motivation, job stress and employees' well-being. Journal of Applied

Management Studies, 8(1), 61.

Lykken, D. and Tellegen, A. (1996). Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon. Psychological

Science, 7(3), 186-189.

Maidani, E. A. (1991). Comparative study of Herzberg's two-factor theory of job satisfaction

among public and private. Public Personnel Management, 20(4), 441.



- 144 -

Mangione, T. W. and Quinn, R. P. (1975). Job satisfaction, counterproductive behavior, and

drug use at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(1), 114-116.

Marquez, J. (2006). Union cites high stress at call centers in India. Workforce Management,

85(21), 14-14.

Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, vol. 50, 370-96.

Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row. In Robbins, S. P.

(2003). Essentials of organizational behavior (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New

Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Mayo, E. (1933). The human problems of an industrial civilization. New York: MacMillan.

McClave, J. T., Benson, P. G. and Sincich, T. (1998). Statistics for business and economics

(seventh ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

McClelland, D. C. (1975). Power: The inner experience. New York: Irvington.

McEvoy, G. M. and Cascio, W. F. (1985). Strategies for reducing employee turnover: A

meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(2), 342-353.

McGregor, D.M. (1960). The human side of enterprise. McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York,

New York. In Burns, J. E. (1967). Theory X. Industrial Management, p. 1.


New York. In Carson, C. M. (2005). A historical view of Douglas McGregor's theory

Y. Management Decision, 43(3), 450-460.


New York. In Kinicki, A., & Kreitner, R. (2003). Organizational behavior: Key

concepts, skills and best practices (international ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill

Companies, Inc.



- 145 -


New York. In Meeker, S. M. E. (1982). Theory Y: Another look. Southern Review of

Public Administration, 5(4), 500-515.


New York. In Robbins, S. P. (2003). Essentials of organizational behavior (7th ed.).

Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.


New York. In Schein, E. H. (1975). In defense of theory Y. Organizational Dynamics,

4(1), 17-30.

McNeese-Smith, D. K. (1999). The relationship between managerial motivation, leadership,

nurse outcomes and patient. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(2), 243.

McNeese-Smith, D. K. (2001). A nursing shortage: Building organizational commitment

among nurses. Journal of Healthcare Management, 46(3), 173.

Meeker, S. M. E. (1982). Theory Y: Another look. Southern Review of Public Administration,

5(4), 500-515.

Meng, R. (1990). The relationship between unions and job satisfaction. Applied Economics,

22(12), 1635.

Mento, A. J., Locke, E. A. and Klein, H. J. (1992). Relationship of goal level to valence and

instrumentality. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(4), 395-405.

Miles, E. W., Patrick, S. L. and King, W. C. (1996). Job level as a systemic variable in

predicting the relationship between supervisory communication and job satisfaction.

Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 69(3), 277-292.

Miles, R. H. (1975). An empirical test of causal inference between role perceptions of conflict

and ambiguity and various personal outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(3),

334-339.



- 146 -

Miles, R. H. and Petty, M. M. (1975). Relationships between role clarity, need for clarity, and

job tension and satisfaction for supervisory and nonsupervisory roles. Academy of

Management Journal, 18(4), 877-883.

Miller, D. T. (1976). Ego involvement and attributions for success and failure. Journal of


Miller, D. T. and Ross, M. (1975). Self-serving biases in the attribution of causality: Fact or

fiction? Psychological Bulletin, 82(2), 213-225.

Miller, H. E. and Terborg, J. R. (1979). Job attitudes of part-time and full-time employees.


Money matters. (2006). Occupational Health, 58(11), 14-15.

Morris, J. A. and Feldman, D. C. (1996). The dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of

emotional labor. Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 986-1010.

Mueller, C. W. and Price, J. L. (1990). Economic, psychological, and sociological

determinants of voluntary turnover. Journal of Behavioral Economics, 19(3), 321.

Near, J. P., Rice, R. W. and Hunt, R. G. (1978). Work and extra-work correlates of life and

job satisfaction. Academy of Management Journal, 21(2), 248-264.

O'Reilly, C. A. and Caldwell, D. F. (1980). Job choice: The impact of intrinsic and extrinsic

factors on subsequent satisfaction and commitment. Journal of Applied Psychology,

65(5), 559-565.

Organ, D. W. (1990). The motivational basis of organizational citizenship behavior. Research

in Organizational Behavior, 12, 43.



- 147 -

Organ, D. W. and Ryan, K. (1995). A meta-analytic review of attitudinal and dispositional

predictors of organizational citizenship behavior. Personnel Psychology, 48(4), 775-

802.

.Oshikawa, S. (1969). Can cognitive dissonance theory explain consumer behavior? Journal

of Marketing, 33(4).

Ouchi, W.G. (1981). Theory Z. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley

Perrewé, P. L., Hochwarter, W. A. and Kiewitz, C. (1999). Value attainment: An explanation

for the negative effects of work-family conflict on job and life satisfaction. Journal of

Occupational Health Psychology, 4(4), 318-326.

Peters, L. H. and O'Connor, E. J. (1980). Situational constraints and work outcomes: The

influences of a frequently overlooked construct. Academy of Management Review, 5(3),

391.

Perry, J. L. (2000). Bringing society in: Toward a theory of public-service motivation.

Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory (Transaction), 10(2), 471.

Perry, J. L. and Wise, L. R. (1990). The motivational bases of public service. Public

Administration Review, 50(3), 367-373.

Petty, M. M., McGee, G. W. and Cavender, J. W. (1984). A meta-analysis of the relationships

between individual job satisfaction and individual performance. Academy of


Phillips, J. S. and Freedman, S. M. (1984). Situational performance constraints and task

characteristics: Their relationship to motivation and satisfaction. Journal of

Management, 10(3), 321-331.

Pitcher, G. (2006). Nursing union claims low pay proves society is still sexist. Personnel

Today, 2-2.



- 148 -

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Paine, J. B. and Bachrach, D. G. (2000). Organizational

citizenship behaviors: A critical review of the theoretical and empirical literature and

suggestions for future research. Journal of Management, 26(3), 513-563.

Porac, J. F., Ferris, G. R. and Fedor, D. B. (1983). Causal attributions, affect, and expectations

for a day's work performance. Academy of Management Journal, 26(2), 285-296.

Porter, L. W. and Steers, R. M. (1973). Organizational, work, and personal factors in

employee turnover and absenteeism. Psychological Bulletin, 80(2), 151-176.

Price, J. L. and Mueller, C. W. (1981). A causal model of turnover for nurses. Academy of


Pritchard, R. D., Campbell, K. M. and Campbell, D. J. (1977). Effects of extrinsic financial

rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62(1), 9-15.

Quick, J. C. and Quick, J. D. (1984). Organizational stress and preventive management. New

York: McGraw-Hill. In Broadbridge, A. (2002). Retail managers: their work stressors

and coping strategies. Journal of Retailing & Consumer Services, 9(3), 173.

Rainey, H. G. and Bozeman, B. (2000). Comparing public and private organizations:

Empirical research and the power of the a priori. Journal of Public Administration

Research & Theory (Transaction), 10(2), 447.

Rayton, B. A. (2006). Examining the interconnection of job satisfaction and organizational

commitment: an application of the bivariate probit model. International Journal of

Human Resource Management, 17(1), 139-154.

Reinharth, L. and Wahba, M. A. (1975). Expectancy theory as a predictor of work motivation,

effort expenditure, and job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 18(3), 520-

537.



- 149 -

Reiss, S. and Sushinsky, L. W. (1975). Overjustification, competing responses, and the

acquisition of intrinsic interest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(6),

1116-1125.

Reiss, S. and Sushinsky, L. W. (1976). The competing response hypothesis of decreased play

effects: A reply to Lepper and Greene. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

33(2), 233-244.

Rice, R. W., Near, J. P. and Hunt, R. G. (1980). The job-satisfaction/ life-satisfaction

relationship: A review of empirical research. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 1(1),

37-64.

Robbins, S. P. (2003). Essentials of organizational behavior (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River,

New Jersey: Pearson Education, Inc.

Robie, C. R., Ryan, A. M., Schmeider, R. A., Parra, L. F. and Smith, P. C. (1998). The

relation between job level and job satisfaction. Group and Organization Commitment,

23(4). In Eskildsen, J. K., Kristensen, K. and Westlund, A. H. (2004). Work motivation

and job satisfaction in the Nordic countries. Employee Relations, 26(2), 122-136.

Robison, J. (2002). Does job satisfaction really improve with age? Gallup Poll Tuesday

Briefing, 1.

Rose, E. and Wright, G. (2005). Satisfaction and dimensions of control among call centre

customer service representatives. International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 16(1), 136-160.

Ross, L. (1977). The intuitive psychologist and his shortcomings. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),

Advances in experimental shortcomings. Experimental social psychology (Vol. 10).

New York: Academic Press. In Kahle, L. R. (1980). Stimulus condition self-selection

by males in the interaction of locus of control and skill-chance situations. Journal of




- 150 -

Rusbult, C. E. (1983). A longitudinal test of the investment model: The development (and

deterioration) of satisfaction and commitment in heterosexual involvements. Journal of


Rusbult, C. E. and Farrell, D. (1983). A longitudinal test of the investment model: The impact

on job satisfaction, job commitment, and turnover of variations in rewards, costs,

alternatives, and investments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(3), 429-438.

Rusbult, C. E., Johnson, D. J. and Morrow, G. D. (1986). Impact of couple patterns of

problem solving on distress and nondistress in dating relationships. Journal of


Rusbult, C. E., Verette, J., Whitney, G. A., Slovik, L. F. and Lipkus, I. (1991).

Accommodation processes in close relationships: Theory and preliminary empirical

evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(1), 53-78.

Ryan, R. M. (1982). Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of

cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(3), 450-

461.

Ryan, R. M. and Deci, E. L. (2000a). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions

and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.

Ryan, R. M. and Deci, E. L. (2000b). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of

intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1),

68-78.

Ryan, R. M. and Grolnick, W. S. (1986). Origins and pawns in the classroom: Self-report and

projective assessments of individual differences in children's perceptions. Journal of


Ryan, R. M., Mims, V. and Koestner, R. (1983). Relation of reward contingency and

interpersonal context to intrinsic motivation: A review and test using cognitive

evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45(4), 736-750.



- 151 -

Salancik, G. R. and Pfeffer, J. (1977). An examination of need-satisfaction models of job

attitudes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 22(3), 427.

Sansone, C. and Harackiewicz, J. M. (1998). 'Reality' is complicated. American Psychologist,

53(6), 673-674.

Sansone, C. and Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The search

for optimal motivation and performance. San Diego: Academic Press.

Sansone, C. and Smith, J. L. in Sansone, C. and Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance. San Diego:

Academic Press.

Sargiacomo, M. (2002). Benchmarking in Italy: The first case study on personnel motivation

and satisfaction in a health business. Total Quality Management, 13(4), 489-505.

Savery, L. K. (1989). Job satisfaction and nurses. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 4(5),

11.

Schein, E. H. (1975). In defense of theory Y. Organizational Dynamics, 4(1), 17-30.

Schlenker, B. R. and Miller, R. S. (1977). Egocentrism in groups: Self-serving biases or

logical information processing? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 35(10),

755-764.

Schneider, D. S. and Vaught, B. C. (1993). A comparison of job satisfaction between public

and private sector managers. Public Administration Quarterly, 17(1), 68-83.

Schuster, J. R., Colletti, J. A. and Knowles Jr, L. (1973). The relationship between

perceptions concerning magnitudes of pay and the perceived utility of pay: Public and

private organizations compared. Organizational Behavior & Human Performance,

9(1), 110-119.



- 152 -

Scott, K. D. and Taylor, G. S. (1985). An examination of conflicting findings on the

relationship between job satisfaction and absenteeism: A meta-analysis. Academy of


Shah, J. Y. and Kruglanski, A. W. in Sansone, C. and Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Intrinsic

and extrinsic motivation: The search for optimal motivation and performance. San

Diego: Academic Press.

Sharma, R. D. and Jyoti, J. (2006). Job satisfaction among school teachers. IIMB Management

Review, 18(4), 349-363.

Shipley, D. and Kiely, J. (1988). Motivation and dissatisfaction of industrial salespeople-How

relevant is Herzberg's theory? European Journal of Marketing, 22(1), 17-30.

Simon, D. and Holyoak, K. J. (2002). Structural dynamics of cognition: From consistency

theories to constraint satisfaction. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 6(4), 283-

294.

Skinner, B. F. (1938) The behavior of organisms. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Sloane, P. J. and Williams, H. (2000). Job satisfaction, comparison earnings, and gender.

Labour, 14(3), 473-501.

Snyder, M. L., Stephan, W. G. and Rosenfield, D. (1976). Egotism and attribution. Journal of


Solomon, E. E. (1986). Private and public sector managers: An empirical investigation of job

characteristics and organizational climate. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(2), 247-

259.

Sousa-Poza and Sousa-Poza. (2000). Well-being at work: a cross-national analysis of the

levels and determinants of job satisfaction. Journal of Socio-Economics, 29(6), 517.



- 153 -

Sousa-Poza and Sousa-Poza. (2003). Gender differences in job satisfaction in Great Britain,

1991-2000: permanent or transitory? Applied Economics Letters, 10(11), 691.

Sparks, S. A., Corcoran, K. J., Nabors, L. A. and Hovanitz, C. A. (2005). Job satisfaction and

subjective well-being in a sample of nurses. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,

35(5), 922-938.

Staw, B. M., Sutton, R. I. and Pelled, L. H. (1994). Employee positive emotion and favorable

outcomes at the workplace. Organization Science, 5(1), 51.

Steele, C. M. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self.

In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 261-

302). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Steltzer, T. M., Woods, A. and Gasda, K. A. (2003). Salary survey 2003. Nursing

Management, 34(7), 28-32.

Study: Super Bowl affects worker absenteeism the day after the game. (2005). New Orleans

City Business (LA): Dolan Media.

Stuller, J. (1999). Making call-centre voices smile: A business case for better training.

Training, 36, 26-32. In Tuten, T. L. and Neidermeyer, P. E. (2004). Performance,

satisfaction and turnover in call centers: The effects of stress and optimism. Journal of

Business Research, 57(1), 26-34.

Survey trio find nurses' pay is on the rise. (2006). Report on Salary Surveys, 6(4), 9-9.

Tackling absenteeism in the workplace. (2006). Management Services, 50(3), 44-45.

Tait, M., Padgett, M. Y. and Baldwin, T. T. (1989). Job and life satisfaction: A reevaluation

of the strength of the relationship and gender effects as a function of the date of the

study. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74(3), 502-507.



- 154 -

Tang, S.-H. and Hall, V. C. (1995). The overjustification effect: A meta-analysis. Applied

Cognitive Psychology, 9, 365-404. In Henderlong, J. and Lepper, M. R. (2002). The

effects of praise on children's intrinsic motivation: A review and synthesis.


Taylor, F. W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Harper.

Taylor, P. and Bain, P. (1999). `An assembly line in the head': Work and employee relations

in the call centre. Industrial Relations Journal, 30(2), 101.

Tetrick, L. E. and LaRocco, J. M. (1987). Understanding, prediction, and control as

moderators of the relationships between perceived stress, satisfaction, and psychological

well-being. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(4), 538-543.

Tett, R. P. and Meyer, J. P. (1993). Job satisfaction, organizational commitment, turnover

intention, and turnover: Path analyses based on meta-analytic findings. Personnel

Psychology, 46(2), 259-293.

Thomas, L. T. and Ganster, D. C. (1995). Impact of family-supportive work variables on

work-family conflict and strain: A control perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology,

80(1), 6-15.

Thomas, K. W. (2000). Intrinsic Motivation And How It Works. Training, 37(10), 130.

Tietjen, M. A. and Myers, R. M. (1998). Motivation and job satisfaction. Management

Decision, 36(3/4), 226.

Timmreck, T. C. (2001). Managing motivation and developing job satisfaction in the health

care work environment. Health Care Manager, 20(1), 42-58.

Tolman, E. C. (1932). Purposeful behavior in animals and men. New York: Century. In Klein,

H. J. (1991). Further evidence on the relationship between goal setting and expectancy

theories. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 49(2), 230.



- 155 -

Trope, Y. (1975). Seeking information about one's ability as a determinant of choice among

tasks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(6), 1004-1013.

Tummers, G. E. R., Van Merode, G. G. and Landeweerd, J. A. (2006). Organizational

characteristics as predictors of nurses' psychological work reactions. Organization

Studies (01708406), 27(4), 559-584.

Tuten, T. L. and Neidermeyer, P. E. (2004). Performance, satisfaction and turnover in call

centers: The effects of stress and optimism. Journal of Business Research, 57(1), 26-34.

Ubaldi, A. (1997). Denmark's focus on employee motivation & education creates ideal call

centre environment. Direct Marketing, 59(12), 46.

Unscheduled absenteeism on the rise. (2005). Industrial Safety & Hygiene News, 39(12), 10-

10.

Van Dyne, L. and Ang, S. (1998). Organizational citizenship behavior of contingent workers

in Singapore. Academy of Management Journal, 41(6), 692-703.

Verespej, M. A. (2000). Stressed out. Industry Week, 249(4), 30.

Vieira, J. A. C. (2005). Skill mismatches and job satisfaction. Economics Letters, 89(1), 39-

47.

Vieira, J. A. C., Menezes, A. and Gabriel, P. (2005). Low pay, higher pay and job quality:

empirical evidence for Portugal. Applied Economics Letters, 12(8), 505-511.

Vroom, V. 1964. Work and Motivation. New York, NY: Wiley. In Ferris, K. R. (1977). A test

of the expectancy theory of motivation in an accounting environment. Accounting

Review, 52(3), 605.

Vroom, V. 1964. Work and Motivation. New York, NY: Wiley. In Isaac, R. G., Zerbe, W. J.,

& Pitt, D. C. (2001). Leadership and motivation: The effective application of

expectancy theory. Journal of Managerial Issues, 13(2), 212.



- 156 -

Vroom, V. 1964. Work and Motivation. New York, NY: Wiley. In Kinicki, A., & Kreitner, R.

(2003). Organizational behavior: Key concepts, skills and best practices (international

ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Vroom, V. 1964. Work and Motivation. New York, NY: Wiley. In Kopelman, R. E. (1976).

Organizational control system responsiveness, expectancy theory constructs, and work

motivation: Some interrelations and causal connections. Personnel Psychology, 29(2),

205-250.

Vroom, V. 1964. Work and Motivation. New York, NY: Wiley. In Kopf, J. M. (1992). Force

versus force, or force and choice? An integrative model of expectancy theory. Human

Resource Management Review, 2(2), 131.

Vroom, V. 1964. Work and Motivation. New York, NY: Wiley. In Reinharth, L., & Wahba,

M. A. (1975). Expectancy theory as a predictor of work motivation, effort

expenditure, and job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 18(3), 520-537.

Vroom, V. 1964. Work and Motivation. New York, NY: Wiley. In Robbins, S. P. (2003).

Essentials of organizational behavior (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey:

Pearson Education, Inc.

Vroom, V. 1964. Work and Motivation. New York, NY: Wiley. In Wahba, M. A., & House,

R. J. (1972). Expectancy theory in managerial motivation. Academy of Management

Proceedings, 69-70.

Wahba, M. A. and House, R. J. (1972). Expectancy theory in managerial motivation.

Academy of Management Proceedings, 69-70.

Wallace, C. M., Eagleson, G. and Waldersee, R. (2000). The sacrificial HR strategy in call

centers. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 11(2), 174.

Wanous, J. P. (1974). A causal-correlational analysis of the job satisfaction and performance

relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59(2), 139-144.



- 157 -

Wanous, J. P., Poland, T. D., Premack, S. L. and Davis, K. S. (1992). The effects of met

expectations on newcomer attitudes and behaviors: A review and meta-analysis. Journal

of Applied Psychology, 77(3), 288-297.

Ward, M. E. and Sloane, P. J. (2000). Non-pecuniary advantages versus pecuniary

disadvantages: Job satisfaction among male and female. Scottish Journal of Political

Economy, 47(3), 273.

Ward, M. E. and Sloane, P. J. (2001). Cohort effects and job satisfaction of academics.

Applied Economics Letters, 8(12), 787-791.

Warr, P. (1992). Age and occupational well-being. Psychology and Aging, 7(1), 37-45.

Wegge, J. r., van Dick, R., Fisher, G. K., Wecking, C. and Moltzen, K. (2006). Work

motivation, organisational identification, and well-being in call centre work. Work &

Stress, 20(1), 60-83.

Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 71(1), 3-25.

Weiss, W. H. (2002). Organizing for quality, productivity and job satisfaction. Supervision,

63(2), 13.

Weissenberg, P. and Gruenfeld, L. W. (1968). Relationship between job satisfaction and job

involvement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 52(6), 469-473.

Wernimont, P. F. (1966). Intrinsic and extrinsic factors in job satisfaction. Journal of Applied


Wiersma, U. J. (1992). The effects of extrinsic rewards in intrinsic motivation: A meta-

analysis. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 65(2), 101-114.

Wiley, D. L. (1987). The relationship between work/nonwork role conflict and job-related

outcomes: Some unanticipated findings. Journal of Management, 13(3), 467.



- 158 -

Williams, E. S., Konrad, T. R., Scheckler, W. E., Pathman, D. E., Linzer, M., McMurray, J.,

Gerrity, M. and Schwartz, M. (2000). The effects of job satisfaction and perceived stress

on the physical and mental health and withdraw intentions of physicians. Academy of

Management Proceedings, 1.

Witt, L. A. and Nye, L. G. (1992). Gender and the relationship between perceived fairness of

pay or promotion and job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(6), 910-917.

Wolf, M. G. (1970). Need gratification theory: A theoretical reformulation of job

satisfaction/dissatisfaction and job motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 54(1),

87-94.

Workman, M. (2003). Results from organizational development interventions in a technology

call centre. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 14(2), 215.

Wood, R., & Locke, E. (1990). Goal setting and strategy effects on complex tasks. In B. Staw

& L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 12, pp. 73–109).

Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. In Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a

practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey.


Workman, M. and Bommer, W. (2004). Redesigning computer call centre work: a

longitudinal field experiment. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25(3), 317-337.

Wortman, C. B., Costanzo, P. R. and Witt, T. R. (1973). Effect of anticipated performance on

the attributions of causality to self and others. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 27(3), 372-381.

Wright, B. E. (2001). Public sector work motivation: A review of the current literature model

and a revised conceptual model. Journal of Public Administration Research & Theory

(Transaction), 11(4), 559.



- 159 -

Yoon, J. and Thye, S. R. (2002). A dual process model of organizational commitment: Job

satisfaction and organizational support. Work & Occupations, 29(1), 97.

Zawacki, R. A. and Shahan, R. (1995). Who has higher job satisfaction: Male or female

nurses? Nursing Management, 26(1), 54-55.

Zhong, M., Siong, B., Mellor, D., Moore, K. A. and Firth, L. (2006). Predicting intention to

quit in the call centre industry: does the retail model fit? Journal of Managerial

Psychology, 21(3), 231-243.

- 160 -

Appendix A

Factor analyses

Component Matrix a

,564 -,146

,581 -,308

,634 8,440E-02

,591 -,442

,754 -,117

,563 -,122

,524 ,639

,541 ,537

1. I feel a sense of

personal satisfaction

when I do this job well

2. My opinion of myself

goes down when I do this

job badly

5. I take pride in doing the

work as well as I can

7. I feel unhappy when

my work is not up to my

usual standard

10. I like to look back on

the day's work with a

sense of a job well done

11. I try to think of ways of

doing my job effectively

12. What matters most to

me is enjoying what I do

15. It is important to me

that my work is

challenging and

interesting

1 2

Component

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.

2 components extracted.a.

Component Matrix a

,576 -,268

,668 ,239

,352 ,665

,711 -8,62E-02

,609 -,398

,484 -,438

,611 ,451

3. I prefer having

someone set clear goals

for me in my work

4. To me, success

means doing better than

other people

6. I am less concerned

with what work I do than

what I get for it

8. I am strongly motivated

by the rewards I can earn

9. I am strongly motivated

by the recognition I can

earn from other people

13. I am worried that I do

not meet my targets

14. If I would get more

salary, I would work

harder

1 2

Component



Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation Appendix A


- 161 -

Component Matrixa

,759 -7,58E-02

,626 -,408

,685 -,307

,638 -2,91E-03

,723 -3,63E-02

,414 ,680

,465 ,580

16. I am satisfied with

my job

17. My colleagues are

great to work with

18. I can get along nicely

with my supervisors

19. The job security is

high in this organization

20. I am glad to work at

this company

21. I am satisfied with

the salary I receive

Stress (satisfaction)

reverse scaled =>

recomputed

1 2

Component



Component Matrixa

,579 -,643

,797 -,167

,646 ,323

,450 ,659

24. I will put as

much into my job as

I expect to get from it

25. If I work hard, I

do well

26. If I do well, I will

be rewarded

27. If I will receive a

reward, I will like the

reward

1 2

Component



Component Matrixa

,808

,808

28. I like to set difficult

goals for myself

29. When the company

sets goals I am more

motivated to perform

1

Compone

nt





- 162 -

Component Matrix a

,815 9,682E-02

,819 1,142E-02

-8,87E-02 ,995

30. When something

goes wrong at work, I

usually contribute it to

external factors

31. When things go right

at work, it is because I

did something right

32. If you would receive

less salary, would you

remain at the same job?

1 2

Component



Component Matrixa

,784

,784

33. Supervisors think of

us as lazy, irresponsible,

uncreative and

unambitious

34. I only work for the

salary and the rewards I

receive

1

Compone

nt



Component Matrix a

,816

,816

35. I often disagree

with things that

happen at work

36. I sometimes I

have to do things that

are unethical to me

1

Compone

nt



Cronbach’s Alphas

R E L I A B I L I T Y A N A L Y S I S - S C A L E (A L P H A)

1. INTMOT_1 1. I feel a sense of personal satisfact 2. INTMOT_2 2. My opinion of myself goes down when

3. INTMOT_3 5. I take pride in doing the work as we 4. INTMOT_4 7. I feel unhappy when my work is not u

5. INTMOT_5 10. I like to look back on the day's wo

6. INTMOT_6 11. I try to think of ways of doing my

7. INTMOT_7 12. What matters most to me is enjoying

8. INTMOT_8 15. It is important to me that my work



- 163 -

Reliability Coefficients

N of Cases = 439,0 N of Items = 8

Alpha = ,7239


1. EXTMOT_1 3. I prefer having someone set clear go

2. EXTMOT_2 4. To me, success means doing better th

3. EXTMOT_3 6. I am less concerned with what work I

4. EXTMOT_4 8. I am strongly motivated by the rewar

5. EXTMOT_5 9. I am strongly motivated by the recog

6. EXTMOT_6 13. I am worried that I do not meet my 7. EXTMOT_7 14. If I would get more salary, I would



Alpha = ,6702


1. SATGEN_1 16. I am satisfied with my job

2. SATCOL_1 17. My colleagues are great to work wit

3. SATBOS_1 18. I can get along nicely with my supe

4. SATSEC_1 19. The job security is high in this or

5. SATFIR_1 20. I am glad to work at this company

6. SATPAY_1 21. I am satisfied with the salary I re 7. SATSTR_A Stress (satisfaction) reverse scaled =>



Alpha = ,7131


1. MOTEXP_1 24. I will put as much into my job as I

2. MOTEXP_2 25. If I work hard, I do well 3. MOTEXP_3 26. If I do well, I will be rewarded





- 164 -

Alpha = ,4970


1. MOTGOA_1 28. I like to set difficult goals for m

2. MOTGOA_2 29. When the company sets goals I am mo



Alpha = ,4673


1. MOTATT_1 30. When something goes wrong at work, 2. MOTATT_2 31. When things go right at work, it is



Alpha = ,5061


1. MOTTHX_1 33. Supervisors think of us as lazy, ir

2. MOTTHX_2 34. I only work for the salary and the



Alpha = ,3729


1. MOTCOG_1 35. I often disagree with things that h

2. MOTCOG_2 36. I sometimes I have to do things tha



Alpha = ,4966



- 165 -

Tests for independence

Coefficientsa

1,832 ,126 14,486 ,000

,241 ,056 ,229 4,269 ,000

5,174E-02 ,060 ,043 ,863 ,389

1,791E-02 ,031 ,036 ,574 ,566

4,746E-02 ,026 ,093 1,827 ,068

3,017E-02 ,030 ,068 1,020 ,308

-4,69E-02 ,075 -,044 -,626 ,532

6,368E-02 ,076 ,061 ,839 ,402

(Constant)

GROUP

Dummy variable gender

Dummy variable age

Dummy variable

educational background

Dummy variable tenure

Dummy variable full

time/part time contract

Dummy variable full

time/part time job

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

Dependent Variable: Computed sat. (total fact. sat. incl reverse stress / total numb. sat.

questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

1,428 ,098 14,500 ,000

,231 ,044 ,276 5,256 ,000

,132 ,047 ,137 2,819 ,005

-9,12E-03 ,024 -,023 -,375 ,708

6,715E-03 ,020 ,017 ,332 ,740

3,380E-02 ,023 ,095 1,468 ,143

3,144E-02 ,058 ,037 ,539 ,590

5,380E-02 ,059 ,064 ,910 ,363

(Constant)

GROUP


Dummy variable age

Dummy variable



Dummy variable full


Dummy variable full

time/part time job

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

Dependent Variable: Computed intr. motiv. (sum of intr. mot. factors / total numb. of intr. mot.

questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

3,810 ,117 32,515 ,000

-,509 ,052 -,460 -9,724 ,000

-,104 ,056 -,082 -1,864 ,063

1,527E-02 ,029 ,029 ,528 ,598

1,389E-02 ,024 ,026 ,577 ,564

3,738E-02 ,027 ,080 1,364 ,173

1,821E-02 ,069 ,016 ,262 ,793

2,144E-02 ,070 ,019 ,305 ,761

(Constant)

GROUP


Dummy variable age

Dummy variable



Dummy variable full


Dummy variable full

time/part time job

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

Dependent Variable: Computed extr. mot. (sum extri. mot. factors / total numb. extr. mot.

questions)

a.



- 166 -

Tests for normality

Computed intr. motiv. (sum of intr. mot. factors / total numb. of intr.

4,50

4,00

3,50

3,00

2,50

2,00

1,50

1,00

300

200

100

0

Std. Dev = ,42

Mean = 1,91

N = 439,00

Computed extr. mot. (sum extri. mot. factors / total numb. extr. mot. qu

4,504,25

4,003,75

3,503,25

3,002,75

2,502,25

2,001,75

1,501,25

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Std. Dev = ,55

Mean = 3,18

N = 439,00

Computed sat. (total fact. sat. incl reverse stress / total numb. sat. q

4,003,75

3,503,25

3,002,75

2,502,25

2,001,75

1,501,25

1,00

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Std. Dev = ,52

Mean = 2,39

N = 439,00



- 167 -

Descriptive Statistics

439 1,00 4,38 1,9061 ,41806 ,568 ,117 2,480 ,233

439 1,29 4,57 3,1761 ,55265 -,096 ,117 ,014 ,233

439 1,00 4,14 2,3876 ,52161 ,560 ,117 1,131 ,233

439


(sum of intr. mot.

factors / total numb. of

intr. mot. questions)

Computed extr. mot.

(sum extri. mot.

factors / total numb.

extr. mot. questions)

Computed sat. (total

fact. sat. incl reverse

stress / total numb.

sat. questions)

Valid N (listwise)

Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Statistic Std. Error Statistic Std. Error

N Minimum Maximum Mean Std.

DeviationSkewness Kurtosis

Normal Q-Q Plot of Computed intr. motiv. (sum of intr. mot. factors / to

Observed Value

4,54,03,53,02,52,01,51,0,5

Expected Normal Value

3,5

3,0

2,5

2,0

1,5

1,0

,5

Normal Q-Q Plot of Computed extr. mot. (sum extri. mot. factors / total

Observed Value

54321


5,0

4,5

4,0

3,5

3,0

2,5

2,0

1,5



- 168 -

Normal Q-Q Plot of Computed sat. (total fact. sat. incl reverse stress /

Observed Value

4,54,03,53,02,52,01,51,0,5


4,0

3,5

3,0

2,5

2,0

1,5

1,0

,5

Multicollinearity tests

Coefficientsa

1,963 ,271 7,234 ,000

,364 ,056 ,292 6,486 ,000 ,739 1,354

2,090E-03 ,048 ,002 ,043 ,965 ,573 1,744

8,052E-02 ,051 ,077 1,591 ,112 ,636 1,573

-5,68E-02 ,025 -,100 -2,296 ,022 ,795 1,259

1,404E-02 ,013 ,053 1,099 ,272 ,654 1,530

3,998E-03 ,027 ,006 ,147 ,884 ,897 1,115

-1,43E-02 ,017 -,038 -,856 ,393 ,743 1,346

1,256E-02 ,018 ,030 ,707 ,480 ,826 1,211

,125 ,020 ,268 6,121 ,000 ,782 1,279

-2,23E-02 ,017 -,059 -1,295 ,196 ,716 1,396

-6,87E-02 ,014 -,199 -4,859 ,000 ,893 1,120

3,792E-02 ,026 ,064 1,475 ,141 ,803 1,246

-6,47E-02 ,027 -,100 -2,424 ,016 ,880 1,136

(Constant)


(sum of intr. mot. factors /

total numb. of intr. mot.

questions)

Computed extr. mot. (sum

extri. mot. factors / total

numb. extr. mot.

questions)

GROUP

Construct equity theory

(comparison: q 23)

Construct 1 expectancy

theory (combined = effort:

q 24, 25 and 26)


theory (reward

receivement: q 27)

Construct goal setting

theory (combined: q 28

and 29)

Construct 1 attribution

theory (combined =

contribution: q 30 and 31)


theory (salary: q 32)

Construct theory X and Y

(combined: q 33 and 34)

Construct cognitive

dissonance theory


Construct investment

model (change job: q 37)

Construct cognitive

evaluation theory (target

increase: q 38)

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig. Tolerance VIF

Collinearity Statistics

Dependent Variable: Computed sat. (total fact. sat. incl reverse stress / total numb. sat. questions)a.

- 169 -

Appendix B

Hypothesis 1

Independent Samples Test

2,611 ,107 -5,872 437 ,000 -,376 ,0641 -,5023 -,2504

-5,803 396,7 ,000 -,376 ,0648 -,5038 -,2488

1,076 ,300 -4,302 437 ,000 -,425 ,0987 -,6187 -,2307

-4,295 428,2 ,000 -,425 ,0989 -,6191 -,2303

,249 ,618 -,984 437 ,326 -,060 ,0606 -,1788 ,0595

-,979 420,2 ,328 -,060 ,0609 -,1794 ,0601

8,205 ,004 -2,491 437 ,013 -,180 ,0722 -,3218 -,0379

-2,478 420,3 ,014 -,180 ,0726 -,3225 -,0372

4,988 ,026 -5,032 437 ,000 -,279 ,0554 -,3873 -,1697

-4,988 408,5 ,000 -,279 ,0558 -,3883 -,1688

2,613 ,107 -,471 437 ,638 -,026 ,0547 -,1333 ,0817

-,467 403,7 ,641 -,026 ,0552 -,1344 ,0828

,008 ,930 -2,144 437 ,033 -,136 ,0633 -,2601 -,0113

-2,142 429,5 ,033 -,136 ,0633 -,2602 -,0112

2,668 ,103 -5,545 437 ,000 -,327 ,0590 -,4429 -,2111

-5,491 404,3 ,000 -,327 ,0595 -,4440 -,2099

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

1. I feel a sense

of personal

satisfaction

when I do this

job well

2. My opinion of

myself goes

down when I do

this job badly

5. I take pride in

doing the work

as well as I can

7. I feel unhappy

when my work is

not up to my

usual standard

10. I like to look

back on the

day's work with a

sense of a job

well done

11. I try to think

of ways of doing

my job effectively

12. What

matters most to

me is enjoying

what I do

15. It is

important to me

that my work is

challenging and

interesting

F Sig.

Levene's Test

for Equality of

Variances

t df

Sig.

(2-tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error

Difference Lower Upper

95%

Confidence

Interval of the

Difference

t-test for Equality of Means

Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation Appendix B


- 170 -


1,100 ,295 9,358 437 ,000 ,763 ,0815 ,6027 ,9231

9,388 435,5 ,000 ,763 ,0813 ,6032 ,9226

18,7 ,000 9,590 437 ,000 ,818 ,0853 ,6505 ,9858

9,449 384,1 ,000 ,818 ,0866 ,6479 ,9884

2,102 ,148 3,199 437 ,001 ,266 ,0831 ,1025 ,4293

3,204 433,9 ,001 ,266 ,0830 ,1028 ,4291

,161 ,688 7,165 437 ,000 ,711 ,0992 ,5157 ,9055

7,171 432,5 ,000 ,711 ,0991 ,5158 ,9053

13,2 ,000 3,015 437 ,003 ,247 ,0819 ,0860 ,4079

3,043 436,0 ,002 ,247 ,0812 ,0874 ,4064

,056 ,812 5,722 437 ,000 ,499 ,0873 ,3278 ,6709

5,690 418,1 ,000 ,499 ,0878 ,3268 ,6719

12,8 ,000 5,949 437 ,000 ,526 ,0885 ,3525 ,7002

5,894 405,9 ,000 ,526 ,0893 ,3508 ,7019

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

3. I prefer

having

someone

set clear

goals for me

in my work

4. To me,

success

means

doing better

than other

people

6. I am less

concerned

with what

work I do

than what I

get for it

8. I am

strongly

motivated by

the rewards

I can earn

9. I am

strongly

motivated by

the

recognition I

can earn

from other

people13. I am

worried that I

do not meet

my targets

14. If I

would get

more salary,

I would work

harder

F Sig.

Levene's

Test for

Equality of

Variances

t df

Sig.

(2-tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error


95%

Confidence

Interval of the

Difference




- 171 -


2,127 ,145 -5,864 437 ,000 -,2259 ,03853 -,30167 -,15022

-5,808 405,004 ,000 -,2259 ,03890 -,30242 -,14947

,016 ,899 11,903 437 ,000 ,5472 ,04597 ,45682 ,63752

11,877 427,109 ,000 ,5472 ,04607 ,45662 ,63772

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Computed intr.

motiv. (sum of

intr. mot. factors /

total numb. of

intr. mot.

questions)

Computed extr.

mot. (sum extri.

mot. factors /

total numb. extr.

mot. questions)

F Sig.

Levene's Test

for Equality of

Variances

t df

Sig.

(2-tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error


95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference


Hypotheses 2 and 3

Coefficientsa

1,838 ,211 8,725 ,000

-,134 ,047 -,142 -2,855 ,005

,515 ,056 ,412 9,189 ,000

-3,65E-03 ,054 -,003 -,068 ,946

(Constant)

Computed extr. mot.

(sum extri. mot.

factors / total numb.

extr. mot. questions)


(sum of intr. mot.

factors / total numb. of

intr. mot. questions)

GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.



- 172 -

Hypotheses 4 and 5

Coefficients a

2,778 ,580 4,792 ,000

-,250 ,147 -,265 -1,703 ,089

,214 ,183 ,171 1,166 ,244

-,610 ,353 -,584 -1,730 ,084

,192 ,113 ,480 1,707 ,089

7,612E-02 ,094 ,203 ,812 ,417

(Constant)

Computed extr. mot.

(sum extri. mot. factors /

total numb. extr. mot.

questions)


(sum of intr. mot. factors

/ total numb. of intr. mot.

questions)

GROUP

Interaction variable

between intrinsic

motivation and grouping

variable nurses/call

center agents


between extrinsic

motivation and grouping


center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.



- 173 -

Hypothesis 6


4,874 ,028 -6,201 437 ,000 -,441 ,0712 -,5811 -,3014

-6,163 416,8 ,000 -,441 ,0716 -,5820 -,3005

21,93 ,000 -,936 437 ,350 -,062 ,0662 -,1921 ,0682

-,918 367,6 ,359 -,062 ,0675 -,1947 ,0707

13,00 ,000 -1,152 437 ,250 -,093 ,0806 -,2513 ,0656

-1,140 402,9 ,255 -,093 ,0814 -,2529 ,0672

19,85 ,000 -7,856 437 ,000 -,676 ,0861 -,8455 -,5071

-7,692 356,4 ,000 -,676 ,0879 -,8493 -,5034

1,450 ,229 -,904 437 ,367 -,059 ,0650 -,1865 ,0690

-,900 423,6 ,369 -,059 ,0652 -,1869 ,0695

1,149 ,284 -,085 437 ,932 -,009 ,0999 -,2049 ,1879

-,085 434,6 ,932 -,009 ,0997 -,2045 ,1874

8,485 ,004 ,414 437 ,679 ,04 ,092 -,142 ,218

,410 409,2 ,682 ,04 ,092 -,144 ,220

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

16. I am

satisfied

with my job

17. My

colleagues

are great to

work with

18. I can

get along

nicely with

my

supervisors

19. The job

security is

high in this

organization

20. I am

glad to work

at this

company

21. I am

satisfied

with the

salary I

receive

Stress

(satisfactio

n) reverse

scaled =>

recomputed

F Sig.

Levene's Test

for Equality of

Variances

t df

Sig.

(2-tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error


95% Confidence

Interval of the

Difference




- 174 -


11,8 ,001 -3,79 437 ,000 -,1860 ,04913 -,2825 -,0894

-3,73 388 ,000 -,1860 ,04982 -,2839 -,0880

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances

not

assumed

Computed

sat. (total fact.

sat. incl

reverse

stress / total

numb. sat.

questions)

F Sig.

Levene's

Test for

Equality of

Variances

t df

Sig.

(2-tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error


95%

Confidence

Interval of the

Difference


Hypothesis 7


4,213 ,041 -1,031 437 ,303 -,043 ,0418 -,1254 ,0391

-1,027 424,9 ,305 -,043 ,0420 -,1256 ,0394

4,048 ,045 3,118 437 ,002 ,312 ,1001 ,1154 ,5089

3,128 435,4 ,002 ,312 ,0998 ,1160 ,5083

6,583 ,011 5,309 437 ,000 ,530 ,0999 ,3339 ,7264

5,248 397,6 ,000 ,530 ,1010 ,3315 ,7287

28,94 ,000 7,492 437 ,000 ,806 ,1075 ,5942 1,0169

7,412 400,7 ,000 ,806 ,1087 ,5919 1,0192

22,39 ,000 -3,800 437 ,000 -,175 ,0461 -,2660 -,0847

-3,788 424,2 ,000 -,175 ,0463 -,2664 -,0844

2,324 ,128 -4,178 437 ,000 -,196 ,0469 -,2883 -,1039

-4,175 429,8 ,000 -,196 ,0470 -,2884 -,1038

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances not

assumed

Equal

variances

assumed

Equal

variances not

assumed

39. What is

your gender?

40. What is

your age?

41. What is

your

educational

background?

42. How

many years

have you

been working

at this job?

43. Do you

have a … ?

44. My

current job is

a …

F Sig.

Levene's Test

for Equality of

Variances

t df

Sig.

(2-tailed)

Mean

Difference

Std. Error


95%

Confidence

Interval of the

Difference




- 175 -

Hypothesis 8

Coefficientsa

2,440 ,157 15,510 ,000

,205 ,056 ,196 3,654 ,000

-5,71E-02 ,058 -,048 -,980 ,327

-,110 ,097 -,092 -1,133 ,258

5,688E-02 ,078 ,051 ,730 ,466

2,874E-02 ,077 ,023 ,374 ,709

-,205 ,143 -,145 -1,440 ,151

,262 ,196 ,082 1,335 ,183

-7,90E-02 ,135 -,075 -,583 ,560

-6,43E-02 ,137 -,059 -,469 ,639

-4,76E-02 ,090 -,036 -,528 ,598

-1,05E-02 ,085 -,008 -,123 ,902

-1,75E-02 ,076 -,013 -,231 ,818

5,298E-02 ,074 ,050 ,717 ,474

-7,06E-02 ,075 -,068 -,947 ,344

(Constant)

GROUP

If 1 then gender is female

If 1 then age 18-25

If 1 then age 26-35

If 1 then age 36-46

If 1 then education is

secondary school

If 1 then education is LBO

If 1 then education is MBO

If 1 then education is HBO

If 1 then tenure is shorter

than 1 year

If 1 then tenure is

between 1 and 3 years

If 1 then tenure is


If 1 then contract is full

time

If 1 then job is full time

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.




- 176 -

Coefficients a

2,470 ,265 9,335 ,000

,155 ,336 ,148 ,460 ,646

-8,63E-02 ,083 -,072 -1,037 ,300

7,245E-02 ,146 ,061 ,495 ,621

3,596E-03 ,099 ,003 ,036 ,971

2,777E-02 ,099 ,022 ,282 ,778

-,178 ,262 -,125 -,680 ,497

-,337 ,428 -,106 -,787 ,432

-7,02E-02 ,238 -,066 -,295 ,768

-6,42E-02 ,236 -,059 -,272 ,786

-,106 ,150 -,081 -,706 ,480

-,303 ,143 -,222 -2,115 ,035

-8,52E-02 ,097 -,061 -,878 ,380

5,167E-02 ,125 ,049 ,415 ,679

-3,00E-02 ,120 -,029 -,249 ,803

6,085E-02 ,122 ,055 ,497 ,619

-,216 ,208 -,144 -1,041 ,298

,125 ,163 ,088 ,763 ,446

1,199E-02 ,160 ,007 ,075 ,940

-7,71E-02 ,314 -,046 -,245 ,806

,656 ,485 ,188 1,353 ,177

-4,99E-02 ,291 -,040 -,171 ,864

-6,70E-02 ,295 -,037 -,227 ,821

8,352E-02 ,193 ,056 ,433 ,665

,414 ,185 ,249 2,244 ,025

,127 ,160 ,059 ,794 ,428

-2,57E-03 ,160 -,002 -,016 ,987

-9,12E-02 ,158 -,069 -,575 ,565

(Constant)

GROUP

If 1 then gender is female

If 1 then age 18-25

If 1 then age 26-35

If 1 then age 36-46

If 1 then education is

secondary school

If 1 then education is LBO

If 1 then education is MBO

If 1 then education is HBO

If 1 then tenure is shorter

than 1 year

If 1 then tenure is


If 1 then tenure is


If 1 then contract is full

time

If 1 then job is full time


between gender dummy

and group


between age dummy 1

and group


between age dummy 2

and group


between age dummy 3

and group


between education

dummy 1 and group


between education

dummy 2 and group


between education

dummy 3 and group


between education

dummy 4 and group


between tenure dummy 1

and group



and group



and group


between contract dummy

and group


between job dummy and

group

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.




- 177 -

Motivational theories

Coefficientsa

3,442 ,116 29,678 ,000

,142 ,024 ,234 5,781 ,000

-,510 ,045 -,461 -11,367 ,000

(Constant)


(comparison: q 23)

GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

3,070 ,284 10,820 ,000

,249 ,079 ,412 3,164 ,002

-,269 ,173 -,243 -1,552 ,121

-7,04E-02 ,049 -,267 -1,437 ,151

(Constant)


(comparison: q 23)

GROUP


between construct equity

theory (comparison) and

grouping variable

nurses/call center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.

Dependent Variable: Computed extr. mot. (sum extri. mot. factors / total numb. extr. mot. questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

1,545 ,101 15,319 ,000

7,541E-03 ,021 ,017 ,354 ,723

,228 ,039 ,272 5,848 ,000

(Constant)


(comparison: q 23)

GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

1,251 ,247 5,068 ,000

9,252E-02 ,068 ,202 1,351 ,177

,418 ,151 ,500 2,773 ,006

-5,56E-02 ,043 -,279 -1,305 ,192

(Constant)


(comparison: q 23)

GROUP


between construct equity

theory (comparison) and

grouping variable


Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.



- 178 -

Coefficients a

3,125 ,156 20,087 ,000

-,441 ,047 -,399 -9,292 ,000

7,448E-02 ,012 ,263 6,134 ,000

(Constant)

GROUP


theory (combined =

effort: q 24, 25 and 26)

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

3,634 ,366 9,916 ,000

-,789 ,232 -,713 -3,404 ,001

2,087E-02 ,037 ,074 ,564 ,573

3,761E-02 ,025 ,308 1,534 ,126

(Constant)

GROUP



q 24, 25 and 26)


between construct

expectancy theory 1

(combined) and grouping


center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


a.

Coefficientsa

1,290 ,135 9,553 ,000

,261 ,041 ,312 6,341 ,000

2,465E-02 ,011 ,115 2,339 ,020

(Constant)

GROUP


theory (combined =

effort: q 24, 25 and 26)

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

,996 ,319 3,125 ,002

,462 ,201 ,553 2,296 ,022

5,568E-02 ,032 ,260 1,731 ,084

-2,18E-02 ,021 -,236 -1,021 ,308

(Constant)

GROUP



q 24, 25 and 26)


between construct

expectancy theory 1



center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.



- 179 -

Coefficientsa

3,662 ,106 34,631 ,000

,118 ,029 ,167 4,039 ,000

-,520 ,046 -,470 -11,378 ,000

(Constant)


theory (reward

receivement: q 27)

GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

4,045 ,221 18,317 ,000

-4,48E-02 ,087 -,063 -,513 ,608

-,805 ,152 -,728 -5,315 ,000

,123 ,062 ,329 1,976 ,049

(Constant)


theory (reward

receivement: q 27)

GROUP


between construct

expectancy theory 2

(reward) and grouping


center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

1,407 ,090 15,701 ,000

6,144E-02 ,025 ,115 2,479 ,014

,240 ,039 ,287 6,201 ,000

(Constant)


theory (reward

receivement: q 27)

GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

1,652 ,188 8,804 ,000

-4,23E-02 ,074 -,079 -,570 ,569

5,830E-02 ,129 ,070 ,453 ,651

7,853E-02 ,053 ,277 1,481 ,139

(Constant)


theory (reward

receivement: q 27)

GROUP


between construct

expectancy theory 2

(reward) and grouping


center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.



- 180 -

Coefficientsa

3,307 ,126 26,263 ,000

,104 ,016 ,263 6,378 ,000

-,472 ,046 -,427 -10,364 ,000

(Constant)


theory (combined: q

28 and 29)

GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

3,300 ,287 11,500 ,000

,105 ,050 ,266 2,110 ,035

-,468 ,182 -,423 -2,565 ,011

-8,32E-04 ,033 -,004 -,025 ,980

(Constant)



and 29)

GROUP


between construct goal

setting theory (combined)

and grouping variable


Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


a.

Coefficientsa

1,220 ,108 11,245 ,000

5,442E-02 ,014 ,182 3,882 ,000

,265 ,039 ,317 6,758 ,000

(Constant)


theory (combined: q

28 and 29)

GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

1,220 ,247 4,932 ,000

5,449E-02 ,043 ,182 1,271 ,204

,266 ,157 ,317 1,690 ,092

-4,79E-05 ,028 ,000 -,002 ,999

(Constant)



and 29)

GROUP


between construct goal

setting theory (combined)

and grouping variable


Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.



- 181 -

Coefficients a

3,681 ,138 26,742 ,000

4,725E-02 ,019 ,107 2,548 ,011

-,527 ,046 -,477 -11,372 ,000

(Constant)


theory (combined =


GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


a.

Coefficientsa

4,358 ,347 12,554 ,000

-6,97E-02 ,058 -,158 -1,201 ,231

-,976 ,216 -,883 -4,512 ,000

7,847E-02 ,037 ,454 2,124 ,034

(Constant)


theory (combined =


GROUP


between construct

attribution theory 1



center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


a.

Coefficients a

1,470 ,116 12,667 ,000

1,623E-02 ,016 ,049 1,038 ,300

,233 ,039 ,278 5,956 ,000

(Constant)


theory (combined =


GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

,995 ,293 3,394 ,001

9,827E-02 ,049 ,294 2,003 ,046

,548 ,183 ,655 2,997 ,003

-5,50E-02 ,031 -,421 -1,763 ,079

(Constant)


theory (combined =


GROUP


between construct




center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.



- 182 -

Coefficientsa

4,286 ,091 47,259 ,000

-,105 ,020 -,212 -5,218 ,000

-,520 ,045 -,470 -11,559 ,000

(Constant)



GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

4,304 ,209 20,546 ,000

-,110 ,061 -,223 -1,811 ,071

-,533 ,144 -,482 -3,710 ,000

3,939E-03 ,041 ,018 ,096 ,923

(Constant)



GROUP


between construct


(salary) and grouping


center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

1,364 ,077 17,768 ,000

7,178E-02 ,017 ,192 4,229 ,000

,207 ,038 ,248 5,439 ,000

(Constant)



GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

1,560 ,177 8,807 ,000

1,246E-02 ,051 ,033 ,242 ,809

6,619E-02 ,121 ,079 ,545 ,586

4,226E-02 ,035 ,251 1,222 ,222

(Constant)



GROUP


between construct


(salary) and grouping


center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.



- 183 -

Coefficientsa

3,508 ,152 23,052 ,000

5,791E-02 ,016 ,145 3,510 ,000

-,530 ,046 -,480 -11,623 ,000

(Constant)



GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

3,981 ,425 9,366 ,000

-2,73E-03 ,054 -,007 -,051 ,959

-,836 ,260 -,756 -3,210 ,001

3,941E-02 ,033 ,305 1,191 ,234

(Constant)



GROUP


between construct theory

x and y (combined) and

grouping variable


Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


a.

Coefficientsa

2,320 ,123 18,878 ,000

-9,13E-02 ,013 -,302 -6,853 ,000

,200 ,037 ,239 5,414 ,000

(Constant)



GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

1,448 ,341 4,247 ,000

2,055E-02 ,043 ,068 ,479 ,632

,763 ,209 ,912 3,653 ,000

-7,27E-02 ,027 -,743 -2,740 ,006

(Constant)



GROUP


between construct theory

x and y (combined) and

grouping variable


Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.



- 184 -

Coefficientsa

3,898 ,121 32,192 ,000

1,307E-02 ,015 ,036 ,856 ,392

-,550 ,046 -,497 -11,930 ,000

(Constant)

Construct cognitive

dissonance theory


GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

3,994 ,319 12,523 ,000

-1,39E-03 ,047 -,004 -,030 ,976

-,618 ,213 -,559 -2,906 ,004

1,012E-02 ,031 ,077 ,328 ,743

(Constant)

Construct cognitive

dissonance theory


GROUP


between construct

cognitive dissonance

theory (combined) and

grouping variable


Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


a.

Coefficientsa

1,713 ,101 16,921 ,000

-2,17E-02 ,013 -,078 -1,704 ,089

,230 ,039 ,275 5,978 ,000

(Constant)

Construct cognitive

dissonance theory


GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

1,773 ,267 6,648 ,000

-3,07E-02 ,039 -,111 -,787 ,431

,188 ,178 ,225 1,058 ,291

6,291E-03 ,026 ,063 ,244 ,808

(Constant)

Construct cognitive

dissonance theory


GROUP


between construct

cognitive dissonance

theory (combined) and

grouping variable


Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.



- 185 -

Coefficientsa

4,123 ,092 45,024 ,000

-6,42E-02 ,026 -,102 -2,455 ,014

-,540 ,046 -,488 -11,781 ,000

(Constant)



GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


a.

Coefficientsa

3,787 ,203 18,686 ,000

7,743E-02 ,081 ,123 ,960 ,338

-,307 ,133 -,278 -2,308 ,021

-9,71E-02 ,052 -,326 -1,856 ,064

(Constant)



GROUP


between construct

investment model

(change) and grouping


center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


a.

Coefficientsa

1,296 ,074 17,425 ,000

,126 ,021 ,263 5,925 ,000

,211 ,037 ,253 5,680 ,000

(Constant)



GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

1,542 ,165 9,366 ,000

2,169E-02 ,066 ,045 ,331 ,741

4,054E-02 ,108 ,048 ,375 ,708

7,140E-02 ,043 ,317 1,679 ,094

(Constant)



GROUP


between construct

investment model



center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.



- 186 -

Coefficientsa

3,877 ,113 34,398 ,000

3,402E-02 ,029 ,050 1,192 ,234

-,549 ,046 -,497 -11,948 ,000

(Constant)

Construct cognitive

evaluation theory

(target increase: q 38)

GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

3,960 ,282 14,052 ,000

7,774E-03 ,087 ,011 ,090 ,929

-,608 ,190 -,550 -3,210 ,001

1,861E-02 ,058 ,068 ,320 ,749

(Constant)

Construct cognitive

evaluation theory


GROUP


between construct

cognitive evaluation



center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

1,579 ,095 16,682 ,000

-1,61E-03 ,024 -,003 -,067 ,946

,226 ,039 ,270 5,855 ,000

(Constant)

Construct cognitive

evaluation theory


GROUP

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

Coefficientsa

1,006 ,235 4,287 ,000

,180 ,072 ,347 2,491 ,013

,634 ,158 ,757 4,014 ,000

-,129 ,048 -,624 -2,662 ,008

(Constant)

Construct cognitive

evaluation theory


GROUP


between construct

cognitive evaluation



center agents

Model

1

B Std. Error

Unstandardized

Coefficients

Beta

Standardized

Coefficients

t Sig.


questions)

a.

- 187 -

Appendix C

Thesis research

Dear participant,

On behalf of my final thesis at the University of Maastricht, I am conducting a research

in two different employment sectors. This research is about motivation and job

satisfaction in your work environment. Moreover, several questions concerning theories

of motivation will be included as well.

I kindly ask you to fill in the following questionnaire. Your help is crucial for conducting

my research successfully and I would be enormously appreciate it. All information given

will be handled anonymously and confidentially.

I thank you in advance for your participation,

Rudi Oudejans

Linking extrinsic and intrinsic motivation Appendix C


- 188 -

Motivation

1. I feel a sense of personal satisfaction when I do this job well

O Totally agree O Agree O Neither Agree nor Disagree O Disagree O Totally disagree

2. My opinion of myself goes down when I do this job badly


3. I prefer having someone set clear goals for me in my work


4. To me, success means doing better than other people


5. I take pride in doing the work as well as I can


6. I’m less concerned with what work I do than what I get for it


7. I feel unhappy when my work is not up to my usual standard


8. I am strongly motivated by the rewards I can earn


9. I am strongly motivated by the recognition I can earn from other people


10. I like to look back on the day’s work with a sense of a job well done




- 189 -

11. I try to think of ways of doing my job effectively


12. What matters most to me is enjoying what I do O Totally agree O Agree O Neither Agree nor Disagree O Disagree O Totally disagree

13. I am worried that I do not meet my targets


14. If I would get more salary, I would work harder


15. It is important to me that my work is challenging and interesting

O Very Important O Important O No Opinion O Not Important O Not Important at All

Job satisfaction

16. I am satisfied with my job


17. My colleagues are great to work with


18. I can get along nicely with my supervisors


19. The job security is high in this organization


20. I am glad to work at this company




- 190 -

21. I am satisfied with the salary I receive


22. My work is very stressful


Motivational theories

23. I compare what I put into a job and what I get out of it to my peers O Totally agree O Agree O Neither Agree nor Disagree O Disagree O Totally disagree

24. I will put as much into my job as I expect to get from it


25. If I work hard, I do well


26. If I do well, I will be rewarded


27. If I will receive a reward, I will like the reward O Totally agree O Agree O Neither Agree nor Disagree O Disagree O Totally disagree

28. I like to set difficult goals for myself


29. When the company sets goals I am more motivated to perform O Totally agree O Agree O Neither Agree nor Disagree O Disagree O Totally disagree



- 191 -

30. When something goes wrong at work, I usually contribute it to external factors


31. When things go right at work, it is because I did something right O Totally agree O Agree O Neither Agree nor Disagree O Disagree O Totally disagree

32. If you would receive less salary, would you remain at the same job?


33. Supervisors think of us as lazy, irresponsible, uncreative and unambitious O Totally agree O Agree O Neither Agree nor Disagree O Disagree O Totally disagree

34. I only work for the salary and the rewards I receive O Totally agree O Agree O Neither Agree nor Disagree O Disagree O Totally disagree

35. I often disagree with things that happen at work O Totally agree O Agree O Neither Agree nor Disagree O Disagree O Totally disagree

36. I sometimes I have to do things that are unethical to me O Totally agree O Agree O Neither Agree nor Disagree O Disagree O Totally disagree

37. If I am satisfied with my job, I will be less likely to change to another job although it

might pay more O Totally agree O Agree O Neither Agree nor Disagree O Disagree O Totally disagree

38. I dislike my work more when there are more targets set by the organization




- 192 -

General questions

39. What is your gender?

O Female O Male


O 18 - 25 O 26 – 35 O 36 - 46 O Older than 46

41. What is your educational background?

O Secondary school O LBO O MBO O HBO O University

42. How many years have you been working at this job?

O Shorter than 1 years O Between 1 and 3 years O Between 3 and 5 years O More than 5 years


O Full time contract O Part time contract


O Full time job O Part time job

This is the end of this questionnaire. I thank you for your cooperation!!!



- 193 -

Eind scriptie onderzoek

Geachte deelnemer aan deze vragenlijst,

Vanwege mijn eindscriptie op de Universiteit van Maastricht, doe ik onderzoek in twee

verschillende werkgelegenheid sectoren. Dit onderzoek gaat over motivatie en werk

tevredenheid in uw werk situatie. Ook zullen er een aantal vragen over verscheidene

motivatie theorieën in zitten.

Ik vraag u vriendelijk om deze vragenlijst in te vullen. Uw hulp is cruciaal voor het met

succes beëindigen van mijn onderzoek en ik zou het enorm waarderen als u mij wilt

helpen. Gegeven informatie wordt anoniem en vertrouwelijk behandeld.

Ik dank u bij voorbaat voor uw deelname,

Rudi Oudejans



- 194 -

Motivatie

1. Ik heb een gevoel van persoonlijke tevredenheid als ik dit werk goed doe

O Helemaal mee eens O Mee eens O Noch eens of oneens O Niet mee eens O Helemaal niet mee eens

2. Mijn mening over mezelf gaat naar beneden als ik dit werk slecht doe


3. Ik heb liever iemand die duidelijke doelen voor mij stelt op mijn werk


4. Succes betekent voor mij dat ik het beter doe dan anderen O Helemaal mee eens O Mee eens O Noch eens of oneens O Niet mee eens O Helemaal niet mee eens

5. Ik ben trots als ik het werk zo goed mogelijk doe als ik kan O Helemaal mee eens O Mee eens O Noch eens of oneens O Niet mee eens O Helemaal niet mee eens

6. Het maakt mij minder uit wat voor werk ik doe dan wat ik verdien O Helemaal mee eens O Mee eens O Noch eens of oneens O Niet mee eens O Helemaal niet mee eens

7. Ik voel me niet goed als ik mijn werk minder goed doe dan normaal O Helemaal mee eens O Mee eens O Noch eens of oneens O Niet mee eens O Helemaal niet mee eens

8. Ik ben erg gemotiveerd door de beloningen die ik kan verdienen


9. Ik ben erg gemotiveerd door de erkenning die ik kan krijgen van anderen O Helemaal mee eens O Mee eens O Noch eens of oneens O Niet mee eens O Helemaal niet mee eens

10. Ik vind het fijn om terug te kijken na een werkdag met een gevoel dat ik mijn werk

goed gedaan heb




- 195 -

11. Ik probeer aan manieren te denken om mijn werk zo effectief mogelijk te doen


12. Het belangrijkste voor mij is iets te doen waar ik plezier in heb O Helemaal mee eens O Mee eens O Noch eens of oneens O Niet mee eens O Helemaal niet mee eens

13. Ik maak me druk dat ik de doelen van het bedrijf niet haal


14. Als ik meer salaris zou krijgen zou ik harder werken


15. Het is belangrijk voor mij dat mijn werk uitdagend en interessant is

O Heel belangrijk O Belangrijk O Geen mening O Niet belangrijk O Helemaal niet belangrijk

Werk tevredenheid

16. Ik ben tevreden met mijn werk


17. Mijn collega’s zijn fijn om mee te werken


18. Ik kan het goed vinden met de mensen die de leiding over mij hebben


19. De veiligheid voor mijn baan is hoog in dit bedrijf


20. Ik ben blij dat ik bij dit bedrijf kan werken




- 196 -

21. Ik ben tevreden met het salaris dat ik krijg


22. Ik krijg veel stress van mijn werk


Motivatie theorieën

23. Ik vergelijk hoeveel ik in mijn werk stop met wat ik er voor terug krijg en ik

vergelijk dit met mijn collega’s


24. Ik zal zoveel in mijn werk stoppen als ik verwacht er voor terug te krijgen


25. Als ik hard werk, doe ik het goed


26. Als ik het goed doe, zal ik beloond worden


27. Als ik beloond word, zal ik de beloning leuk vinden


28. Ik vind het fijn om moeilijke doelen voor mezelf te stellen


29. Wanneer het bedrijf doelen zet die ik moet halen ben ik meer gemotiveerd om te

presteren O Helemaal mee eens O Mee eens O Noch eens of oneens O Niet mee eens O Helemaal niet mee eens



- 197 -

30. Wanneer iets fout gaat op het werk, komt het meestal niet omdat ik iets fout gedaan

heb.


31. Wanneer het goed gaat op het werk, komt het vaak door dat ik dingen goed doe.


32. Als u minder salaris zou krijgen, zou u dezelfde baan willen houden?


33. Bazen/managers/leiders denken dat we lui, onverantwoordelijk, niet creatief, en niet

ambitieus zijn


34. Ik werk alleen voor het salaris en de beloningen die ik ontvang


35. Ik ben het vaak oneens met dingen die op het werk gebeuren


36. Soms moet ik dingen doen die ik ethisch niet verantwoord vind


37. Als ik tevreden ben met mijn baan, dan zal het minder waarschijnlijk zijn dat ik

van baan verander voor een baan die meer betaalt O Helemaal mee eens O Mee eens O Noch eens of oneens O Niet mee eens O Helemaal niet mee eens

38. Ik vind mijn werk minder leuk wanneer het bedrijf meer doelen stelt waaraan ik

moet voldoen




- 198 -

Algemene vragen

39. Wat is uw geslacht?

O Vrouw O Man

40. Wat is uw leeftijd?

O 18 - 25 O 26 – 35 O 36 - 46 O Ouder dan 46

41. Wat voor een school heeft u afgerond? O Middelbare school O LBO O MBO O HBO O Universiteit

42. Hoeveel jaar heeft u al deze baan?

O Korter dan 1 jaar O Tussen 1 en 3 jaar O Tussen 3 en 5 jaar O Meer dan 5 jaar

43. Hebt u een … ?

O Vol tijd contract O Deel tijd contract

44. Mijn huidige baan is een …

O Full time baan O Part time baan

Dit is het einde van deze vragenlijst. Hartelijk dank voor uw medewerking!!



- 199 -

Diplomarbeitsstudie

Im Rahmen meiner Diplomarbeit an der Universität Maastricht (ich studiere dort

internationale BWL), untersuche ich zwei verschiedene Berufssektoren. Diese Studie

betrifft Motivation und Zufriedenheit in Ihrem Arbeitsumfeld. Ausserdem gibt es einige

Fragen bezüglich mehrerer Motivationstheorien.

Ich möchte Sie freundlichst bitten diesen Fragebogen auszufüllen. Das ausfüllen daurt

nur einige Minuten. Ihre Hilfe ist jedoch von entscheidender Bedeutung für den

erfolgreichen Abschluss meines Studiums. Gerade deshalb würde ich Ihre Hilfe sehr

schätzen. Erteilte Informationen werden absolut anonym und vertraulich behandelt.

Für Ihre Teilnahme möchte ich mich im Voraus herzlich bei Ihnen bedanken,

Rudi Oudejans



- 200 -

Motivation

1. Mein Beruf verschafft mir ein Gefühl persönlicher Zufriedenheit

O völlig richtig O richtig O weder richtig noch falsch O falsch O völlig falsch

2. Mein Selbstbild nimmt ab wenn ich keinen gute Arbeit leiste


3. Ich bevorzuge es, wenn jemand mir in meinem Job deutliche Ziele setzt O völlig richtig O richtig O weder richtig noch falsch O falsch O völlig falsch

4. Erfolg bedeutet für mich, dass ich bessere Arbeit leiste als andere O völlig richtig O richtig O weder richtig noch falsch O falsch O völlig falsch

5. Ich bin stolz wenn ich meine Arbeit so gut wie nur möglich erledige


6. Den Job den ich mache ist mir weniger wichtig als was ich verdiene


7. Ich fühle mich nicht wohl wenn ich meine Arbeit weniger gut mache als gewöhnlich


8. Ich werde sehr motiviert durch mögliche zusätzliche Belohnungen


9. Ich werde sehr motiviert durch die Anerkennung von anderen Menschen O völlig richtig O richtig O weder richtig noch falsch O falsch O völlig falsch

10. Ich finde es schön zurückzublicken auf einen erfolgreichen Arbeitstag mit dem

Gefühl gute Arbeit geleistet zu haben




- 201 -

11. Ich versuche Wege zu finden die es mir ermöglichen meine Arbeit so effektiv wie

möglich zu erledigen


12. Für mich ist es das wichtigste etwas zu tun was mir Freude macht


13. Ich mache mir Sorgen das ich die Unternehmensziele nicht erreiche


14. Wenn ich mehr Gehalt bekommen würde, würde ich härter Arbeiten


15. Es ist wichtig für mich dass meine Arbeit herausfordernd und interessant ist


Zufriedenheit mit dem Beruf

16. Ich bin zufrieden mit meinem Job


17. Ich arbeite gerne zusammen mit meinen Kollegen


18. Ich verstehe mich gut mit meinen Führungskräften


19. Die Absicherung meines Jobs ist hoch in diesem Unternehmen


20. Ich freue mich darüber in diesem Unternehmen arbeiten zu dürfen




- 202 -

21. Ich bin zufrieden mit meinem Gehalt


22. Meine Arbeit besorgt mir viel Stress


Motivationstheorien

23. Ich stelle mein Arbeitspensum in Relation zu meinem Gehalt und vergleiche dieses

mit dem meiner Kollegen


24. Ich werde genau soviel Arbeit leisten wie ich erwarte dafür wiederzubekommen


25. Wenn ich hart arbeite, mache ich einen guten Job


26. Wenn ich einen guten Job mache, werde ich dafür belohnt werden


27. Wenn ich belohnt werde, wird mir die Belohnung Freude bereiten


28. Ich setze mir gerne schwierige Ziele


29. Wenn das Unternehmen mir Ziele setzt, bin ich eher zu Leistung motiviert


30. Wenn etwas schief geht auf der Arbeit, ist das meistens nicht mein Fehler




- 203 -

31. Wenn alles richtig läuft auf der Arbeit, ist das oft mein Verdienst


32. Würden Sie für weniger Gehalt den gleichen Job behalten wollen?


33. Chefs/ Manager/ Führungskräfte denken dass wir faul, verantwortungslos, nich

kreativ, und nicht ehrgeizig sind


34. Ich arbeite nur für das Gehalt und die Belohnungen die ich erhalte


35. Ich bin oft nicht einverstanden mit Ereignissen am Arbeitsplatz


36. Manchmal muss ich Tätigkeiten ausführen die ich ethisch nicht vertretbar finde


37. Wenn ich zufrieden bin mit meinem Job, dann ist es eher unwahrscheinlich

dass ich meinen Job wechsle für einen besser bezahlten Job O völlig richtig O richtig O weder richtig noch falsch O falsch O völlig falsch

38. Meine Arbeit gefällt mir weniger gut wenn das Unternehmen mehr Ziele setzt die

ich erreichen soll


Allgemeine Fragen

39. Was ist ihr Geschlecht?

O Weiblich O Männlich



- 204 -

40. Wie alt sind sie?

O 18 - 25 O 26 – 35 O 36 - 46 O älter als 46

41. Was ist ihre höchste Ausbildung?

O Mittlere Reife O Berufsschule O Mittlere Berufsschule O Gymnasium O Universität

42. Seit wievielen Jahren haben sie Ihren jetzigen Job?

O Kürzer als 1 Jahr O Zwischen 1 und 3 Jahren O Zwischen 3 und 5 Jahren O Mehr als 5 Jahren

43. Haben sie ein....?

O Vollzeit-Vertrag O Teilzeit-Vertrag

44. Mein jetziger Job ist....

O Vollzeit-Job O Teilzeit-Job

Dies ist das Ende dieses Fragebogens. Herzlichen Dank für Ihre

Teilnahme!!

File 11432

Documents

Transcript of File 11432