Inpacts of nature of work, social environment and benefits on movivation of employees: The case of a public organization in britain

Nội dung text: Inpacts of nature of work, social environment and benefits on movivation of employees: The case of a public organization in britain

1. INPACTS OF NATURE OF WORK, SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT AND BENEFITS ON MOVIVATION OF EMPLOYEES: THE CASE OF A PUBLIC ORGANIZATION IN BRITAIN Hoang Le An VPBank Abstract This study explored the impacts of nature of work, social environment and benefits on employee motivation at the Environment Agency (EA) as responding to the continuous public sector pay restraint, which has already been in place for seven years in Britain. A mix methods of primary data collection was employed including a questionnaire survey generating quantitative data, preceded by qualitative, semi-structured interviews. The questionnaire was sent out to a sample of 500 employees selected from the National Office group using stratified sampling technique. 197 people responded within two weeks, making a response rate of 39.4%. The findings indicate that a more favourable attitude toward the meaningfullness and worthiness of work as well as equality and recognition have significantly positive impacts on employee’s (self-reported) motivation level. Recommendations based on these findings are also provided. Key words: Public sector, Employee motivation, Work characteristic, Equality, Benefits 631
2. 1. Introduction Many studies have confirmed the vital role of motivation in employee retention and work performance (Eberendu and Kenneth-Okere, 2015; Kassa, 2015; ACCA, 2012). A commonplace assumption might be that financial rewards are the major motivator. However, non-financial incentives are also important and have been emphasized in influential work motivation theories. Herzberg’s (1968) two-factor theory identified pay as a ‘hygiene factors’, distinct from the motivation factors of achievement, recognition, personal growth and the work itself. According to a study by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (2005), higher pay increases performance for tasks that require ‘mechanical’ skill alone, and decreases performance when rudimentary cognitive skill is involved. If more jobs in the future will require cognitive skills and creativity, organisations will need to develop new or modify existing policies and practices they use to motivate staff. In the UK, public sector pay has been restrained since 2010, as governments have insisted on public expenditure austerity as the means of reducing the national deficit and debt. Public sector managers have to consider using non-pay incentives to sustain employee retention and motivation at work. Whether this is effective or not is still a question. This research, therefore, aims to answer two questions: Question 1: How much has nature of work, social environment and benefits influenced on employees’ work motivation in public organisations in Britain? Question 2: Are motivational influences the same or are there differences among different groups of employees? The Environment Agency (EA) in the UK is selected to be the venue for research. It is an executive non-departmental public body that is part of Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Its responsibilities are protecting and improving the environment. The EA helps people and wildlife to deal with climate change consequences (flooding, drought, sea level rise and coastal erosion) and threats to wildlife. It works to tackle pollution, improve the quality of water, land and air, and regulate nuclear activities (EA, 2017). Its head office is located at the Horizon House in Bristol, and across the country, there are around 11,200 staff. As in the case for other public-sector organisations, employees’ pay has been restrained by the government’s pay cap policy over the last 7 years, at the same time, it is under pressure to develop employees’ productivity. Given its nature and scale, EA 632
3. can serve as a great context for the study of employee motivation in public organisations in Britain. Regarding research question 2, in 2016, DEFRA developed its equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) strategy which focuses on ensuring equality between individuals and groups, improving workforce diversity and promoting an inclusive culture (DEFRA, 2017). Embracing these EDI priorities, the research aims to investigate the similarities or differences in motivation between different employee groups. Based on the HR team’s priority, four demographic factors, including age, seniority, gender, profession were chosen for comparison. The aim has been to generate findings helpful for the development of HR policies that aim to attract, retain and motivate all the talents, through workforce diversity and inclusivity. 2. Theoretical Background, Literature Review, and Hypotheses 2.1.Motivation theories Motivation is defined as the forces initiating behaviour or the reasons for us to do or not to do something (Guay et al, 2010; Gredler et al., 2004; Gibson et al., 2003). Theories of motivation have a long history. They dated from the 17th and 18th centuries when hedonism was conceptualised by philosophers as drivers of human behaviour (Steers et al., 2004). At the end of the 19th century, the issue of motivation began to capture in the interest of the emerging discipline of psychology. Various models have been proposed to explain motivation. In 1940s, content theories started to emerge. This group of theories focus on identifying different types of internal and external stimuli (Herzberg, et al, 1959). One of the earliest content theories is Maslow’s need hierarchy (1943). And a very similar theory to Maslow’s is Alderfer’s (1972) which views Existence, Relatedness and Growth (ERG) needs in a hierarchical order . Herzberg’s two-factor theory (Herzberg et al., 1959) focused on extrinsic and intrinsic motivational factors. It suggests there is a series of dis-satisfiers or hygiene factors which do not necessarily increase employees’ motivation but will demotivate people with their absence. Hygiene factors are extrinsic, such as remuneration, job security and promotion. This contradicts the traditional view that pay is the main incentive (Brooks, 2009). On the other hand, Herzberg also proposed a series of satisfiers which will lead to increased motivation. These are intrinsic factors relating directly to the work itself such as sense of achievement 633
4. and recognition, responsibility and growth opportunities. The theory suggests that managers should seek to enhance employees’ intrinsic motivation as well as provide adequate extrinsic rewards. In comparison to Maslow’s theory, the hygiene factors equate to physiological and safety needs, while satisfiers are similar to higher-level needs (Brooks, 2009). Although Herzberg’s theory received strong criticism in terms of its validity, owing to the limited sample size (210 professionals) in his original study (House and Wigdor, 1971), it remains influential among researchers and managers as they continue to discuss and try to use the theory to increase employees’ motivation (Gibson et al. 2003). Blackburn and Mann (1979) found similarly that people have strong orientation towards intrinsic motivators rather than pay alone, in research among 1000 low- to medium-skilled workers. Beginning to emerge in the mid-1960s, process theories focused on causal relationships between events as they relate to employees’ behaviour (Steers et al, 2004). These theories collectively attempt to explain the mental process that people undergo to make choices. The best known process theory is expectancy theory, developed by Victor Vroom (1964; Gibson et al., 2003). Motivation is viewed as the product of three elements: expectancy (E) about the effort that will lead to a certain level of performance (first-level outcome), instrumentality (I) which is people’s perception that their performance is associated with the final results, and valence (V) measuring the degree to which the results are desirable. Equity theory as developed by Adams (1963) is also classified as a process theory. There are three main components in his model which are inputs (the effort of an individual), outputs (rewards from the organisation) and comparison with others. The first two factors equate to effort and reward in expectancy theory, while the last component is significantly different. Adams (1963) suggests that the level of motivation an individual might gain from receiving a reward is influenced by the rewards of others since people tend to be motivated by fair return for their efforts. In contrast, the sense of unfairness will cause dissatisfaction and demotivation, which might result in reduced input, conflict and relationship difficulties between management and employees (Brooks, 2009). Equity theory has held its validity (Goodman and Friedman, 1971; Miner, 1984). However, it is also criticised for not considering differences between individuals and cultures (Al-Zawahreh and Al-Maldi, 2012). Empirical studies’ findings on motivation are very diverse because of the differences in motivation theories employed, research contexts, as well as study methods. Each theory or study has its own advantages and disadvantages which make it very difficult to evaluate and 634
5. choose the best theoretical frameworks between them. As this research has its context in a public sector organisation in which non-financial motivators have become increasingly important, the author found that Herzberg’s (1968) two-factor theory and Equity theory are the most useful. Next section about the UK public sector will clarify the appropriateness of the two theories. 2.2. The public sector in the UK Following the 2008 financial crisis, the British government’s fiscal policy from 2010 focused on reducing the public deficit through an austerity programme and accelerated privatisation. A 2-year pay freeze was followed by the policy of a 1% limit on public sector pay increases and adjustment in pension provision alongside welfare benefit cuts (Bach, 2016). Public sector employment has also suffered because of vacancy freezes and redundancies (NAO, 2014), services withdrawn, early retirement (Jones et al. 2015) and privatisation. A debate concerns the UK traditional conceptualisation of erosion of public service ethos (PSE) and the US literature on public service motivation (PSM). In the UK, PSE is the unwritten cultural values and rules that set out the standards across public institutions and agencies and inform public servants’ behaviour (Pratchett and Wingfield, 1994; House of Commons, 2002). In this case, ethos acts as a benchmark or principled framework for action that public service workers should uphold. This view is considered a more bureaucratic perspective compared to the US theories of PSM, which emphasise the importance of “getting the right people in the job” (Norris, 2003). US literature argues that public sector workers naturally have a distinctive set of values (or ethos), for example, Perry (1996) identifies four elements of public service motivation (PSM): attraction to policy making, commitment to public interest, compassion and self-sacrifice. Hence public sector workers are believed to be more intrinsically motivated rather than affected by extrinsic incentives. They choose to work in the sector being concerned to help other people, being useful to the society and for the greater good (Hebson et al., 2003; Buelens and Van de Broeck, 2007). John and Johnson (2008) suggest this is also the reason for many people to choose to work in the public rather than private sector considering the fact that public sector pay is lower on average for the same jobs and it also has more rules and regulations (Boyne, 2002). However, there are still arguments in the literature about PSE’s existence. Buelens and Broeck (2007) argue that it is job content instead of working in the public sector that matters since some jobs only exist in the public sector such as social work, doctors and nurses. 635
6. Jurkiewicz and Brown (1998) look at a totally different aspect which is age or cohort effects. They suggest that different age groups have different visions for society leading to variances in ethos between them. Thus, data shows that public sector employees tend to be older, are more likely to be female, professional and trade union members (see Table 1), which indicates that PSE might be the result of the different social demographic characteristics. Table 1: Composition of private and public sector employees in 2005 % of employees Private sector Public sector Difference Men 51 35 -16 Women 49 65 +16 18-34 33 20 -13 65+ 19 24 +5 Professional 31 52 +21 Routine/semi-routine 37 24 -13 Degree or higher 24 44 +20 No qualifications 27 20 -7 Highest income quartile 22 27 +5 Lowest income quartile 27 19 -8 Labour supporter 41 41 0 Conservative supporter 23 24 -1 Trade union member 11 37 +26 Base 2404 1158 Source: John and Johnson (2008) Testing for this issue using multivariate analysis, John and Johnson’s (2008) findings support the existence of PSE. Public sector employees remained more altruistically motivated than those in the private sector after taking into account the above demographic factors. There is persuasive evidence for the existence of PSE. However, many policymakers and commentators claim that PSE has been declining among public sector employees. Based on the study of Jurkiewicz and Brown (1998) about cohort effects, PSE might be a feature of the public sector of the past. This argument is supported by empirical research undertaken by Moynihan & Pandey (2007) which found a stronger sense of public service among older workers. Hence, it may have started to decline when a new generation entered the public 636
7. sector. Moreover, as the public sector increases the outsourcing of the works to the private sector, many authors blame the involvement of the private sector for PSE erosion. Hebson et al.’s (2003) two case studies in health and local government suggested that public-private- partnership arrangements had weakened managerial accountability and PSE’s traditional values. This is because PSE has been gradually replaced by behaviour driven by commercial values. Public sector workers are treated like self-interested actors with the increasing use of private sector’s management techniques, for instance, performance-related pay (Public Administration Committee, 2002). John and Johnson (2008), however, using data from the British Social Attitudes survey present a totally opposite result. The findings reject PSE’s weakening based on the growth of individual self-interest; they argue PSE increased during the New Labour years (1997-2010), although this might be as the two sectors become more similar and the choice of careers now depends on values rather than practical factors such as job security. As a result, the public sector has only attracted individuals who already have ‘the right’ values (John and Johnson, 2008). This explanation does not seem conclusive. Furthermore, the data cover the period of Tony Blair’s government from 1997 to 2005. There has been much change since then with the switch of ruling party from Labour to Conservative-Liberal Democrat in 2010, followed by the introduction of the austerity programme. A more recent study by Booth-Smith and Leigh (2016) confirms the negative effect of private sector involvement on public services’ quality and core values. Major components of PSE such as social justice, accountability, integrity and community responsibility are reported to have deteriorated by 1,415 public sector managers and executives. In summary, the UK public sector has experienced a harsh reform triggered by the political goal of national budget reduction. The austerity programme froze and then capped public sector pay rises at 1% for seven years (Maidment, 2017). Some believed that public service quality should remain the same as pay has a very minor role in the distinctive ethos of public servants (PSE). However, the recent protest of NHS nurses in early September against the pay cap suggests this policy has become very problematic. It has lasted for a long period of seven years and is far below the current rate of inflation at 2.6% (Maidment, 2017). Besides, PSE is reported to be diminishing. Given pay is more or less a fixed factor in the UK public sector, furthur studies should be conducted to find out whether non-pay factors play an important role in determining employee motivation. 637
8. Applying Herzberg’s two-factor theory and Equity theory to the public sector context, in this study, the impacts of non-pay factors including the work itself (whether it is meaningful and/or worthwhile), equality, recognition, and benefits will be examined. The following hyptheses are proposed: H1: Higher level of the work’s meaningfulness leads to higher level of employee motivation. H2: Higher level of the work’s worthiness leads to higher level of employee motivation. H3: Higher level of equality leads to higher level of employee motivation. H4: Higher level of recognition leads to higher level of employee motivation. H5: Higher level of benefits leads to higher level of employee motivation. 2.3. Age, seniority, gender, profession, and employee motivation This section looks at previous research examining the influence of four demographic and social status factors: age, seniority (length of service), gender, and profession, on employees’ motivation. Age and seniority Pratchett and Wingfield (1996) suggest older people have a stronger belief in PSE, while younger workers might be more motivated by extrinsic rewards. This is supported by many empirical studies indicating that extrinsic motivation such as power, achievement, progression and recognition seems to decline with age (Warr, 2008; Inceoglu et al., 2012), while intrinsic motivation witnesses the reverse (Kooij et al., 2011; Inceoglu et al., 2012; Rhodes, 1983). Van De Berg (2011) found job characteristics such as organisational stimulation, work variety, challenging goals and autonomy effectively motivated older employees since they increase intrinsic motivation. On the other hand, Maehr and Kleiber (1981) whose study focused on achievement motivation, propose that achievement does not decrease with age but transforms from a more extrinsic to an intrinsic, ‘mastery-related’ pattern. ‘Mastery’ is defined as the intra-personal standards of competence that are intrinsically, instead of extrinsically interpersonal or other-referenced standards (De Lange et al., 2010). Young workers, in contrast, place more value on career advancement. 68% of recent graduates surveyed by Adecco in 2012 chose growth and development opportunities as one of their top priorities (Goudreau, 2013). Some studies argue that differences in motivation 638
9. between age groups are caused by the distinctive eras in which they grow up. Therefore, they examine this topic by dividing the population into various generations: Baby Boomer, Generation Xer and Millennial. The findings on each generation’s motivations and demotivation are diverse (Goodman, 2006; Erickson, 2008; Jaworski, 2009). Much work has focused on the Millennials as they are about to be the majority of the workforce. Encouragement, recognition and work-life balance are the top three reward preferences, while high pay is far behind in the list (Fertik, 2011; Goudreau, 2013; Twenge, 2010; Hershatter and Epstein, 2010). A study about generations by Griffith Insurance Education Foundation in 2012 reported that Millennials are willing to sacrifice pay to have more time on holiday and work outside the office. It is argued that technological change might have impacted Millennials’ expectation about their work (Thompson and Gregory, 2012; Goudreau, 2013). In fact, work can be performed anytime from anywhere as long as Internet access is available. Thus, fixed working hours and to having to sit at a desk all day everyday are not favourable. Millennials also responds well to encouragement, feedback and praise. This is because they have been socialised by ‘helicopter parents’ who provide frequent positive feedback, praise, reassurance and guidance (Hershatter and Epstein, 2010). As a result, they will expect the same level of feedback, praise, individual attention and guidance at work (Thompson and Gregory, 2012). Other research also suggests management style is the key to motivate Millennials (Lancaster and Stillman, 2002; Ng et al., 2010), since poor management might be the cause for the highest turnover rate of Millennials among other generations (Gallup, 2016). Length of service or seniority might share some common impacts with age on motivation of employees since normally young workers are the one who have shorter length of service compared to older employees. However, this is not always the case as many older workers decided to change their job for various reasons such as to be promoted to a higher rank, better salary or simply for closer distance from home, which leads to their short duration of service at the new organisation. Many authors have researched the relationship between length of service and job satisfaction and found the positive relationship (Atchinson and Lefferts, 1975; Karp et al., 1973; Locke, 1968; Mobley et al., 1979), while the impacts on motivation has not been studied much. Nonetheless, job satisfaction is well-known as strongly related to motivation, which means there is a high possibility that seniority would affect employees’ motivation. 639
10. Gender Research findings on gender and motivation seems to capture gender stereotypes. For example, studies find significant difference in preference between men and women in terms of achieving promotions or power which may provide part of the explanation for the higher percentage of men holding leadership positions (Gino and Brooks, 2015). These findings have a long history since the 1960s and 1970s. Research at that time illustrated that males had higher levels of achievement motivation than females (Tyler, 1965; Hoffman, 1972), which was consistent with the social belief that women should stay at home and look after their children (Hyde and Kling, 2001). Horner (1969) suggests this imbalance in achievement motivation is caused by women’s fear of success. To prove her theory right, Horner (1969) conducted a projective test which required respondents to finish a story that started “After first-term finals, Anne (John) finds herself (himself) at the top of her (his) medical-school class.” 65% of women showed very negative responses compared to men’s. They indicated fears of social rejection, success denial and concerns about womanhood, while men expressed their satisfaction over the achievement. Horner’s study was criticised for not taking into account the heavily stereotyped society at that time. Critics noted that Anne’s success was in medical school, which was stereotyped as male. Therefore, the findings might indicate a fear of violating stereotypes rather than a generalised fear of success (Cherry and Deaux, 1978). Eccles (1994) also tried to explain gender differences by using an expectancy x value model. This identifies two sets of beliefs influencing the choice to conduct an achievement- related behaviour: the individual expectation for the success and how he/she values the results. These beliefs in turn are affected by social and cultural factors such as socialisers (parents and teachers) and gender stereotypes. However, studies show that women’s achievement motivation has developed over time (Veroff et al., 1980; Jenkins, 1987), which seems to be the result of more educational and career opportunities becoming available for women over the last decades (Hyde and Kling, 2001). More recent research on achievement motivation, in contrast, reveals no gender differences (Mednick and Thomas, 1993; Barron and Harackiewicz, 2001). Other studies also find male workers value pay, benefits and authority more highly than females. Whereas, women tend to be motivated by affiliation such as relationships, respect, collaboration, fairness and work-life balance (Guth and Taguiri, 2007; Buelens and Broeck, 2007; Fapohunda, 2013). However, culture and sector characteristics contribute important roles in gender differences. A study of gender relations in the broadcast sector in Nigeria 640
11. (Ufuophu-Biri and Iwu, 2014) found no evidence of the correlation between gender and job motivation. Male and female employees in Slovakia also have great similarity in motivation factors (Hitka et al., 2016). Japanese men value intrinsic motivations higher than extrinsic incentives, while women prefer extrinsic factors in Japan (Worthley et al., 2009). Profession According to Maslow (1943), people tend to satisfy their needs from the lowest level first. Working at higher positions compared to general employees, managers have different and higher levels of desires. Myers (1966) supported this argument and pointed out in more detail factors that strongly influenced mangers’ motivation: interpersonal competence, meaningful goals, and management systems. All of them belong to high level needs in Maslow’s hierarchy. Specialists are thought distinct in their motivation in comparison with other occupations such as administration workers. Many empirical studies testing Herzberg’s two-factor theory (1959) and Vroom’s expectancy theory (1964) suggest that specialists such as engineers and scientists are highly internally motivated and their engagement comes from curiosity, the desire to do high-quality, interesting and challenging work (Kea, 2008; Venkatesan et al. 2009; Jindal-Snape and Snape, 2006). Most of them do not consider financial rewards as motivating factors (Browne, 2013; Hagstrom, 1965). Instead, achievement (Herzberg, 1968; Ruthankoon and Ogunlana, 2003) and recognition (Katz, 2004; Venkatesan et al., 2009; Mulkay and Turner, 1971) are the primary rewards. Obtaining professional recognition from peers in the forms of reference or honorific prizes is very important to them, especially within the research communities. The strong intrinsic motivation is also likely to be found in the healthcare industry, where codes of medical ethics are normally in place. However, even with the absence of these code of ethics, medical professions are still expected to naturally have strong motivation to perform well since their works directly affect people’s health. Another important factor is management style: for example, using a business manager to manage engineers may be problematic since they are different in many aspects and motivated by different things (Terpstra, 2012). Specialists may be too qualified for a manager who does not have the same background to be able to understand and manage. Although the research results remain a matter of controversy, significant evidence supports the differences in motivation of employees having different age, gender, profession and/or 641
12. seniority. Hence, those variables will be used as control variables in the research model (figure 1). Figure 1. Research model Meaningfull work Control variables 1. Gender 2. Age 3. Profession 4. Seniority Worthwhile work Employee Equality motivation Recognition Benefits 3. Research Methodology 3.1 Questionnaire and data collection A mix methods of primary data collection was used in this investigation of motivation among EA employees: a questionnaire survey generating quantitative data, preceded by qualitative, semi-structured interviews. Semi-structured interviews were conducted to gather qualitative insight on work motivation in the organisational context of the EA and its National Office department as well as to improve the quetionnaire. The interviews included a list of key questions around the topic of employee motivation, but the number and order in which they were addressed varied from interview to interview according to the flow of the conversations (Saunders et al., 2012). A sample of the questionnaire was also given to interviewees for their opinion and suggestions for improvement. Ideally all EA employees would have been asked to participate in the questionnaire survey. However, they number 11,000 in total. Given time and resource constraints, the study focused on the National Office group of 4558 employees. A reason for focusing on this population was that data necessary to apply the stratified random sampling technique to 642
13. achieve adequate representation of the demographic ‘variables’ that were of interest as possible influences on work motivation were available. The questionnaire has 15 questions organised in two sections. Section 1 consisted of 10 questions explored employee attitudes to aspects of work and work content identified in the literature as potential influences on motivation. Respondents were asked to answer rating scale questions from 1 to 5 showing their satisfaction or agreement for the particular aspects of work and work context included in the questionnaire. They were organised into nine dimensions based on the factors of motivation identified from the literature review. Some questions were adapted from the previous study of DeBeer (1987) and some were from the EA employee survey. Besides, other questions were also designed by the researcher. They were than allocated into the appropriate dimensions and measured against 1 question asking respondents to assess their level of motivation in their job (question 10). Section 2 of the questionnaire was designed to gather demographic information about respondent’s gender, age, ethnicity, and also length of service at the EA and occupation within the organisation. Appendix 2 shows the questionnaire. The data collection process included two phases. Qualitative data was collected first. 5 interviewees were invited to participate in the research. They were ‘expert informants’ members of networks within the EA such as the age network, women’s network and BAME network. Face-to-face and telephone interviews were conducted since some interviewees were not based in Bristol. The second phase was quantitative data collection. The questionnaire was sent out after being edited in accordance with interviewees’ advice and suggestions. An internal online survey had been set up and sent out by the EA’s Market Research Team. A link to the survey was attached in the invitation to participate in the research emailed to the selected sample of 500 employees. 3.2 Sampling The sampling technique was stratified random sampling. It involves the division of the population into strata based on one or more features and then a simple random sample will be selected from each of the strata. It is necessary to apply this technique to address the research questions considering different age groups, genders and professions. Among four considered characteristics, it was concerned that there might not be enough responses in different age groups to carry out statistical analysis. Therefore, it was designed to divide the sample into 643
14. five strata: under 25, 25-34, 35-44, 45-54, and 55 or over. 100 employees have been randomly selected from each stratum to form the sample. In total, 197 people responded within two weeks, making a response rate of 39.4%. The demographic data summary is presented below in Table 2: Table 1. Data summary Response Response Gender Percent Total 1 Male 44.67% 88 2 Female 51.78% 102 3 Non-binary 0.51% 1 4 Self-declared 0.00% 0 5 Prefer not to say 3.05% 6 Age Response Response Percent Total 1 Under 25 5.58% 11 2 25-34 23.86% 47 3 35-44 24.87% 49 4 45-54 15.23% 30 5 55 or over 23.86% 47 6 Prefer not to say 6.60% 13 Profession Response Response Percent Total 1 Director / Executive Manager 0.00% 0 2 Manager 10.66% 21 3 Specialist 29.95% 59 4 Team leader 6.60% 13 5 Team member 47.21% 93 6 Prefer not to say 5.58% 11 Response Response Seniority Percent Total 1 Up to 6 months 3.55% 7 2 Over 6 months – 1 year 3.05% 6 3 Over 1 – 2 years 11.68% 23 4 Over 2 – 5 years 11.68% 23 5 Over 5 – 10 years 20.30% 40 6 Over 10 – 15 years 17.77% 35 7 Over 15 years 28.93% 57 8 Prefer not to say 3.05% 6 644
15. 3.3 Data analysis Besides descriptive statistical technques, Cronbach’s alphas were calculated to test the internal consistency among questions in one variable (Tavakol and Dennick, 2011). The overall Spearman correlations between all variables was produced to roughly detect any multicollinearity before running the regression analysis. Ordinary Least Square (OLS) regression analysis was carried out using SPSS to test the proposed hypotheses. Besides five independent variables, 4 control variables which are Age, Seniority, Gender and Profession were taken into account by using dummy variables. n-1 dummy variables were created for each of those four categories and added to the regression model, which makes the total explanatory variables to increase by 8. 4. Findings and Discussion This section presents the findings from the research. It focuses on the questionnaire survey data with the aim of establishing, through statistical analysis, the aspects of work and work context that appear significant in accounting for employee motivation in the job (as reported by questionnaire participants). Insight from the qualitative interviews, however, is incorporated where it contributes, for example, to clarification of EA HR and/or work practices. The first part of this section provides the description of the data set to establish the initial understanding of the data and the rationale for using of further analysis techniques. Reliability tests are also discussed. The next section presents correlation matrix and the regression analyses of the sample, which reveals factors affecting employee motivation in their job. Comparison with relevant studies in the research literature and with the EA’s employee survey will also be made with appropriate justification. 4.1.Descriptive analysis Figure 2 shows the respondents’ answers to motivation question. It can be seen that more people surveyed reported they were fairly or very motivated in their job than those who indicated they were fairly or very demotivated. In fact, 66.5% of participants gave the response fairly or very motivated. In contrast, only 8.1% recorded they were demotivated, with only 4.1% indicating very demotivated. This is an unexpected result for a public-sector organisation after 7 years suffering from the government austerity programme. There are two possible explanations for this. First, it might be that the majority of respondents are happy people with high level of motivation, while staff who feel demotivated about their job chose not to take part in the survey. On the other hand, it is possible that EA employees hold a 645
16. strong public service ethos (PSE) which has not been diminished by years of pay restraint for the publics sector. Figure 2. Motivation level of the overall sample 4.1% 16.2% 8.1% Very demotivated Demotivated 21.3% Neither motivated nor demotivated Motivated Very motivated 50.3% The result of some PSE-related questions seem to support the latter argument (Figure 3). For example, more than 80% of respondents agreed or agreed strongly that their work is interesting, and a similar proportion agreed or strongly agreed they achieve something worthwhile at work. Likewise, the survey participants overall seem to be satisfied with the current reward package at the EA. Figure 3. Respondents’ perception of the work itself and the benefits offered by EA 6.1% 1.0% 2.0% 1.0% 11.7% 25.9% 11.7% 38.1% 47.2% 55.3% My work is interesting I feel I achieve something worthwhile at work 646
17. 10.7% 13.2% Strongly disagree 19.8% Tend to disagree Neither agree or disagree 37.1% Tend to agree Strongly agree 19.3% Thinking about my reward package (pay, core and voluntary benefits), overall I am satisfied with what is on offer to me 4.2.Reliablity analysis, Correlation, and Regression analysis Reliability analysis Table 2 shows the results for the Variables Table 2.Questions Cronbach's alphasCronbach’s alphas Cronbach’s alphas, which test the Interesting work 1 - internal consistency of those Meaningful work 2 - questions under one variable. Equality 3, 4, 5 0.754 Recognition 8, 9 0.689 According to Tavakol and Dennick Benefits 6, 7 0.481 (2011), the Cronbach’s alpha should be at least 0.7. Therefore, questions under Benefits will have to be analysed individually. They will be named as B1, B2, for question 6, and 7 respectively. Correlation matrix Several strong correlations between explanatory variables are highlighted in Table 3. These correlations are even higher than that of individual regressors with the regressand. For example, Interesting work and Meaningful work have a quite strong relationship with the correlation coefficient of 0.637. Likewise, there are a few strong correlations between dummy variables in the same group, such as D2-10 years and DOver 10 years. However, this should not be a concern as both of these variables were created from the variable of Seniority. 647
18. Table 3. Correlation matrix Interesting Meaningful DOver 10 Motivation Equality Recognition B1 B2 DMale D25-34 D35-44 D45-54 DOver 55 D2-10 years DManager work work years Spearman Correlation .650 1 Interesting work Sig. (2-tailed) .000 Spearman Correlation .600 .637 1 Meaningful work Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 Spearman Correlation .487 .396 .459 1 Equality Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 Spearman Correlation .360 .311 .291 .374 1 Recognition Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .000 .000 Spearman Correlation .287 .150* .298 .347 .452 1 B1 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .039 .057 .000 .000 Spearman Correlation .197 .485 .153* .306 .241 .360 1 B2 Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000 .042 .000 .001 .000 Spearman Correlation -.010 -.016 -.067 .072 -.061 -.134 .041 1 DMale Sig. (2-tailed) .895 .837 .379 .338 .422 .074 .588 Spearman Correlation -.073 -.131 -.067 -.108 .022 -.038 -.020 .104 1 D25-34 Sig. (2-tailed) .332 .081 .373 .151 .770 .613 .789 .170 Spearman Correlation .036 .051 -.013 -.001 -.065 -.040 .118 .066 -.356 1 D35-44 Sig. (2-tailed) .408 .504 .861 .991 .391 .601 .116 .380 .000 Spearman Correlation .044 .140 .101 .036 .007 .058 -.102 -.104 -.266 -.262 1 D45-54 Sig. (2-tailed) .564 .064 .181 .633 .924 .440 .176 .168 .000 .000 Spearman Correlation -.021 -.023 .015 .050 -.020 -.075 -.087 -.127 -.351 -.346 -.258 1 DOver 55 Sig. (2-tailed) .786 .786 .838 .510 .796 .320 .252 .091 .000 .000 .001 Spearman Correlation -.094 -.066 -.106 -.039 -.021 -.004 -.012 .027 .299 -.043 -.124 -.089 1 D2-10 years Sig. (2-tailed) .216 .383 .159 .603 .786 .953 .874 .720 .000 .567 .101 .238 Spearman Correlation .034 .080 .072 .063 -.118 -.122 -.077 -.093 -.539 .166* .257 .283 -.673 1 DOver 10 years Sig. (2-tailed) .650 .289 .342 .403 .118 .105 .307 .221 .000 .027 .001 .000 .000 Spearman Correlation -.030 .101 .011 .042 .019 .027 -.028 -.128 -.086 .171* -.076 .070 -.034 .200 1 DManager Sig. (2-tailed) .687 .182 .889 .581 .797 .726 .715 .090 .256 .023 .312 .357 .655 .007 Spearman Correlation -.074 -.157* -.098 -.081 .006 .001 -.060 .243 .265 -.261 -.109 -.042 .115 -.402 -.693 DSpecialist Sig. (2-tailed) .328 .037 .193 .286 .935 .992 .431 .001 .000 .000 .147 .577 .126 .000 .000 648
19. Regression This technique is employed to identify which factors are responsible for the current motivation level reported by EA survey participants. Dummy variables Taking into account 4 control demographic factors, 8 dummy variables were formed to add to the regression equation. They are DMale, D2-10years, DOver 10 years, D35-44, D45-54, DOver 55, DManager and DSpecialist. The variables’ name indicates the characteristic that took the value of 1. For example, D35-44 is the dummy variable in which people who are 35- 44 years old took the value of 1, while the rest took the value of 0. Multicollinearity Another problem needs to be tackled to ensure the validity of the results is multicollinearity. Multicollinearity is the phenomenon in which there are one or more exact linear relationships among explanatory variables (Gujarati, 2015). Although it does not cause any bias in the estimated parameters, it makes it hard to distinguish the effects of individual variables on the regressand. This problem can be spotted by using the variance inflation factor (VIF). VIF calculates how much the variance of an estimated coefficient is increased because of collinearity. Table 4 shows the regression estimation and VIF of the regression model, where the impacts of Interesting work, Worthwhile work, Autonomy, Equality, Recognition, B1, B2, and 8 control dummy variables are regressed for the whole sample. A rule of thumb found in the literature suggests a VIF of 4 indicates excessive multicollinearity (O’Brien, 2007). In contrast with the result of the correlation matrix, Interesting work and Worthwhile work do not cause multicolinearity. High VIF values stay with dummy variables, which again should not be a big concern. Table 4. Regression estimation model Std. Standardised Collinearity Statistics B t Sig. Error coefficients Beta Tolerance VIF (Constant) -1.074 .486 -2.207 .029 Interesting work .478 .087 .392 5.497 .000 .474 2.109 Worthwhile work .317 .084 .277 3.788 .000 .449 2.227 Equality .070 .029 .156 2.443 .016 .589 1.698 Recognition .095 .041 .135 2.314 .022 .709 1.410 B1 .015 .068 .013 .216 .829 .656 1.525 B2 -.003 .045 -.004 -.077 .939 .753 1.329 DMale -.023 .104 -.012 -.221 .826 .853 1.172 649
20. D25-34 .078 .241 .035 .324 .746 .204 4.903 D35-44 .174 .266 .078 .656 .513 .169 5.913 D45-54 .011 .286 .004 .037 .971 .206 4.847 DOver 55 .073 .273 .033 .268 .789 .163 6.153 D2-10 years -.122 .160 -.059 -.764 .446 .400 2.499 DOver 10 years -.126 .193 -.064 -.651 .516 .248 4.035 DManager -.265 .150 -.127 -1.768 .079 .468 2.137 DSpecialist -.136 .158 -.069 -.857 .393 .368 2.719 Note: N = 177 R2 = 0.612 Significant variables at 0.05 From the regression result above, the model has a quite good R2=0.612, which means 61.2% of the variability of motivation level is explained by the variability of the independent variables. There are four independent variables that are statistically significant at 95% confident level (p<0.05). They are Interesting work, Worthwhile work, Equality, and Recognition, supporting H1, H2, H3, and H4. All of them have positive regression coefficients (β). This means that people’s perception toward interesting work, worthwhile work, fairness and recognition, have significantly positive impacts on their motivation level. Hence, for a one-unit increase in each of those independent variables, the response variable level is expected to increase by its respective coefficient in the ordered scale while the other variables are held constant. These findings seem to support the theories discussed in section 2. The significance of Equality supports Adam’s Equity theory (1963) about the positive effect of fair treatments on motivation. However, this factor also includes people’s perceptions about equality when individual differences such as backgrounds, characteristics and cultures are taken into account, which is one of the criticisms of Adam’s theory (Al-Zawahreh and Al-Maldi, 2012). This result therefor suggests that people working at the EA have a strong awareness about diversity since it is important to them that individual differences are respected. Likewise, these findings also support Herzberg’s two-factor theory (Herzberg et al., 1959). Interesting work, Worthwhile work, and Recognition are classified as intrinsic factors that will lead to higher job satisfaction and motivation, while hygiene factors such as benefits (B1, B2) are found insignificant. In addition, the regression estimation also indicates the existence of PSE among EA employees. Having interesting work and the feeling of achieving something worthwhile do matter to people rather than benefits alone. When comparison is made with the EA’s 2016 employee survey, Interesting work and Worthwhile work were ranked as the top 4 drivers of motivation. 650
21. In terms of demographic factors, all 8 dummy variables are statistically insignificant. Thus, there are no significant differences in motivation level between gender, age, seniority and profession at the EA. This might be caused by the small sample size selected in this study, which is not big enough to capture the differences. 5. Conclusion and Recommendations This study aimed to explore motivation among EA’s employees: how employees’ perceptions on nature of work, social environment and benefits affect their motivation level, and the differences between gender, age, seniority and profession. The results show that among 14 independent variables, only Interesting work, Worthwhile work, Equality and Recognition have positive significant impact on employees’ motivation level, while benefits (B1, B2) are insignificant, indicating that for the public sector, benefits are not as important as it is in the private sector. When people choose to work for the public sector, they look for things like the work itself, equality, and recognition, rather than benefits. Moreover, no difference in gender, age, seniority and profession was found. This might due to the fact that the small sample size is not large enough to capture the differences between demographic group. Further studies should investigate a bigger sample. Anyways, with some exceptions, the findings are generally consistent with theories, previous empirical studies and the EA employee survey. When it comes to implications for HR practices, EA employees seem to be intrinsically motivated. To make employees feel they are doing an interesting and meaningful work, management style is very important. Managers need to strive to allocate work that best aligns with their team members’ skills and interests. Investigating employees’ strengths and helping to develop them through appropriate goal setting and mentoring will create challenging and interesting work for employees. Likewise, giving employees the opportunities to choose the assignments matched their personal preferences and strengths is another way of promoting intrinsic motivation. Employees should also be included in decision-making process, which gives them a stake in the success of the organisation. They will feel valued as well as achieved something worthwhile. Thus, training for managers about the importance and conduct of those skills should be one of the key practices that drive employees’ motivation. In addition, organising outdoor days that allows office workers to participate in actual field works of helping the community environment will enhance their feeling about the importance of their contribution. 651
22. References ACCA (2012) Talent Attraction and Retention in Large Accounting Firms [online]. ACCA. Available from: PDFs/talent-attraction-singapore.pdf [Accessed 17 September 2017]. Adams, S. (1963) Toward an understanding of inequity. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 67, pp. 422-436. Al-Zawahreh, A. and Al-Maldi, F. (2012) The utility of equity theory in enhancing organisational effectiveness. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Sciences. 46, pp. 158-170. Bach, S. (2016) Deprivileging the public sector workforce: Austerity, fragmentation and service withdrawal in Britain. The Economic and Labour Relations Review. 27(1), pp. 11-28. Barron, K. and Harackiewicz, J. (2001) Achievement goals and optimal motivation: Testing multiple goal models. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 80, pp. 706–722. Blackburn, R. and Mann, M. (1979) The Working Class in the Labour Market. London: Macmillan. Booth-Smith, L. and Leigh, D. (2016) A New Public Service Ethos: Next Generation Public Service Reform [online]. Localis and Grant Thornton. Available at: kingdom/pdf/publication/2016/a-new-public-service-ethos.pdf [Accessed 06 September 2017]. Boyne, G. (2002) Public and private management: What is the difference? Journal of Management Studies. 39(1), pp. 97-122. Brooks, I. (2009) Organisational Behaviour. 4th ed. London: Pearson. Browne, K. (2013) Unique factors for motivating engineers: A motivation meta theory approach. Doctor of Business Administration. Available at: [Accessed 29 June 2017]. 652
23. Buelens, M. and Broeck, H. (2007) An analysis of differences in work motivation between public and private sector organisations. Public Administration Review. 67(1) pp. 65-74. Cherry, F. and Deaux, K. (1978) Fear of success versus fear of gender-inappropriate behaviour. Sex Roles. 4, pp. 97–102. De Lange, A., Yperen, N., Van der Heijden, B. and Bal, M. (2010) Dominant achievement goals of older workers and their relationship with motivation-related outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behaviour. 77(1), pp. 118-125. DeBeer, M. (1987) 'n Ondersoek na die rol wat arbeidsomset in die bedryf speel met spesifieke verwysing na werkbevrediging en werksmotivering. Master, University of the Free State. DEFRA (2017) Defra Group: Equality, Diversity and Inclusion Strategy 2017 to 2020 [online]. DEFRA. Available at: group-equality-diversity-and-inclusion-strategy-2017-to-2020.pdf [Accessed 18 September 2017]. Eccles, J. (1994) Understanding women’s educational and occupational choices: Applying the Eccles et al. model of achievement-related choices. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 18, pp. 585–610. The Environment Agency (EA) (2016) Environment Agency Annual report and accounts for the financial year 2015 to 2016 [online]. UK: The Environment Agency. Available from: 0494.pdf [Accessed 03 July 2017]. The Environment Agency (2017) The Work of the Environment Agency. Environment Agency. Eberendu, A. and Kenneth-Okere, R. (2015) An empirical review of motivation as a constituent to employees’ retention. Research Inventy: International Journal of Engineering and Science. 5(2), pp. 06-15. Erickson, T. (2008) Don’t treat them like baby boomers. Business Week. August, p. 64. 653
24. Fapohunda, T. (2013) An exploration of gender based differences in workplace values. International Journal of Human Resource Studies. 3(3), pp. 50-61. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (2005) Large Stakes and Big Mistakes. Boston: Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. Fertik, M. (2011) Managing and motivating employees in their twenties. Harvard Business Review [online]. [Accessed 10 September 2017]. Gibson, J., Ivancevich, J., Donnelly, J. and Konopaske, R. (2003) Organisations: Behaviour, Structure, Processes. 11st ed. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. Gino, F. and Brooks, A. (2015) Explaining gender differences at the top. Harvard Business Review. Available at: [Accessed 26 June 2017]. Goodman, M. (2006) Corporate communication practice and pedagogy at the dawn of the new millennium. Corporate Communications: An International Journal. 11(3), pp. 196-213. Goodman, P. and Friedman, A. (1971) An examination of Adams’ theory of equity. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16.Grimshaw, D., Marchinton, M., Rubery, J. and Willmott, H. (2005) Fragmenting Work: Blurring Organisational Boundaries and Disordering Hierarchies. New York: Oxford University Press. Goudreau, J. (2013) 7 surprising ways to motivate millennial workers. Forbes [blog]. 07 March. Available from: surprising-ways-to-motivate-millennial-workers/#24924e62c79f [Accessed 10 September 2017]. Guay, F., Chanal, J., Ratelle, C., Marsh, H., Larose, S. and Boivin, M. (2010) Intrinsic, identified, and controlled types of motivation for school subjects in young elementary school children. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 80(4), pp. 711–735. Gujarati, D. (2015) Econometrics by Example, 2nd ed. London: Palgrave. Guth, W. and Tagiuri, R. (2007) The Sociology of Values. Annual Review of sociology. pp. 27-49. 654
25. Hagstrom, W. (1965). The Scientific Community. New York: Basic. Hebson, G., Grimshaw, D. and Marchington, M. (2003) PPPs and the changing public sector ethos: case-study evidence from the health and local authority sectors. Work Employment and Society. 17(3), pp. 483-503. Hershatter, A. and Epstein, M. (2010) Millennials and the world of work: An organization and management perspective. Journal of Business and Psychology. 25, pp. 211–223. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B. and Synderman, B. (1959) The Motivation to Work. New York: John Wiley & Son. Herzberg, F. (1968) One more time: How do we motivate employees? Harvard Business Review. 6(1), pp. 53-62. Hitka, M., Vetráková, M. and Balážová, Z. (2016) Differences in motivation between male and female in Slovakia in 2015. Modern Applied Science. 10(1), pp. 52-64. Hoffman, L. (1972) Early childhood experiences and women’s achievement motives. Journal of Social Issues, 28(2), pp. 129–155. Horner, M. S. (1969) Fail: Bright women. Psychology Today. 3(6), p. 36. House, R. and Wigdor, L. (1967) Herzberg’s dual-factor theory of job satisfaction and motivation: A review of the empirical evidence and a criticism. Personnel Psychology. Winter, pp. 369-380. Hyde, J. and Kling, K. (2001) Women, motivation, and achievement. Psychology of Women Quarterly. 25, pp. 364-378. Inceoglu, I., Segers, J. and Bartram, D. (2012) Age-related differences in work motivation. Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology. 85, pp. 300-329. Jaworski, B. (2009) Boom times. Benefits Canada [online] 01 September. Available from: [Accessed by 26 June 2017]. 655
26. Jenkins, S. (1987) Need for achievement and women’s careers over 14 years: Evidence for occupational structure effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 53, pp. 922– 932. Jindal-Snape, D. and Snape, J. (2006) Motivation of scientists in a government research institute: Scientist’ perceptions and the role of management. Management Decision. 44(10), pp. 1325-1343. John, P. and Johnson, M. (2008) Is there still a public sector ethos? In: Park, A., Curtice, J., Thomson, K., Phillips, M., Johnson, M. and Clery, E. (2008) British Social Attitudes: the 24th Report. London: Sage, pp. 105-125. Jones I., Martin S. and Whittington L. (2015) Coping with the Cuts: Lessons from English Councils’ Responses to Budget Reductions. Cardiff: Public Policy Institute for Wales.͒ Jurkiewicz, C. and Brown, R. (1998) Generational comparisons of public employee motivation. Review of Public Personnel Administration. 18, pp. 18-37. Kassa, T. (2015) Employee motivation and its effect on employee retention in Ambo mineral water factory. International Journal of Advance Research in Computer Science and Management Studies. 3(3), pp. 10-21. Katz, R. (2004) The Human Side of Managing Technological Innovation. Cambridge: Harvard Business Review Books. Kea, H. (2008) How are NASA Engineers Motivated? An Analysis of Factors that Influence NASA Goddard Engineers’ Level of Motivation. PhD, Antioch University. Kooij, D., de Lange, A., Jansen, P. Kanfer, R. and Dikkers, J. (2011) Age and work-related motives: Results of a meta-analysis. Journal of Organisational Behaviour. 32, pp. 197-225. Lancaster, L. and Stillman, D. (2002) When generations collide: Who they are. Why they clash. How to solve the generational puzzle at work. New York: Harper Business. Locke, E. (1968) Toward a theory of task motivation and incentives. Organisational Behaviour and Human Performance. May, pp. 157-189. 656
27. Maehr, M. and Kleiber, D. (1981) The graying of achievement motivation. American Psychologist. 36, pp. 787-793. Maidment, J. (2017) Theresa May ‘set to lift 1% public sector pay cap’. The Telegraph [online]. 04 September. Available from: [Accessed 24 October 2017]. Maslow, A. (1943) A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review. 50(4), pp. 370-396. Mednick, M. and Thomas, V. (1993) Women and the psychology of achievement: A view from the eighties. In: Denmark, F. and Paludi, M. (1993) Psychology of Women: A Handbook of Issues and Theories. Westport, CT: Greenwood. Miner, J. (1984) The validity and usefulness of theories in an emerging organizational science. Academy of Management Review. 9, pp. 296-306. Moynihan, D. and Pandey, S. (2007) The role of organisations in fostering public service motivation. Public Administration Review. 67(1), pp. 40-53. Mulkay, M. and Turner, B. (1971) Over-production of personnel and innovation in three social settings. Sociology. 5(January), pp. 47-62. Myers, S. (1966) Conditions for manager motivation. Harvard Business Review [online]. Available at: [Accessed 29 June 2017]. Ng, E., Schweitzer, L. and Lyons, S. (2010) New generation, great expectations: A field study of the millennial generation. Journal of Business and Psychology. 25, pp. 281–292. Norris, P. (2003) Is there still a public service ethos? Work values, experience, and job satisfaction among government workers. In: Donahue, J. and Nye Jr., J., eds. (2003) For the People: Can We Fix Public Service? Washington D.C: Brookings Institution Press. O’Brien, R. (2007) A caution regarding rules of thumb for variance inflation factors. Quality & Quantity [online]. 41 (5), pp. 673-690. [Accessed 19 November 2017]. 657
28. Perry, J. (1996) Measuring public service motivation: An assessment of construct reliability and validity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory. 6(1), pp. 5–22. Pratchett, L. and Wingfield, M. (1994) The Public Sector Ethos in Local Government: a research report. London: Commission for Local Democracy. Pratchett, L. and Wingfield, M. (1996) Petty bureaucracy and woolly minded liberalism? The changing ethos of local government officers. Public Administration. 74, pp. 639-656. Public Administration Committee (2002) Seventh Report, the Public Service Ethos. London: HMSO. Rhodes, S. (1983) Age-related differences in work attitudes and behaviour: A review and conceptual analysis. Psychological Bulletin. 93, pp. 328-367. Ruthankoon, R. and Ogunlana, S. (2003) Testing Herzberg’s two-factor theory in Thai Construction Industry. 10(5), pp. 333-341. Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2012) Research Methods for Business Students. 6th ed. Harlow: Pearson. Terpstra, R. (2012) Motivating and working with engineers as a business person. Forbes [blog]. 11 June. Available from: engineers-as-a-business-person/#9339ddf8cd9e [Accessed 29 June 2017]. Thompson, C. and Gregory, J. (2012) Managing Millennials: A framework for improving attraction, motivation and retention. Psychologist-Manager Journal. 15, pp. 237-246. Twenge, J. (2006) Generation Me: Why Today’s Young Americans are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled and More Miserable than Ever Before. New York: Free Press. Tyler, L. (1965) The Psychology of Human Differences. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Ufuophu-Biri, E. and Iwu, C. (2014) Job motivation, job performance and gender relations in the broadcast sector in Nigeria. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. 5(16), pp. 191-198. 658
29. Van de Berg, P. (2011) Characteristics of the work environment related to older employees’ willingness to continue working: Intrinsic motivation as a mediator. Psychological Reports. 109(1), pp. 174-186. Venkatesan , R., Varghese, K and Ananthanarayanan, K. (2009) Motivation and demotivation ‘cause factors’ for engineers in construction organisations. In: Dainty, A., ed. Procs 25th Annual ARCOM Conference. Nottingham, 7-9 September 2009. Association of Research in Construction Management, pp. 145-153. Veroff, J., Depner, C., Kukla, R. and Douvan, E. (1980) Comparison of American motives: 1957 versus 1976. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 39, pp. 1004–1013. Warr, P. (2008). Work values: Some demographic and cultural correlates. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 81, pp. 751–775. Worthley, R., MacNab, B., Brislin, R., Ito, K. and Rose, E. (2009) Workforce motivation in Japan: an examination of gender differences and management perceptions. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 20(7), pp. 1503-1520. 659