Working motivation of lecturers of public universities in vietnam in the context of industry 4.0

Nội dung text: Working motivation of lecturers of public universities in vietnam in the context of industry 4.0

1. WORKING MOTIVATION OF LECTURERS OF PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES IN VIETNAM IN THE CONTEXT OF INDUSTRY 4.0 Ph.D Ha Dieu Linh1 – Assoc. Prof. Bui Huy Nhuong2 – Canh Chi Dung3 Abstract: Industry 4.0 is happening strongly and has a great impact to higher education envirnment. By the end of 2019, the total number of public universities in Vietnam is 172, accounted for 72.6% of the total number of universities nationwide. Public universities in Vietnam account for a high proportion in number and play a decisive role in results for Vietnamese students. To achieve the goal of sustainable development, public universities must pay special attention to the human factor. This article introduces the current situation of lecturers in public universities in Vietnam, and the research system of university lecturers' work motivation to propose recommendations for major construction of human resource management policies in public universities in Vietnam in the context of industry 4.0. Keywords: working motivation, public universities, industry 4.0. 1. INTRODUCTION In social life, education and training are the important fields for every nation and nation in all times. In addition to factors such as the training environment, facilities the resource of lecturers is the key issue that determines the success of a university. In particular, the quality of teaching and research of lecturers depends on their work motivation. The total number of public universities in Vietnam's higher education system by the end of 2019 is 172, accounted for 72.6% of the total number of universities nationwide. Detailed data on public universities and the total number of universities in Vietnam for the period 2013–2019 are shown in Figure 1, as follows: Figure 1. Number of public universities in Vietnam 235 235 237 250 214 219 223 200 175 175 172 156 159 163 150 100 50 0 School year School year School year School year School year School year 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 Number of public university Total number of university Source: Ministry of Education and Training 1 Ph.D Candidate, Ministry of Education and Training, Graduate Academy of Social Sciences. Email: dieulinhha83@gmail.com. 2 Assoc. Prof. Bui Huy Nhuong, Head of Personal andOrganizationalDepartment, National Economics University, Vietnam. Email: nhuongbh@neu.edu.vn. 3 Deputy Director General, Personnel and Organization Department, Ministry of Education and Training, Vietnam. Email: dungcc@moet.go n. 48
2. Figure 1 shows that in the period 2013–2019, public universities have an increase in number and has the highest proportion of universities in Vietnam. In school year 2016–2017 and school year 2017– 2018, the number of public universities was 175, accounted for 73.8% of the total number of universities in the country, respectively. This increase requires for lecturersin public universities to constantly increase in both quantity and quality. Detailedfigures of lecturersfor Vietnam's public universities during the period 2013–2019 are shown in Figure 2, as follows: Figure 2. Number oflecturersin public universities 80000 69591 72792 74881 73312 65664 70000 65206 59232 55401 57634 56985 60000 52500 52689 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 School year School year School year School year School year School year 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 Number of public university Source: Ministry of Education and Training The qualifications of lecturesat universities in Vietnam are divided into four categories, including: doctorate, master, bachelor and other qualifications. Information on qualificationof public universities’s lecturersin Vietnam in the period 2013–2019 is shown in Figure 3, as follows: Figure 3. Qualificationuniversity’slecturers 50000 43650 45266 44705 45000 41046 37853 40000 34471 35000 30000 25000 21006 20198 21106 17251 20000 14897 16514 13598 12519 15000 9653 10424 9495 10000 7489 5000 76 336 50 109 32 12 0 School year School year School year School year School year School year 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 Doctorate Master Bachelor Other Source: Ministry of Education and Training Industry 4.0 with modern technology platforms, especially information technology such as Internet of things, Big Data, Cloud computing, Automation technology, Artificial intelligence (AI), Machine Learning (Do, 2020) are taking place strongly and have a great impact on the higher education environment. To survive and develop sustainably, it requires public universities to pay special attention to the human factor. According to McKee and Tew (2013), human resource development, in particular lecturer development plays a key role, determining the success in construction and development of universities. Public universities not only need to take measures to retain lecturers, but also have policies to enhance motivation, arouse the passion, creativity, and spirit of dedication of lecturersfor their career education, for the development of the university. In order to do this, public universities must first have a systematically built rationale about the nature of lecturer motivation and the factors affecting that motivation to contribute to construct work motivation policies for lecturer. Therefore, it is very 49
3. important to study the work motivation of university’s lecturer in the context of industry 4.0 with theoretical and practical significance. This article provides an overview of the work motivation studies in general and the work motivation of lecturers in particular as the basis for the research on the work motivation of public universities’s lecturers in the context of Industry 4.0 and propose recommendations for the construction of human resource management policies in public universities in Vietnam. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ON WORK MOTIVATION Work motivation is one of the factors playing an important role in human resource management of an organization. The concept of motivation has been mentioned in many studies. According to Mitchell (1982), motivation is a degree that an individual wants to reach and choose to associate with his or her behavior. Research by Stee and Porter (1983) defined, work motivation is the desire and voluntariness of employees to increase efforts towards achieving organizational goals; is the impulse, consistency and persistence in the working process. The study of Pinder (1998) defined that work motivation is a set of two groups of factors that originate both inside and outside of an individual leading to behavior related to form defining, intensity and duration of action. In the same view as Pinder (1998), according to Gundry (2007), work motivation includes internal and external motivation. The internal motivation is the desire to work to prove one's own abilities, the internal motivation drives the desire to find and test new things. Meanwhile, the external motivation is the employees' desire to work due to the tangible or intangible rewards they receive (Leonard et al., 1999). Researchers have come up with many theories on work motivation, however, the main argument given by most theories is that people mainly act on demand, people will act to satisfy their own needs. Therefore, the needs becomes an important driving force to motivate employees to work, and the impact on demand will change human behavior. This is considered an important point to the organization’s managers to promote employees' motivation to work by using measures to influence their needs. The first theory mentioned is Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (1943). This theory shows that people have 5 needs from basic needs to advanced needs including: physiological needs, safety needs, love and belonging needs, esteem needs and self–actualization needs. In which, physiological needs include wages, food, accommodation and clothing, good and comfortable working conditions. Safety needs include needs for security, fair treatment, threat protection, job security. Love and belonging needsinclude the need to be loved, accepted, to be part of the group, while esteem needsincludes the need to be respected and trusted. Self–actualization needsincludes realizing your full potential or personal growth. On the basis of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, Herzberg and Mausner (1959) developed a Two– factor Theory consisting a group of factors that generate incentives and a group of factors that cause employee dissatisfaction. In the group of motivating factors include: achieving desired results, recognition of the organization, responsibility, advancement in work and personal growth. These factors are considered as the factors that create the motivation for employees to work. Factors that create dissatisfaction include the organization's regimes, policies, supervision, work conditions that do not meet employee expectations, salaries and remuneration mismatch, relationship with superiors and peers. Herzberg's theory emphasizes that the organization needs to satisfy employees first with their basic needs (group of dissatisfaction factors) and then on high demand (group of incentives). This group of incentives is only effective when the employee has been satisfied with the basic needs of working conditions and working environment. Followed is the theory X and the theory Y by Mc Gregor (1960). This theory has divided workers into two groups of subjects including group X theory and Y theory. The target group of X theory is 50
4. those who do not like to work, therefore the way to maintain and increase their productivity is accompanying disciplinary measures, overseeing their activities and encouraging them through financial incentives such as salaries and bonuses. The group of Y theory are those who love to work, they voluntarily work to achieve the purpose of the organization, they do it themselves and take responsibility by themselves, thus they have a spirit of vision and desire to learn. For this target group, it is necessary to assign challenging jobs, creating opportunities for them to be creative and capture higher demand. Although there is quite a bit of research on work motivation and the study of performance evaluation criteria, there are not many detailed studies assessing the impact of work motivation on job performance. Some studies abroad are mentioned as Davidson (2005) studies the influence of cultural factors of the organization on the performance of teachers. Research has shown that organizational culture plays an essential role in affecting teachers' performance. Only when creating a suitable culture in the organization, employees will feel comfortable in communication between colleagues and superiors, thereby helping their work to be more effective. How did Negussie & Ranjan (2014) explore the 5 basic needs of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needsthat affect the performance of teachers? What factors prominently influence teacher's performance? At the same time, the study also found out whether or not there was a difference in the impact of the five needs on job performance between public and private school’s teachers. Naqvi and Nadeem (2011) showed that teachers' performance is influenced by the social and economic conditions of teachers. Teachers' motivation will be reduced when working conditions are not being met, thereby reducing work efficiency. Research by Shahzadi et al. (2014) assessing the impact of employee motivation on work performance has shown that there is a positive relationship between employee motivation and performance. Research also shows that intrinsic factors such as salary, bonus will positively affect employee's workforce creation and work efficiency. 3. LITERATURE REVIEW ON WORK MOTIVATION OF UNIVERSITY’S LECTURER In recent years, there has been a growing interest in lecturer motivation. Many studies have also been performed to identify lecturer motivation factors, but their findings vary slightly depending on the subject of study (Gautreau 2011; Schifter, 2000). Motivation often comes from two sources: the internal and the external (Reeve, 2001). Employee motivation is often affected simultaneously by both factors (Rasheeh et al., 2010). Internal factors include lecturer capabilities, personal contributions, work motivation, promotion opportunities, workplace relationships and recognition (Sebaluck and Seegum, 2013; Situma, 2015). External factors include school policy, work environment, training and development, salary and other benefits (Sebaluck and Seegum, 2013; Situma, 2015; Rasheed et al., 2010; Do et al., 2019; Do et al., 2020; Do and Canh, 2018; Ai et al., 2019). Some studies have shown the factors that influence and effect the work motivation of lecturers. These factors can be classified into 02 groups: internal and external (Dinham and Scott, 2000). According to Dinham and Scott (2000), the group of internal factors includes teacher competency, teacher achievement, student's positive attitude, promotion opportunities, working environment relationships and self–actualization. These factors have a positive effect on job satisfaction and the absence of these factors will lead to a decrease in thejob satisfaction of lecturer. External factors include school policies, poor supervision, a decline in number of teachers in society, an increase in workload due to administrative duties, poor and negative working conditions. These factors reduce satisfaction of lecturer. Tella et al. (2007) argued that bonuses are seen as a motivational strategy to improve lecturer productivity, commitment to work and satisfaction. According to research results of Shah et al. (2012), it has been shown that the positive effects of bonuses, recognition, leadership satisfaction and job 51
5. nature on lecturer motivation have been shown. Zembylas and Papanastasiou (2004) showed that lecturer's motivation includes both internal and external motivations related to job satisfaction. External motivations such as higher salaries and working conditions, the more satisfied the lecturer are with their jobs. Seebaluck and Seegum (2013) analyzed the factors influencing teacher'smotivation at public elementary schools in Mauritius using Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Research results have shown 7 factors affecting work motivation of teacher including: (1) the meaning of job completion; (2) the ability to communicate and impart knowledge to students; (3) the fulfillment of one's own career desires; (4) develop social relationships; (5) responsibility in teaching; (6) opportunities to improve career skills and (7) social status. Filak and Sheldon (2003) argued that motivation is important for the long–term success and performance of any educational system, and motivation for lecturer is not just important to each university, but also affects the development of both the education system and the development of each country. Likewise, Porter and Steers (1973) emphasized that motivating lecturer is important for several different reasons. The first is to help satisfy the needs as well as help lecturers to complete the job. Second, motivation is capable of bringing advanced legal and educational reforms, especially at higher education levels. They also emphasized that the satisfaction of lecturers at work and motivation is related to reduced absence and replacement of lecturers. Ololube (2005) explored the same aspect in which more motivated lecturers lead to increase labor productivity that helps to foster education systems; hence the functional methods of motivation in education cannot be underestimated. Studies in this direction confirm that work motivation affects the work efficiency of lecturers and the advancement of educational institutions and the education sector, especially higher education. Bernaus and Gardner (2008) said that mostlecturers who are motivated to work are those who regularly go to university and provide knowledge for learners with little interest in communication with learners and parents. Thus, the work motivation of lecturers mainly focuses on teaching, providing knowledge for learners through going to class with little attention to circumstances, conditions of learners. For countries in South Asia and Africa, research by Paul Bennell and colleagues has shown that teachers in the Sahara and countries in South Asia have little motivation to teach, even though they are fell into a crisis of motivation. With this research result, it can be seen that lecturers in these countries teach merely a duty and a responsibility. Ramachandran et al. (2005), in a study on faculty motivation in India, emphasized that lecturers in public and rural schools are less motivated to work than lecturers in private schools or in cities. A study by Peter Van Petegen et al. on the motivation of lecturers in the Antwerp region of Belgium through three aspects: efficiency, interest and their own efforts at work. Research results showed that lecturers who have a strong belief in their own abilities and effectiveness often have an interest in teaching and that they have high efforts in their work. These results showed that lecturers who clearly define their goals and evaluate their own abilities will be more confident and motivated to work. Thus, studies in this direction show that the work motivation of lecturers and teachers in developing and least developed countries is low and there is a close relationship between the efforts of lecturers with belief in their own abilities and love for their work. Dửrnyei and Ushioda (2013) in the study "Teaching and Researching Motivation" showed that there are two groups of factors that affect the work motivation of lecturers, namely the micro factor group and the macro factor group. At the micro level, there are factors belonging to the lecturers and within the organization; while the macro level are factors outside the organization. In which, Dornyei pointed out 5 factors that negatively affect the lecturer's work motivation: psychological stress, limited autonomy of lecturers or they are not satisfied with the need to express themselves, lack of personal qualifications of the instructor, lack of occupational challenges and incompatible career positions. Dornyei said that it is the negative influence from these 5 factors that lead to the loss of motivation for 52
6. lecturers because they have to work repeatedly day after day. Another study by Menyhỏrt shows that lecturers are motivated by 5 factors: the love to teach, teaching is interesting and valuable work, personal intelligence development, positive emotions in the process of teaching preparation and responsibility for the job. The study also pointed out two factors that negatively affect faculty motivation: work stress and the lack of resources and teaching facilities. The balance between the university's aspirations and the university's faculty is essential because any such imbalance can lead to dissatisfaction with the job and lead to low productivity. Kyriacou and Sutcliffe (1979) emphasized in their research the reasons why lecturers quit their jobs can be due to the lack of support from superiors, workload, burdens of administrative duties, not because of assign lecturers to academic tasks. In addition, the motivation of lecturers is also influenced by external factors such as: reward and punishment, the political position of lecturers (Nadeem et al., 2014). Or a recent study by Han et al. affirms that, goal orientation has a great influence on the work motivation and work efficiency of lecturers, the study also pointed out 5 main goals of lecturers are mastery goals, ability accessibility goals, ability avoidance goals, job avoidance goals, and relationship goals. In short, this research direction shows that there are subjective factors such as the love to teach, the pride of being mentoredthe younger generation and the objective factors such as reward, punishment, and psychological environment in schools, faculties, classes, and the professional status of teachers affects the work motivation of lecturers. Duc et al. (2020) argued that assessing faculty competency plays an important role in enhancing their knowledge and in determining the contribution of each faculty member to universities. In order to evaluate the research capacity of lecturers, it is necessary to have many quantitative and qualitative criteria in process evaluation. Therefore, evaluating lecturer’s research capacity can be seen as a multi– criteria decision–making (MCDM). Research of Do et al. (2020) have developed a multi–standard decision–making model in determining the weights of the factors that measure faculty motivation and performance at Vietnam National University. The research results showed that the implementation of faculty assessment requires a strategic approach to equity and transparency. Lecturer assessment is complex and has become a hot topic in education and management systems. Do and Canh (2018) have based on researchs of lecturers, research university characteristics according to organizational management approach and practice in Vietnam have proposed a set of standards for research university lecturers in Vietnam in 03 groups with 09 standards, 11 contents. In addition, the study also examined the impact relationship between the standards, as a basis for making policies/ways to develop faculty in accordance with the requirements of research universities in Vietnam. Dat et al. (2019) developed a Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) approach using an interval neutrosophic set to evaluate lecturer’s performance in time sequence. The novelty of this study is the score function, the accuracy function and the certainty function are used to evaluate and rank the alternatives. The proposed method is applied to evaluate lecturer’s performance at Vietnam National University, Hanoi based on sets of criteria and decision making committee. The results show that the proposed method is feasible to solve the real life problem and is an extension of the existing approaches. Theoretically, experiments have shown that, lecturer expectations affect student learning outcomes. This is a phenomenon in social psychology called the "Pygmalion effect". However, the research results of educational psychologists show that this effect not only affects the positive aspects, at the individual level, but also the negative aspects and at the group level. Deci et al. (1999) emphasized that the relationship between faculty motivation and learner motivation is reciprocal, it is possible a positive relationship but also a negative relationship. In practical terms, the researches have come to the conclusion that lecturer's work motivation affects students' learning performance, positively or negatively. Research by Ann P. Sweet has shown that lecturer's expectations affect learners' learning motivation. Research by Mercố Bernaus et al. showed that foreign language teachers 53
7. are motivated to innovate their teaching methods, that innovation also affects learners' learning. Learners are more active and proactive when lecturers apply new teaching methods. Adams and Bailey (1989) emphasized in their research, student achievement can be a motivating factor for lecturers such as: if students study hard, achieve high results, lecturers will be more motivating because faculty satisfaction and student achievement are closely related not only to increase faculty satisfaction at work, but also to motivate faculty to be their best. Clarke and Keating (1995) also found that there is a strong relationship between students and lecturers and affirms that students can be a motivating factor for lecturers than factors related to administrative supportion. Butler and Shibaz (2014) have shown that faculty motivation is an essential component to improve learner efficiency. Han et al. (2015) affirmed that teaching effectiveness depends on teaching style, teaching methods, teaching practice and teaching behaviors of lecturers. The degree of these factors reflects the work motivation of lecturers, affects their work performance and indirectly affects the motivation and learning efficiency of learners. Thus, the theoretical and practical studies show that lecturers' work motivation affects learners and vice versa. These studies strongly support the argument: faculty expectations affect learners' academic performance at both the individual and group levels, both positively and negatively. 4. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POLICIES DEVELOPMENT ON HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT IN PUBLIC UNIVERSITIES IN VIETNAM Based on the current status of lecturers in public universities in Vietnam and the research system of university lecturers' work motivation, the study proposes recommendations for building governance policies. Human resource management in public universities in Vietnam in the context of Industry 4.0 is as follows: Firstly, in order to strengthen work motivation for faculty in public universities in Vietnam, there should be a scientific and systematic approach that considers such faculty motivating factors. It is necessary to build a theoretical model, test the model in order to provide the recommended scientific basis for the construction of policies on human resource management in public universities in Vietnam. Secondly, managers at public universities need to design appropriate jobs, always giving lecturers the opportunity to show their creativity and contribute more in the professional through taking on actual projects; At the same time, it enables lecturers to develop their professional skills through knowledge sharing activities initiated and organized in a faculty/subject environment. Thirdly, to have intrinsic work motivation, lecturers must be enthusiastic and passionate about the job. Therefore, it is important that from the beginning in the recruitment stage, managers at universities need to screen and recruit candidates with professional qualities such as eager to learn, capable and passionate for scientific research, understand and be responsible to students This will significantly contribute to improve the quality of training. Fourthly, build a mechanism to evaluate the performance in a fair, open and transparent way. This mechanism is strictly implemented from the junior level to the higher level and use it as the core tool to reform training activities in schools. Lecturers with achievements in their expertise, in scientific research should be commended and considered in promotion and salary increase; It is necessary to publicize this reward and recognition through university's general information pages such as information boards, websites Fifthly, universities need to develop a salary payment mechanism in accordance with the development trend and aspirations of the employees, including lecturers; openly and transparently in the process of paying salaries and earnings based on an objective work completion assessment; promptly and thoroughly solve the questions of lecturers related to these issues. In fact, with the increasing trend of socialization of higher education, income equity is a criterion to attract lecturers to change their workplaces. 54
8. REFERENCES: 1. Adams, B., & Bailey, G. D. (1989). School is for teachers: Enhancing the school environment. NASSP Bulletin, 73(513), 44–48. 2. Ai, T. H., My, T. P. T., & Chieu, M. P. T. (2019). Work motivation of lecturers in non–public universities: the case of Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam. The EUrASEANs: Journal on Global Socio– Economic Dynamics, 4(17), 46–58. 3. Bernaus, M., & Gardner, R. C. (2008). Teacher motivation strategies, student perceptions, student motivation, and English achievement. The Modern Language Journal, 92(3), 387–401. 4. Butler, R., & Shibaz, L. (2014). Striving to connect and striving to learn: Influences of relational and mastery goals for teaching on teacher behaviors and student interest and help seeking. International journal of educational research, 65, 41–53. 5. Clarke, R., & Keating, W. F. (1995). A Fresh Look at Teacher Job Satisfaction. 6. Dat, L.Q., Duc, D.A., Dung, C.C., Trang, N.T.T & Huyen, T.T. (2019). Applying a multi–criteria decision making to assess lecturers' peformance. Journal of Economics and Development, 266, 85–92 7. Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta–analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological bulletin, 125(6), 627. 8. Dinham, S., & Scott, C. (2000). Moving into the third, outer domain of teacher satisfaction. Journal of educational administration. 9. Do, A. D, & Canh, C. C. (2018). Designing Standards for Lecturers at Research Based Universities in Vietnam. Journal of Economics and Development, 252(2), 20–32. 10. Do, A. D., Pham, M. T., Dinh, T. H., Luu, Q. D., Ha, D. L., & Vuong, H. N. (2020). Evaluation of lecturers’ performance using a novel hierarchical multi–criteria model based on an interval complex Neutrosophic set. Infinite Study. 11. Do, D. A., Pham, N. T., Bui, H. P., Canh, C. D., Luu, H. V., & Pham, T. H. D. (2019). A dynamic fuzzy multiple criteria decision– making approach for lecturer performance evaluation. Journal of Management Information and Decision Sciences, 22(3), 250–261. 12. Do, D.A., & Dinh, L.H.H. (2020). An analytical framework considering the effect of education and training on firms’ innovation. Proceedings International Research Conference Innovation & Entrepreneurship for Suitable Development Goals: A Journey of 5 Years and the Path Ahead, 137–147. 13. Dửrnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2013). Teaching and researching: Motivation. Routledge. 14. Duc D.A (2020). Innovation in Vietnam in the context of Industry 4.0. Economy and Management Review, 33, 57–60. 15. Duc, D.A., Hang, D. T., Tam, P. M., Hue, T. T., Van Loi, T., Lien, L. T., & Dat, L. Q. (2020). Lecturers’ Research Capacity Assessment Using an Extension of Generalized Fuzzy Multi–criteria Decision–Making Approach. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 1–12. 16. Filak, V. F., & Sheldon, K. M. (2003). Student psychological need satisfaction and college teacher– course evaluations. Educational psychology, 23(3), 235–247. 17. Foucault, M. (2005). The hermeneutics of the subject: Lectures at the Collốge de France 1981– 1982. Macmillan. 18. Gautreau, C. (2011). Motivational Factors Affecting the Integration of a Learning Management System by Faculty. Journal of Educators Online, 8(1), 1–25. 55
9. 19. Gundry L.K. (2007). Managing Creativity and Innovation in the 21st Century. 21st Century Management: A Reference Handbook. Sage: London. 20. Han, J., Yin, H., & Wang, W. (2015). Exploring the relationship between goal orientations for teaching of tertiary teachers and their teaching approaches in china. Asia Pacific Education Review, 16(4), 537–547. 21. Herzberg, F. M., & Mausner, B. (1959). B. and Snyderman, BB (1959) The motivation to work. Aufl., NewYork–London. 22. Kyriacou, C., & Sutcliffe, J. (1979). Teacher stress and satisfaction. Educational Research, 21(2), 89–96. 23. Leonard, N. H., Beauvais, L. L., & Scholl, R. W. (1999). Work motivation: The incorporation of self– concept–based processes. Human relations, 52(8), 969–998. 24. Maslow, A. H. (1943). Preface to motivation theory. Psychosomatic medicine. 25. Mc Gregor, D. (1960). The Human Side of Enterprise, trad. it.(1972). L’aspetto umano dell’impresa. 26. McKee, C. W., & Tew, W. M. (2013). Setting the stage for teaching and learning in American higher education: Making the case for faculty development. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2013(133), 3–14. 27. Mitchell, T. R. (1982). Motivation: New directions for theory, research, and practice. Academy of management review, 7(1), 80–88. 28. Nadeem, M., Ahmad, N., Abdullah, M., & Hamad, N. (2014). Impact of employee motivation on employee performance (A case study of Private firms: Multan District, Pakistan). International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences, 36, 51–58. 29. Naqvi, S. M. M. R., & Nadeem, S. (2011). Impact of high performance work practices system on motivation. Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 3(8), 197–210. 30. Negussie, Y., & Ranjan, M. (2014). Motivational Factors That Affect Teachers’ Work Performance In Secondary Schools Of Jijiga City, Somali Regional State, Ethiopia (Doctoral dissertation, Haramaya University). 31. Ololube, N. P. (2005). Benchmarking the motivational competencies of academically qualified teachers and professionally qualified teachers in Nigerian secondary schools. In The African Symposium (Vol. 5, No. 3, pp. 17–37). 32. Pinder, C. C. (1998). Motivation in work organizations. 33. Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1973). Organizational, work, and personal factors in employee turnover and absenteeism. Psychological bulletin, 80(2), 151. 34. Ramachandran, V., Pal, M., Jain, S., Shekar, S., & Sharma, J. (2005). Teacher motivation in India (pp. 96–103). Discussion Paper,(Azim Premji Foundation, Bangalore, 2005). 35. Rasheed, M. I., Sarwar, S., & Aslam, H. D. (2010). Motivational issues for teachers in higher education: a critical case of IUB. Journal of Management Research, 2, 1–23. 36. Reeve, J. (2001). Understanding Motivation and Emotion (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Harcourt College Publishers. 37. Schifter, C. C. (2000). Faculty participation in asynchronous learning networks: A case study of motivating and inhibiting factors. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 4(1), 15– 22. 38. Seebaluck, A. K., & Seegum, T. D. (2013). Motivation among public primary school teachers in Mauritius. International Journal of Educational Management, 27, 446–464. 56
10. 39. Shah, M. J., Akhtar, G., Zafar, H., & Riaz, A. (2012). Job satisfaction and motivation of teachers of public educational institutions. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 3(8). 40. Shahzadi, I., Javed, A., Pirzada, S. S., Nasreen, S., & Khanam, F. (2014). Impact of employee motivation on employee performance. European Journal of Business and Management, 6(23), 159–166. 41. Situma, R. (2015). Motivational factors affecting employees’ performance in public secondary schools in Bungoma North. 42. Steers, R. M., & Porter, L. W. (1983). Motivation: New directions for theory and research. Academy of Management Review, 17(1), 80–88. 43. Subcountry, Kenya. International Academic Journal of Human Resource and Business Administration, 1, 140–161. 44. Tella, A., Ayeni, C. O., & Popoola, S. O. (2007). Work motivation, job satisfaction, and organisational commitment of library personnel in academic and research libraries in Oyo State, Nigeria. Library philosophy and practice, 9(2), 13. 45. Zembylas, M., & Papanastasiou, E. (2004). Job satisfaction among school teachers in Cyprus. Journal of Educational Administration. 57