Added: Jyl Briley - Date: 11.04.2022 10:00 - Views: 22276 - Clicks: 4851
To make full use of this concept in career development, a fine-grained assessment of needs is necessary to allow for a straightforward interpretation. Fundamental motives provide a theoretically meaningful, self-contained framework of 16 fine-grained explicit motives, including, for instance, Social Acceptance, Curiosity, and Autonomy.
Based on a series of response surface analyses in a German online sample of working people, we examined the impact on job satisfaction of three different combinations of fundamental motives and their supply: exact congruence, an excess in the supply, and a shortage in the supply. For an excess in the supply, the suggest that job satisfaction was highest for Social Acceptance, Status, Autonomy, Sex, and Retention. For a congruence of high motive levels and high supply levels, the levels of job satisfaction were highest for Curiosity, Idealism, and Social Participation.
Concerning a shortage in the supply, low levels of job satisfaction were observed for Social Acceptance, Status, Sex, Retention, Curiosity, and Idealism. The can be useful in coaching and career developments to provide information about potential sources of low job satisfaction and provide guidance to clients on how to enhance their job satisfaction. studies have demonstrated that the congruence between personal needs and the extent to which a workplace can supply what employees need positively predicts job satisfaction Kristof-Brown et al.
Higher job satisfaction, in turn, has been found to be correlated with better job performance Judge et al. In sum, if a job supplies what employees need, job satisfaction increases, yielding several desirable outcomes for employers and employees. Thus, it has already been demonstrated that a fit between need and supply contributes to job satisfaction. The current study extends existing knowledge by integrating the two approaches of the 16 fundamental motives Havercamp, ; Reiss,and response surface analysis Edwards and Parry, First, we examined need—supply fit on a fine-grained level as postulated by the 16 fundamental motives Havercamp, ; Reiss,which represent what people consciously and ultimately strive for, as opposed to In need of some satisfaction that are pursued for instrumental purposes.
The 16 fundamental motives thus encompass what people are concerned with in their everyday lives. Nevertheless, other approaches to fundamental motives also exist, such as the framework by Kenrick et al. Although there is some overlap between these two frameworks i.
research has supported the validity of the 16 fundamental motives. Further investigations have suggested that the fundamental motives validly predict self-reported behavior e. Second, to exploit this extensive framework in an optimal way, we employed response surface analysis Edwards and Parry,which allowed us to examine in detail how combinations of and discrepancies between need — as measured by the 16 fundamental motives — and supply are related to job satisfaction Shanock et al.
In summary, the of our study provide important implications for coaching and career development processes because they uncover a potential source of low job satisfaction. Although this seems convenient at first glance, the question of which motives should actually be assessed inevitably arises, given that the of explicit motives is basically endless. Even though on a conceptually broad level, scholars have agreed that Achievement, Power, and Affiliation are the so-called big three of motivation, no consensus has been reached about a more extensive and fine-grained framework of motives Heckhausen and Heckhausen, To address the need for a theoretically meaningful and self-contained list of motives, Reiss and Havercamppp.
First, the motives should be ends rather than means. That is, the motives need to be pursued for no other reason than the satisfaction of the motive itself. Second, the importance of the motive should predict the frequency and intensity of behavior targeting the satisfaction of the motive. That is, for a motive that is more important to a person, the person must show more frequent and more intense attempts to satisfy the motive in comparison with individuals for whom the motive holds only a little In need of some satisfaction. Third and strongly connected to the assumption, fundamental motives reflect interindividual differences.
Thus, people may differ with respect to the meaning that each of the motives holds for them and subsequently differ in the frequency and intensity of behavior that is aimed at satisfying the very same motive. Fourth and finally, fundamental motives should for a ificant amount of everyday behavior Reiss, To this end, the motives need to be on a certain level of abstraction.
On the basis of these four rules, Reiss and Havercamp derived a preliminary list of 25 potential fundamental motives. Using four exploratory factor analyses and one confirmatory factor analysis, they reduced the initial list to 16 fundamental motives Havercamp, ; Reiss and Havercamp, that made up the final list of fundamental motives: Social Acceptance, Status, Autonomy, Sex, Retention, Dominance, Family, Physical Exercise, Food Enjoyment, Curiosity, Safety, Idealism, Social Participation, Structure, Morality, and Revenge.
See Table 1 for their respective construct definitions. Therefore, the outcomes of any motives do not exclusively depend on the strength of the motive itself, but rather on the fit between what people desire and what the environment offers them. Consequently, for a comprehensive understanding of human motivation, researchers need to consider not only the motives themselves as personal characteristics but also the appropriate features of the environment.
With respect to the workplace, as one of the major domains in the lives of people with full-time or part-time employment, the congruence of employee personality and job characteristics is subsumed under the concept of need—supply fit Kristof-Brown et al. studies have indicated that the fit between motives and values and the opportunity to satisfy them in the workplace predict job satisfaction Krumm et al.
As an antecedent of several desirable job-related outcomes, job satisfaction as fostered by the congruence between needs and the extent to which the workplace meets these needs constitutes an important concept for researchers and practitioners alike as In need of some satisfaction as for employers and employees alike. Consequently, job satisfaction as fostered by a need—supply fit holds value in coaching, as one example, because it provides a starting point from which to identify potential sources of low job satisfaction.
When relating need—supply fit to job satisfaction, the highest levels of job satisfaction are not necessarily observed when need and supply are exactly congruent. In fact, three different models were introduced to describe this relationship Harrison, ; Edwards, : the monotonic model, the asymptotic model, and the optimal model. Consequently, reversing their principles allows researchers to apply these models to job satisfaction as the opposite of job dissatisfaction see Figures 1A—C. Investigations involving actual and desired amounts of certain tasks at work Edwards, or larger clusters of values that include work-related motives, values, needs, goals, and interests Krumm et al.
We used the monotonic model, the asymptotic model, and the optimal model to derive hypotheses about the effect of oversupply i. Concerning undersupply i. Below, we focus on the effects of oversupply first, before we focus on the consequences of undersupply for job satisfaction. Figure 1. Prototypical response surfaces displaying the A monotonic, B asymptotic, and C optimal models. The vertical axis indicates the level of job satisfaction for different combinations of the motive right axis and the supply left axis. Higher s and darker shades of green represent higher levels of job satisfaction.
The monotonic model see Figure 1A predicts that job satisfaction will be highest for oversupply and that job satisfaction monotonically decreases along the line of incongruence, that is, the blue line in Figure 1A drawn from the left corner of the cube i. The processes behind this model are referred to as conservation and carryover Edwards, Conservation applies when an excess in the supply can be saved for a later time, for instance, an accumulation of overtime hours that can be taken off later to satisfy the work value of Leisure Time i.
Carryover comes into effect when an excess in the supply of one motive or need dimension can be used to satisfy a different motive or need dimension; for instance, an excess of Leisure Time e. A study Krumm et al. As these motives have shown conceptual overlap with the fundamental motives of Autonomy, Curiosity, and Social Acceptance see Table 1we expected the same effect of oversupply on job satisfaction for these motives.
Autonomy in particular is arguably associated with a carryover effect, as an excess of autonomy has the potential to introduce desired changes at the workplace Edwards, In addition, we expected a carryover effect for dominance and status motives. For instance, people with high prestige have a certain influential power, and people in a high position have a certain prestige. For Family, Physical Exercise, Food Enjoyment, and Sex, we expect that the vast majority of employed people seek to satisfy these motives not in the workplace but outside their jobs in their leisure time.
Thus, we expected that supply for these motives would mainly In need of some satisfaction found to occur in the form of leisure time so that employees would have enough time to pursue the satisfaction of these motives in their private lives. Because Leisure Time is an important work-related value in itself Meyer et al. Finally, for Retention, the conservation effect was already inherent to the definition of the construct see Table 1. Consequently, we expected that, for an excess in the supply, job satisfaction would increase monotonically.
If an excess in the supply of one motive cannot be saved for later use or does not affect the satisfaction of other motives, we predicted an asymptotic relationship between need—supply fit and job satisfaction see Figure 1B. Here, an excess in the supply would improve job satisfaction only to a small extend beyond the satisfaction of the motive. Consequently, job satisfaction should asymptotically decrease along the line of incongruence.
Edwardsp. Consequently, we expected an asymptotic effect for Safety because it has shown conceptual overlap with the need for job security Table 1.
Hypothesis 2: Job satisfaction will be highest for an oversupply of Safety, and this relationship will follow the asymptotic model. Finally, the optimal model should apply when oversupply has a negative effect on job satisfaction see Figure 1C. This is the case when depletion or interference processes come into effect Edwards, Depletion describes the idea that an excess in the supply at one point impedes the future satisfaction of the motive, for instance, an excess in support from a supervisor on one occasion may prevent the employee from receiving additional supervisor support on a later occasion Edwards, Interference occurs when an excess in the supply of one motive or need dimension hinders the satisfaction on other motive or need dimensions, for instance, when an excess in job-related travel activity inhibits the desire to spend time with the family.
For a value In need of some satisfaction containing, among others, a Helping motive i. Because Helping has shown conceptual overlap with the fundamental motive of Idealism see Table 1we hypothesized the same relationship for this fundamental motive. The underlying process here seems to be interference because, if you need to spend more time and resources providing help to others In need of some satisfaction would actually be needed to satisfy your motive, this time and these resources cannot be used to pursue the satisfaction of other motives, and job satisfaction would consequently be reduced.
We expected the same effect for Structure, Morality, and Revenge. If you need to spend more time and resources structuring your environment, complying with social norms, or retaliating wrongs from others than you actually desire, this time and these resources cannot be used to pursue the satisfaction of other motives. Consequently, we expected job satisfaction to drop for the oversupply of Structure, Morality, and Revenge.
Finally, we also expected an interference effect for Social Participation because an oversupply should hinder the satisfaction of the need for privacy and should consequently reduce job satisfaction Harrison, Hypothesis 3: For Idealism, Social Participation, Structure, Morality, and Revenge, job satisfaction will be highest with a congruence between a high supply and a high motive level, and this relationship will follow the optimal model.
In addition to the effects of oversupply on job satisfaction described above, Figure 1 indicates that, for undersupply, job satisfaction should be the lowest French et al. However, research has suggested that this might not hold for all motives. For a value cluster containing, inter aliaAutonomy and Learning motives, they found that for a low level of supply, job satisfaction was equally low for all levels of the respective motive Krumm et al.
Because the Autonomy and Learning motives have shown strong conceptual overlap with the fundamental motives of Autonomy and Curiosity, respectively, we expected a similar effect of undersupply for these motives. Hypothesis 4: For all fundamental motives except Autonomy and Curiosity, job satisfaction will be lowest for an undersupply.
Hypothesis 5: For Autonomy and Curiosity, job satisfaction will be lowest at low levels of supply, irrespective of the level of the motive. Currently, there is a lack of research that has investigated need—supply fit by considering fine-grained motives in combination with response surface analysis. Traditional approaches to need—supply fit using difference scores have suffered from methodological flaws, including but not limited to a reduction in the reliability of the difference scores compared with the need and supply components they consist of, ambiguity in interpretation of the difference scores, a lack of ways to identify the unique contributions of the need and supply components, and a reduction in the three-dimensional relationship between need, supply, and outcome to the two dimensions, namely, the difference score and the outcome Edwards, Response surface analysis is a powerful tool that can be used to provide a way to overcome these issues by a incorporating the need and supply components directly instead of having to compute their difference scores and b offering a graphical representation of the three-dimensional relationship between need, supply, and outcome on a detailed level Edwards, To extend on the need—supply fit by examining these relations on a more fine-grained level, this study is the first to combine the extensive framework of fundamental motives with the methodological approach of response surface analysis.
To this end, we examined five hypotheses, with Hypotheses 1—3 focusing on high levels of job satisfaction and Hypotheses 4 and 5 focusing on low levels of job satisfaction. By investigating these hypotheses, we were able to identify the combinations of motives and supply that are particularly beneficial to job satisfaction.
Vice versa, we gained insight into how over- and undersupply affect job satisfaction. Consequently, we were able to provide detailed insights about which motives are essential for job satisfaction. These motives can be used in coaching to provide guidance to clients about how to change In need of some satisfaction occupational situation to enhance their job satisfaction and help us understand the specific nature of how the combination of need and supply affects job satisfaction. However, as we tested the monotonic model, the asymptotic model, and the optimal model Harrison, ; Edwards, we did not expect any congruence effects in a stricter sense, as defined by Humberg et al.
In their definition, a congruence effect is present when the response surface is shaped like in the optimal model Figure 1Cbut with a slope of 0 along the line of congruence. Fourteen participants were not native German speakers. Twelve of them reported having very good German language skills, whereas two of them reported good German language skills. A total of Please consult the online Supplementary Material for a summary of the educational levels of the sample. The sample that was used in this study was a subset comprised of employees from an online sample that was representative of the German population with respect to age and gender.
The 16mrs is a questionnaire that was developed and validated using online samples that were representative of the German population. It assesses 16 fundamental motives with three items each. The items were rated on a 6-point Likert scale ranging from 0 does not apply at all to 5 applies completely.In need of some satisfaction
email: [email protected] - phone:(252) 742-1948 x 1306
Actually Getting Some Satisfaction on the Job: Need–Supply Fit of Fundamental Motives at Work