INTRINSIC MOTIVATION IN NOT-FOR-PROFIT …...the literature review, research methodology, findings, and discussions section. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW NPOs do face the challenge of continuously

ELK ASIA PACIFIC JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

ISSN 2394-9392 (Online); DOI: 10.16962/EAPJSS/issn.2394-9392/2014; Volume 2 Issue 3 (2016)

www.elkjournals.com ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

INTRINSIC MOTIVATION IN NOT-FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS (NPOS): AN

EXPLORATORY STUDY

Nathalie Mosca

Senior HR

Associate at UNHCR Geneva.

[email protected]

Mehraz Boolaky

Honorary lecturer and Dissertation Adviser

with the University of Liverpool/Laureate.

[email protected]

ABSTRACT In a constantly changing environment, intrinsic motivation (IM) in NPOs (not-for-profit organizations) has drawn major

attention over the past few decades. This paper aims to investigate the extent to which intrinsic motivation (motivation

that comes from inside an individual rather than from any external or outside rewards) contributes to performance

measurement and pay for performance. In particular, this study seeks to identify the necessary prerequisites in NPOs

that enable intrinsic motivation to sustain and ensure acceptance from employees of practices that meet today’s business

requirements without diminishing their commitment. This study strives to find solutions that lie beyond extrinsic rewards

and seeks to identify responses within the thematic areas of autonomy, competence, self-leadership, and organizational

settings. The triangulation method was used to collect quantitative and qualitative data from a questionnaire survey

involving fifty participants selected on basis of convenience sampling. The findings revealed the need for NPOs to devise

management practices founded on a strong set of values that specifically suit the nonprofit context while taking account

of the surrounding environment. To achieve this goal, NPOs should distinguish their mission from the novelty of

management practices to continuously face new challenges without putting at stake their own values.

Keywords: Intrinsic Motivation (IM), extrinsic rewards, not-for-profit organization (NPO), self-determination theory

(SDT), cognitive evaluation theory (CET)

1. INTRODUCTION:

Intrinsic motivation (IM) has drawn major

attention in organizations and continues to arouse

great interest among scholars and practitioners

owing to a fast-moving environment. Ryan and

Deci (2000) define both types of motivation by

explaining that while intrinsic motivation

refers to the inherent feeling of enjoyment and

fulfillment that performing an activity

provides without resorting to any external

rewards, extrinsic motivation conversely

needs to resort to external rewards for

enjoyment and fulfillment to occur. Ensuing

from these two types of motivation, Frey

(2012) explains the crowding-out effects of

extrinsic motivation on intrinsic motivation

whereby the former may highly undermine the

latter due to the increasing use of performance

measurement and pay for performance in

today’s business environment.

mailto:[email protected]


ISSN 2394-9392 (Online); DOI: 10.16962/EAPJSS/issn.2394-9392/2014; Volume 2 Issue 3 (2016) ………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

1.1 Research Problem

Over the past four decades, organizations, and

NPOs (not-for-profit organizations) are not an

exception, experience major changes that are

caused by globalization and internationalization

of competition. In order to adapt to a constantly

changing environment, for-profits and NPOs are

having to rethink their structure and

management. NPOs often encounter difficulty

in introducing performance related pay or

performance measurement systems or

processes because of the nature of their work

whereby intrinsic motivation plays a great role

especially in humanitarian work. Although

there has been an increasing interest in using

performance measurement and extrinsic

rewards in NPOs, enabling the latter to also

adapt to a turbulent climate, to date there has

been little agreement on the positive effects of

these practices in NPOs (Deckop and Cirka,

2000; Theuvsen, 2004; Kluvers and Tippet,

2009; Mulvaney, McKinney and Grodsky,

2012). As such, debate continues about the

best strategies that facilitate intrinsic

motivation without undermining it. In effect,

central to the doubtful outcome of novel

practices in NPOs are the adverse effects of

extrinsic rewards translated into making

employees work according to the

measurement imposed on them and according

to extrinsic rewards rather than encouraging

their engagement in the activities with

selflessness and pride. For example, Kluvers

and Tippet (2009) argue that although

performance measurement associated with

financial incentives might play the role of

motivational driver in for-profit organizations,

any attempt to measure performance in NPOs

might not yield identical results and in fact

could prove ineffective, particularly in public

services. In light of the above, it is important

for NPOs to take account of the inadequacy of

extrinsic rewards and as such strive to develop

strategies that foster intrinsic motivation

without undermining it. For example, Grant

(2008, p. 49) stresses the need to go beyond

this combination of performance

measurement and pay for performance by

looking at the pro-social form of motivation.

Based on the self-determination theory (SDT),

this special form of motivation aims at

‘expending effort to the benefit of other

people’ resulting in having employees

engaged and committed, and thereby

intrinsically motivated (Grant, 2008, p. 49).

Given that a pro-social behavior correlates

with the mission, purpose, and values of

NPOs, especially in the humanitarian sector,

NPOs ought to recognize the need to surpass

the aforesaid combination of performance

measurement and pay for performance

(Luthans and Stajkovic 1999). In so doing,



NPOs create an environment that fosters

coordination and collaboration by

strengthening the features of autonomy,

competence, self-leadership, and organizational

settings (Ryan and Deci, 2000). Gagné (2003

cited in Tremblay et al., 2009, p. and Battistelli

et al. (2013) emphasize the positive correlation

between self-determined and pro-social

behaviors leading to intrinsic motivation, job

satisfaction, and well-being. Throughout this

paper, the acronym of IM stands for Intrinsic

Motivation and NPO stands for not-for-profit

organizations.

1.2 Research Questions

This paper seeks to address the following

questions: How can intrinsic motivation

contribute to the need today for performance

measurement and pay for performance? What

are the necessary prerequisites in NPOs in

light of today’s business environment to

enable intrinsic motivation to sustain? How

can NPOs ensure acceptance from employees

of performance measurement and pay for

performance without undermining intrinsic

motivation? The rest of this paper comprises

the literature review, research methodology,

findings, and discussions section.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

NPOs do face the challenge of continuously

adapting to a fast-moving environment. A key

aspect of this challenge lies in the extent to

which IM correlates with NPOs versus for-profit

organizations whereby the difference between

both types of organizations emanates in their

approach toward extrinsic rewards and the level

of wages. For example, Becchetti, Castriota and

Tortia (2013) found that wages are generally

lower in NPOs than in for-profit organizations,

though valid reasons explain this discrepancy

such as the dependency of NPOs upon

contributions from governments. By

depending on these contributions, NPOs do

not enjoy the use of their funds as freely as for-

profit organizations. While the past two

decades have seen a rapid growth of NPOs in

an increasingly globalized world, research to

date has tended to consider NPOs like for-

profit organizations (Becker, Antuar and

Everett, 2011; Chen, Ren and Knoke, 2014).

As such, studies on this subject have striven to

focus on compensating the loss of IM with

external rewards rather than looking beyond to

seek out solutions that specifically suit the

nonprofit world (Becchetti, Castriota and

Tortia, 2013). Without inducing that extrinsic

rewards are unnecessary, these external

motivators eventually jeopardize the very

fundamental nature and values that constitute

NPOs. According to Frey (2012), the need for

external motivators is likely to produce

crowding-out effects on IM.

By looking at the issue of IM in public services,

Ankli and Palliam (2012) caution the potential



lack of engagement from employees in

attempting to accomplish tasks in a meaningful

manner caused by employees’ avoidance of

risks allowed by a higher job security in such

services. A serious weakness with this

argument, however, is that despite the

recentness of Ankli and Palliam’s (2012) article,

and though the aim is not to treat both public and

private sector symmetrically, each of them

detaining its own prerogatives, Ankli and

Palliam's argument fails to take account of the

decreasing level of job security in public

services. The decrease in job security is due to a

turbulent climate that does not exclude public

services and even less NPOs, which for the

majority of them depend on contributions of

governments, the latter exerting an increasing

pressure on these organizations. However,

research to date has tended to focus on job

security and higher wages as outlined by Benz

(2005) rather than on the growing trend of job

insecurity in the sector. In this regard, little

discussion about the effects of downsizing over

the last decade in the sector of NPOs has

emerged. As rightly outlined by Reychav and

Sharkie (2010), it is of crucial importance to

understand that under such work environment

marked by successive financial crises, job

insecurity affects all types of organizations.

Nevertheless, Ankli and Palliam (2012) and Van

den Broeck et al. (2014) contend that HR

(Human Resource) professionals should

recognize the potential of the self-determination

theory (SDT) and, through this theory,

recognize the higher performance achieved by

employees when the latter are motivated.

Theoretical Framework

Although a plethora of studies has striven to

shed light on the subject grounded on different

theories, there is still insufficient data for the

achievement and sustainability of IM in NPOs

based on the self-determination theory (SDT)

and the cognitive evaluation theory (CET).

While SDT refers to the satisfaction of the

psychological needs for autonomy,

competence, and relatedness in addition to the

physiological needs, CET looks at the factors

of the social environment that either foster or

undermine IM (Gagné and Deci, 2005).

Through the lenses of SDT and CET, the

theoretical framework puts emphasis on the

individual, on the society, and on the

individual within the society in a constantly

changing environment. Deci and Ryan (2008,

p. 18) demonstrate the positive relationship

and its resultant importance between IM and

the individual’s ‘psychological needs for

autonomy, competence, and relatedness’,

thereby suggesting a negative relationship

between these needs and extrinsic rewards.

One of the most salient issues arising from the

relationship between IM and above-

mentioned psychological needs lies in the



unlikely coexistence of autonomy and control.

While the devolution of autonomy helps

individuals gain confidence and IM, exerting

control in turn diminishes IM. Figure 1 is the

theoretical framework for IM in NPOs.

Grounded on SDT and CET, Figure 1 shows

the hypothesized positive relationship

between IM in NPOs and the four predictor

variables benefitting employees, teams/units,

and the organization as a whole. (Refer Figure

1 Here)

3. METHODOLOGY:

This study involved the collection and

analysis of quantitative and qualitative data

translating into a triangulation method.

Yeasmin and Rahman (2012) contend that this

combination of research methods of

qualitative and quantitative data collection

should be envisaged as complementary rather

than supplementary methods that aim to bring

trustworthiness to the study especially in the

area of social science that is not predictable.

Through the designing of an appropriate

survey incorporating a self-completion

questionnaire that was appropriately pilot

tested, data collection prompted the

respondents (fifty chosen on basis of

purposive and convenience sampling) to think

of their experience and provide credible

answers. Given the small sample size of this

study, Teddlie and Yu (2007) suggest the use

of purposive sampling that aims to select

respondents on the basis of certain criteria that

specifically serve the purpose of the paper. As

such, 50 employees were selected out of a

population whose main common element was

an employment in an NPO.

4. DATA ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS:

Demographic Profiles of Respondents

Table 4.1 provides the demographic profile of

the 50 respondents from a total of 18 NPOs.

(Refer Table 4.1 Here)

Almost as many men (52%) as women (48%)

participated in the survey. Although the majority

of respondents belonged to the age groups

between 41-50 years and 51-60 years, the other

three age groups from 21 years and over 60

years were also represented. Likewise, the

majority of respondents hold higher

qualifications with a predominance of Master’s

degrees (44%). Employment status shows that

as many international as local staff were

represented, hence resulting in an average

finding giving rise to significance for the

purpose of the discussion. And finally, it is

worth noting that among the 50 respondents, 16

nationalities were represented.

Dependent Variable: Intrinsic Motivation

at Work Intrinsic Motivation at Work (the dependent

variable) consisted of five items in order to

probe the extent to which the respondents felt

intrinsically motivated in their job. Some of



these items were: “I am motivated by the

mission of my organization.”, “I think that the

organization’s values fit my own values.”, and

“Intrinsic motivation is very important for

me.”

Predictor Variables: Autonomy,

Competence, Self-Leadership, and

Organizational Settings

Four predictor variables were identified and

explained in this section. Autonomy was

measured through five items to probe the

respondents’ opinions and feelings regarding

autonomy in their own professional area. Some

of the items were: “I am very satisfied with the

level of autonomy that is given to me.”, “The

degree of autonomy is in line with the level of

my responsibilities.” Competence sought to

draw information in relation to the perception

and feeling of competence. Some of the items in

relation to competence were: “I believe I have

an accurate perception of my skills, abilities, and

knowledge.”, “I feel I am confident when I

undertake new and unstructured tasks.” With

regard to Self-Leadership, given that the

respondents might not have been conversant

with this concept, the questionnaire provided

a brief definition that was ‘one’s capacity to

act with the environment the same as with

oneself’. The questionnaire provided six items

among which a few were: “I feel I am aware

enough of my strengths and my weaknesses to

lead myself effectively.”, “I regularly set my

own goals.” Organizational Settings was

also measured by a set of five items: “I feel I

work in a trustful environment.”, “I feel that

the surrounding environment is conducive to

an overall social well-being.”, and “I feel I am

supported by managers, co-workers, and

subordinates.” (Refer Figure 4.1 Here)

(Refer Figure 4.2 Here) located on the scatter

diagram represent a straight line as opposed to

a “cloud” of dots. The more the dots form a

straight line on the diagram, the stronger the

correlation is. In so far as the linearity of the

dots is greater than 0, the correlation is

positive whereas the latter becomes negative

when the linearity of the dots is lower than 0.

In other words, the more the correlation

coefficients of two variables get closer to 1 or

-1 in a linear form, the more the relationship is

strongly positive or strongly negative

(Wilcox, 2012). The computed correlation

coefficients showed a positive correlation

between the variables as suggested by the

hypotheses, but also a positive correlation

between the predictor variables themselves.

Although each of the predictor variables

indicated a positive correlation with IM, the

strength in their relationship was not

significant as illustrated in Figures 4.3 to 4.6

by the weakness of the linearity.



Correlation matrix- (Refer Figure 4.3

Here)

A Pearson's correlation matrix based on

(Refer Figure 4.4 Here) collected data is

shown in Figure 4.1 and 4.2. (Refer Figure

4.5 Here) Scatter diagrams, shown in Figures

4.3, 4.4, (Refer Figure 4.6 Here) 4.5, and 4.6

were used to determine the relationship

between the dependent and predictor

variables. A correlation between variables

qualifies as positive when the dots

HYPOTHESES RESULTS

Table 4.2 presents the results of IM in relation

to the five parameters identified for this study

– Motivation at work, Autonomy,

Competence, Self-leadership and

Organizational Settings. (Refer Table 4.2

IM/Parameters 1 Here)

Hypothesis 1: Autonomy is positively related

to Intrinsic Motivation in NPOs. From Table

4.2 and with respect to the influence of

Autonomy on IM, the results show that

Autonomy appears to be essential to most

respondents, thereby supporting the

hypothesis. In this regard, the respondents

predominantly felt that trust and the creation

of a trustful work environment was vital for

IM. The high rate of similar views reflected in

the low variability and a strong correlation (r0,

959). Over half of those surveyed reported that

access to management and management

support were crucial for IM.

Hypothesis 2: Competence is positively

related to Intrinsic Motivation in NPOs. The

results of Competence with regard to IM

reveal that most of the respondents strongly

Agreed (14%) and Agreed (57%) with the five

items, thereby supporting the hypothesis.

Nonetheless, it is worth noting that 25% of the

responses, which represents a significant

number of responses (64) among the five

items, show that the respondents neither

agreed nor disagreed.

Hypothesis 3: Self-leadership is positively

related to Intrinsic Motivation in NPOs. The

results of Self-leadership in relation to IM

and reveal that most of the respondents

strongly Agreed (26%) and Agreed (58%)

with the six items, thereby supporting the

hypothesis. While the relationship between

IM and both autonomy and competence

aroused numerous reactions and comments,

the findings with regard to IM and self-

leadership conversely generated fewer

comments.

Hypothesis 4: Organizational settings are

positively related to Intrinsic Motivation in

NPOs. The results of Organizational settings

in relation to IM suggest that a majority of the

respondents strongly agreed (22%) and agreed

(49%) with the five items, thereby supporting

the hypothesis. It is noteworthy that the rate of

non-responses (22%) should be accounted for

and, as observed from the results, it is



reasonable to replace these non-responses by

those revealing the trend toward more action

from management and management support.

4. DISCUSSIONS-

Toward a Greater Trustful Work

Environment

In several ways, the findings suggested the

necessity to address organizational inertia of

large-scale NPOs. The imperative for the

organization to instill a “deep culture of trust” to

address the problem of hierarchy and

bureaucracy arose as a major finding of the

study in order for employees to gain autonomy

to the detriment of control. Consistent with

Gagné and Deci’s (2005) research, the findings

revealed the need for trust and for a trustful work

environment, greater management support, and

more accessible management so that employees

felt more confident about their work and

consequently about gaining more autonomy. It

was found that, regardless of the scale size of the

organization, respondents predominantly were

in favor of introducing management practices

that better enshrined in today’s work

environment. In this regard, Soonhee (2002)

contends that management should improve

communication skills and move away from the

hierarchical structure while adopting an

approach that is prone to organizational change.

In this respect, Cramm, Strating and Nieboer

(2013) contend that the hierarchical structure

associated with high authority and with a low

level of devolvement of autonomy is unlikely

to arouse solidarity among employees.

Toward Greater Communication and

Collaboration Contrary to the literature review and to

expectations as shown by a weaker correlation

(r = 0,749), the findings did not identify free

will, feedback, and praise as major elements

influencing IM with regard to autonomy.

Nonetheless, Richardson (2010) emphasizes

the need for NPOs to clearly identify the

parameters that surround the choice of the 360

degree feedback that can be detrimental if not

thoughtfully implemented. Considering the

ensuing level of perceived self-efficacy

resulting from the correlation between

feedback and competence, the results

suggested the need to ensure that both

managers and employees were aware of the

difficulty to either transmit or receive

feedback. Murdoch-Eaton (2012) explains the

complexity of perception of feedback that

stems from a combination of various personal

factors in addition to the work environment to

ensure avoidance of wrong transmission,

interpretation, and assimilation of feedback.

However, it was found that the level of self-

efficacy perceived was contingent on the

comparison and competition processes that

could hinder collaboration. In order to address



such occurrence, Fatimah et al.’s (2011) study

stresses the need to create a learning

environment that enables individuals to

objectively take account of their own

competences while addressing the gaps and to

demonstrate engagement without falling into

an attitude of risk avoidance. From another

perspective, Nicolini et al. (2011) suggest that

it is crucial that feedback be given in an

attempt to learn and develop from one

another’s experience and knowledge resulting

in a positive acceptance on the part of

feedback receivers.

Toward Greater Management Support

and Empowerment The findings revealed the importance of the

interconnectedness and interdependence

between autonomy, competence, and self-

leadership as shown by a strong correlation

(r0, 926). Individuals ought to be given a certain

degree of autonomy in order to be able to assess

their own strengths and weaknesses, and as a

result, to set their own goals. In this regard,

Wilson (2011) opines that the more employees

are nurtured with psychological empowerment,

the more they are willing to engage in self-

leadership strategies such as natural reward

strategies that go beyond the purpose of work

performance and productivity. Not only do

these strategies strive to lead to higher

performance, but according to Neck, Ashcraft

and VanSandt (1998), they also commonly

encompass enhanced behavioral, thinking,

and cognitive abilities in NPOs.

5. RECOMMENDATIONS AND

CONCLUSION:

Organizational Integration

The findings in relation to research questions

generally reveal the need to recognize the

idiosyncrasy of NPOs operating in a fast-

moving work environment and rethink their

organizational structure that dovetails with the

nonprofit world. While the human nature of

NPOs suggests an inclination toward practices

developed in a hierarchical structure as

suggested by McNamara, Brown and Pitt-

Catsouphes (2012), there is a need to

reconsider this issue and envisage different

thinking, acting, and doing leading to the

emergence of novel practices. Another way is

to enable a greater involvement of middle

management in the decision-making process.

In line with this approach, Kuyvenhoven and

Buss (2011, p. 10) emphasize the evolution of

the role of middle managers and the need to

entrust these managers with new roles of

‘networker, implementer, and sense-maker’ in

addition to aligning the strategy with

operations.

Organizational Culture

As a continuum to the above, the imperative

to heighten awareness of values such as ethics,

trust, respect, and transparency arose as a



major finding to infuse new meaning and

significance into the organizational culture

and enable NPOs to adopt novel practices.

According to Simha and Cullen (2012), not

only is it vital to encourage an ethical behavior

but it is equally important to give clear

directions as to how to reach this outcome.

The more managers develop clear guidance

and advice that are conducive to a healthy

work environment, the more employees

integrate these notions as part of their work

and private life.

One way to build trust is for NPOs to ensure

the reliance on the governance structure as

described by Müller et al. (2013). Another

way would be for NPOs to engage in various

forms in feedback that would encourage

employees across levels to openly share their

views and speak up more. Schneider, Ehrhart and Macey (2013)

emphasize that the more units and leaders

deploy efforts to communicate and interact

through a clear vision, the stronger the

organizational climate ensues.

Transformational Leadership

In order to buttress empowerment, NPOs should

help employees cultivate self-leadership

through adequate feedback resulting in greater

self-efficacy. Attempting to provide this support

would enable individuals to reconsider their

contribution to the organization and also help

both management and employees evolve toward

common goals through affective commitment

and IM. In this regard, Moscoso Riveros and

Ted Shir-Tau (2011) found a positive reciprocal

relationship between organizational

commitment and career commitment. One way

to achieve the above is to develop

transformational leadership as raised in the

discussion. It is equally important for

management to confer to employees a sense of

care and belonging. According to Northouse

(2013, p. 193), this goal can be reached by

developing a new type of relationship between

managers and employees based on their

respective needs through ‘inspirational

motivation, intellectual stimulation, and

individualized consideration’. Wright and

Pandey (2009) suggest that managers should

enlighten employees on the implications of

work outcomes so that individuals at their own

instigation raise their interest in the

organization’s mission to the detriment of their

own interest. Pereira and Gomes (2012) point

out that while managers set expectations with

employees through professional communication

and clarity of roles, employees in turn adopt a

creative approach toward problem solving,

thereby improving their self-efficacy. It is

essential that this ongoing process that takes the

form of ‘mentoring, job shadowing, and

secondments’ (Muijs, 2011, p. 54) provides

employees with sense making in their attempt to

identify with their organization and increase IM.



Learning Orientation

The above recommendations reveal the need for

NPOs to institute and develop a continuous

learning process. Importantly, NPOs ought to

create a learning environment that allows all

organizational levels to participate in needed

trainings. While the relevancy of the training

according to these levels should matter for

coherence purposes, this pertinence should not

be a barrier to expanding one’s skills. Such

aspect is of particular importance as it allows

employees, regardless of their function, along

their career path to access other roles with other

responsibilities that are of greatest interest to

them. Moreover, expanding one’s skills rejoins

the need for self-leadership and its potential to

better accept organizational changes.

One way to address the above is to determine the

training needs that correlate with the mission of

the organization without neglecting the

essentials that surround management issues. For

example, Plakhotnik and Rocco (2011) stress

the need to think of succession plans to ensure

that first-time managers are well-prepared to

efficiently undertake their new role. The initial

learning period is critical in assessing managers’

learning of processes, procedures, and policies

but more importantly in evaluating the core

values and principles that these managers will be

demonstrating. While organizations strive to

create a learning environment endowed with

innovative practices such as 360 degree

feedback, mentoring, coaching, and job

shadowing, Pinnington (2011) points out the

lack of time and the superficiality in

implementing these practices, thus hampering

the level of the intellectual capital.

Although the above concerns first-time

managers, other managers and employees

should not be precluded from this learning

process. NPOs should give all members at the

unit, group, and individual levels in an

organization the necessary learning tools and

time to acquire the skills, abilities, and

knowledge to grow and meet their aspirations.

While meeting their own needs, the above

type of learning process would help

individuals identify with the organization’s

values and embrace a collective approach to

attain organizational goals, thus increasing

IM. Such attempt would not only facilitate

greater integration and coordination but would

also raise the level of preparedness and

readiness for any eventualities arising in a

constantly changing environment.

Future Research

In an attempt to broaden the knowledge thus far

acquired on IM in NPOs, a larger randomized

sample is recommended to compare the results

emanating from different types of NPOs and

provide more definitive evidence. Future

research could also concentrate not only in terms

of scale size but also in terms of management

style that notably differs from one type of NPO



to another. For example, more empirical results

would help determine the factors that create

members’ need to engage in the organisational

processes that result in a decrease in IM. Finally,

while the study took root from the internal

context through four themes, a further study

with more research on the external context

constituted of the imperative to comply with

donors’ demands to fulfill the mission without

lessening IM could be undertaken. One way to

achieve this goal could be to develop a

balanced scorecard (BSC) as defined by

Kaplan and Norton (2007) or a strategic

management framework in case the BSC

would be confronted to limitations as

cautioned by Kong (2010).

CONCLUSION

The issue of IM in NPOs has grown in

magnitude over the past few decades. The

study has gone some way toward enhancing

avenues that help management better take

account of prerequisites, within an evolving

nonprofit environment that enable employees

to engage more. The findings of this study

suggest the need for management of such

organisations to deploy more efforts to

strengthen values and innovative practices

that lie beyond extrinsic rewards and consider

IM as an alternative to develop competitive

advantage. Whilst it is important to recognize

that the issue of IM remains encapsulated in a

set of intangible values and organizational

settings that need time to mature, emerge, and

be part of the organizational culture; time is

thus a prerequisite to enable acceptance and

implementation of IM.

REFERENCES:

Ankli, R. & Palliam, R. (2012) 'Enabling a

motivated workforce: exploring the

sources of motivation', Development and

Learning in Organisations, 26 (2), pp. 7-

10, outcomes', Journal of Psychology, 147

(1), pp.17-48.

Ashkanasy, N. & Nicholson, G. (2003)

'Climate of fear in organizational settings:

construct definition, measurement and a

test of theory', Australian Journal of

Psychology, 55 (1), pp. 24-29.

Baard, P., Deci, E. & Ryan, R. (2004)

'Intrinsic need satisfaction: a motivational

basis of performance and well-being in

two work settings', Journal of Applied

Social Psychology, 34 (10), pp. 2045-

2068.

Baek-Kyoo, J. & Taejo, L. (2009) 'The

effects of organizational learning culture,

perceived job complexity, and proactive

personality on organizational commitment

and intrinsic motivation', Journal of

Leadership & Organizational Studies

(Sage Publications Inc.), 16 (1), pp. 48-60.

Battistelli, A., Galletta, M., Portoghese, I.

& Vandenberghe, C. (2013) 'Mindsets of



commitment and motivation:

interrelationships and contribution to work

Bauer, J. & Mulder, R. (2006) 'Upward

feedback and its contribution to

employees' feeling of self-determination',

Journal of Workplace Learning, 18 (7-8),

pp. 508-521.

Becchetti, L., Castriota, S. & Tortia, E.

(2013) 'Productivity, wages and intrinsic

motivations', Small Business Economics,

41 (2).

Becker, K., Antuar, N. & Everett, C.

(2011) ‘Implementing an employee

performance system in a nonprofit

organization, Nonprofit Management &

Leadership, 21 (3), pp. 255-27.

Benz, M. (2005) 'Not for the profit, but for

the satisfaction? Evidence on worker well-

being in non-profit firms', Kyklos, 58 (2),

pp. 155-176.

Chen, X., Ren, T. & Knoke, D. (2014) 'Do

nonprofits treat their employees

differently? incentive pay and health

benefits', Nonprofit Management And

Leadership, 24 (3), pp. 285-306.

Child, J. (2005) Organization:

contemporary principles and practice.

Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Cramm, J. M., Strating, M. M. H. &

Nieboer, A. P. (2013) 'The influence of

organizational characteristics on

employee solidarity in the long-term care

sector', Journal of Advanced Nursing, 69

(3), pp. 526-534. De Cooman, R., De

Gieter, S., Pepermans, R.

Jegers, M. (2011) 'A Cross-sector

comparison of motivation-related

concepts in for-profit and not-for-profit

service organizations', Nonprofit and

Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40 (2), pp.

296-317, Social Sciences Citation Index.

Deci, E. & Ryan, R. (1987) 'The support

of autonomy and the control of behavior',

Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 53 (6), pp. 1024-1037.

Deci, E. & Ryan, R (2000) 'The "what"

and "why" of goal pursuits: human needs

and the self-determination of behavior',

Psychological Inquiry, 11 (4), pp. 227-

268.

Deci, E. & Ryan, R. (2008) 'Facilitating

optimal motivation and psychological

well-being across life's domains',

Canadian Psychology, 49 (1), pp. 14-23,

Academic Search Complete.

Deckop, J. R. & Cirka, C. C. (2000) ‘The

risk and reward of a double-edgedsword:

effects of a merit payprogram on intrinsic

motivation’, Nonprofit and Voluntary

Sector Quarterly, 29 (3), pp. 400-418.

Dirks, K. & Ferrin, D. (2001) 'The role of

trust in organizational settings',

Organization Science, 12 (4), pp. 450-467.



Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. &

Jackson, P. (2012) Management research.

4th ed.London: SAGE Publications.

Fatimah, O., Lukman, Z., Khairudin, R.,

Shahrazad, W. & Halim, F. (2011)

'Procrastination's relation with fear of

failure, competence expectancy and

intrinsic motivation', Pertanika Journal of

Social Sciences & Humanities, 19, pp.

123-127.

Flanigan, S. (2010) 'Factors influencing

nonprofit career choice in faith-based and

secular NGOs in three developing

countries', Nonprofit Management &

Leadership, 21 (1) pp. 59-75.

Frey, B. (2012) Crowding Out and

Crowding In of Intrinsic Preferences. n.p.:

The MIT Press, 2012. University Press

Scholarship Online.

Furtner, M., Rauthmann, J. & Sachse, P.

(2010) 'The socioemotionally intelligent

self-leader: examining relations between

self-leadership and socioemotional

intelligence', Social Behavior and

Personality, 38 (9), pp. 1191-1196.

Gagné, M. & Deci, E. L. (2005) ‘Self-

determination theory and work

motivation’, Journal of Organizational

Behavior, 26 (4), 331–362, Wiley Inter

Science.

Glasrud, B. (2001) 'Your mission

statement has a mission', Nonprofit World,

19 (5), pp. 36-37, Business Source

Complete.

Gonzalez-Mulé, E., Courtright, S.,

DeGeest, D., Seong, J. & Hong, D. (2014)

'Channeled autonomy: the joint effects of

autonomy and feedback on team

performance through organizational goal

clarity', Journal of Management.

Grant, A. M. (2008) 'Does intrinsic

motivation fuel the prosocial fire?

Motivational synergy in predicting

persistence, performance, and

productivity', Journal of Applied

Psychology, 93 (1), pp. 48-58.

Grant, A. M. (2012) 'Leading with

meaning: beneficiary contact, prosocial

impact, and the performance effects of

transformational leadership', Academy of

Management Journal, 55 (2), pp. 458-476

Judge, T. A. & Bono, J. E. (2001)

‘Relationship of core self-evaluations

traits— self-esteem, generalized self-

efficacy, locus of control, and emotional

stability—with job satisfaction and job

performance: a meta-analysis’, Journal of

Applied Psychology, 86 (1), pp. 80-92.

Kaplan, R. & Norton, D. (2007) 'Using the

balanced scorecard as a strategic

management system', Harvard Business

Review, 85 (7/8), pp. 150-161.

Kessler, E. H. (2010) Management theory

in action: real-world lessons for walking



the talk. Basingstoke: Palgrave

Macmillan, University of Liverpool

Catalogue.

Kluvers, R. & Tippet, J. (2009) ‘The effect

of motivation of a change in rewards’,

International Review of Business

Research Papers, 5 (5), pp. 147-159.

Kominis, G. & Emmanuel, C. R. (2007)

'the expectancy–valence theory revisited:

developing an extended model of

managerial motivation', Management

Accounting Research, 18, pp. 49-75.

Kormanik, M. B. & Rocco, T. S. (2009)

‘Internal versus external control of

reinforcement: a review of the locus of

control contrust’, Human Resource

Development Review, 8 (4), pp. 463-483.

Kuvaas, B. (2009) 'A test of hypotheses

derived from self-determination theory

among public sector employees',

Employee Relations, 31 (1), pp. 39-56.

Kuyvenhoven, R. & Buss, C. (2011) 'A

normative view of the role of middle

management in the implementation of

strategic change', Journal of Management

& Marketing Research, 8, pp. 1-14.

Lam, C. F. & Gurland, S. T. (2008) 'Self-

determined work motivation predicts job

outcomes, but what predicts self-

determined work motivation?', Journal of

Research in Personality, 42 (4), pp. 1109-

1115.

Laschinger, H. K. S. & Finegan, J. (2005)

'Using empowerment to build trust and

respect in the workplace: a strategy for

addressing the nursing shortage', Nursing

Economic$, 23 (1), pp. 6-13.

Lee, M. & Koh, J. (2001) 'Is

empowerment really a new concept?',

International Journal of Human Resource

Management, 12 (4), pp. 684-695.

Luthans, F. & Stajkovic, A. (1999)

'Reinforce for performance: the need to go

beyond pay and even rewards', Academy

Of Management Executive, 13, 2, pp. 49-

57.

Mahmoud, M. A. & Yusif, B. (2012)

'Market orientation, learning orientation,

and the performance of nonprofit

organisations (NPOs)', International

Journal of Productivity Performance

Management, 61 (6), pp. 624-652.

Mano, R. S. (2010) 'Past organizational

change and managerial evaluations of

crisis: a case of double-loop learning

effects in non-profit organizations',

Journal of Workplace Learning, 22 (8), pp.

489-507.

McMurray, A. J., Pirola-Merlo, A., Sarros,

J. C. & Islam, M. M. (2010) 'Leadership,

climate, psychological capital,

commitment, and wellbeing in a non-

profit organization', Leadership and



Organization Development Journal, 31

(5), pp. 436-457.

McNamara, T., Brown, M. & Pitt-

Catsouphes, M. (2012) 'Motivators for and

barriers against workplace flexibility:

comparing nonprofit, for-profit, and

public sector organizations', Community,

Work & Family, 15 (4), pp. 487-500.

Md. Ali, A. & Yusof, H. (2011) 'Quality in

qualitative studies: the case of validity,

reliability and generalizability', Issues in

Social & Environmental Accounting, 5

(1/2), pp. 25-64.

Milyavskaya, M., McClure, M., Ma, D.,

Koestner, R. & Lydon, J. (2012)

'Attachment moderates the effects of

autonomy-supportive and controlling

interpersonal primes on intrinsic

motivation', Canadian Journal of

Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne

des Sciences du Comportement, 44 (4),

pp. 278-287.

Moscoso Riveros, A. & Ted Shir-Tau, T.

(2011) 'Career commitment and

organizational commitment in for-profit

and non-profit sectors', International

Journal of Emerging Sciences, 1 (3), pp.

324-340.

Muijs, D. (2011) 'Leadership and

organisational performance: from research

to prescription?', International Journal of

Educational Management, 25 (1), pp. 45-

60.

Mullane, J. V. (2002) 'The mission

statement is a strategic tool: when used

properly', Management Decision, 40 (5/6),

pp. 448-455, Business Source Complete.

Müller, R., Andersen, E. S., Kvalnes, Ø.,

Shao, J., Sankaran, S., Turner, J. R.,

Biesenthal, C., Walker, D. & Gudergan, S.

(2013) 'The interrelationship of

governance, trust, and ethics in temporary

organizations', Project Management

Journal, 44 (4), pp. 26-44.

Mulvaney, M., McKinney, W. & Grodsky,

R. (2012) 'The development of a pay-for-

performance appraisal system for

municipal agencies: a case study', Public

Personnel Management, 41 (3), pp. 505-

533.

Murdoch-Eaton, D. (2012) 'Feedback: the

complexity of self-perception and the

transition from 'transmit' to 'received and

understood'', Medical Education, 46 (6),

pp.538-540.

Neck, C., Ashcraft, R. & VanSandt, C.

(1998) 'Employee self-leadership:

enhancing the effectiveness of nonprofits',

International Journal of Organization

Theory & Behavior (Marcel Dekker), 1

(4), pp. 521-551.

Nicolini, D., Hartley, J., Stansfield, A. &

Hurcombe, J. (2011) 'Through the eyes of



others - Using developmental peer reviews

to promote reflection and change in

organizations', Journal of Organizational

Change Management, 24 (2), pp. 211-228.

Northouse, P. G. (2013) Leadership:

Theory and practice. 6th ed. London: Sage.

Park, R. & Searcy, D. (2011) 'Job

autonomy as a predictor of mental well-

being: the moderating role of quality-

competitive environment', Journal of

Business and Psychology, 27 (3), pp. 305-

316.

Pennerstorfer, A. & Schneider, U. (2010)

'What determines the (internal) wage

distribution in non-profit organizations?',

Kyklos, 63 (4), pp. 580-596.

Pereira, C. & Gomes, J. (2012) 'The

strength of human resource practices and

transformational leadership: impact on

organizational performance', International

Journal of Human Resource Management,

23 (20), pp. 4301-4318.

Phelps, S. (1998) 'More "walk the talk":

Deming's 14 points applied to contracting

out', Journal of Management

Development, 17 (6), pp. 463-473.

Pinnington, A. H. (2011) 'Leadership

development: applying the same

leadership theories and development

practices to different contexts?',

Leadership (17427150), 7 (3), pp. 335-

365.

Plakhotnik, M. & Rocco, T. (2011) 'A

succession plan for first-time managers',

T+D, 65 (12), pp. 42-45.

Reychav, I. & Sharkie, R. (2010) 'Trust: an

antecedent to employee extra-role

behaviour', Journal of Intellectual Capital,

11 (4), pp. 227-247.

Richardson, R. (2010) '360-degree

feedback: integrating business know-how

with social work values', Administration

in Social Work, 34 (3), pp. 259-274.

Rothschild, J. & Milofsky, C. (2006) 'The

centrality of values, passions, and ethics in

the nonprofit sector', Nonprofit

Management & Leadership, 17 (2), pp.

137-143.

Ryan, R. & Deci, E. (2000) 'Intrinsic and

extrinsic motivations: classic definitions

and new directions', Contemporary

Educational Psychology, 25 (1), pp. 54-

67.

Sanoubar, N., Fazlzadeh, A., Beshak, S. &

Rezaei, K. (2012) 'Survey of the relation

between managers' emotional intelligence

and commercialization of innovation',

Interdisciplinary Journal of Contemporary

Research In Business, 4 (7), pp. 752-761.

Schneider, B., Ehrhart, M. & Macey, W.

(2013) 'Organizational climate and

culture', Annual Review of Psychology,

64 (1), pp. 361-388.



Scott Rigby, C., Deci, E., Patrick, B. &

Ryan, (1992) 'Beyond the intrinsic-

extrinsic dichotomy: self-determination in

motivation and learning', Motivation and

Emotion, 16 (3), pp. 165-185.

Simha, A. & Cullen, J. (2012) 'Ethical

climates and their effects on

organizational outcomes: implications

from the past and prophecies for the

future', Academy of Management

Perspectives, 26 (4), pp. 20-34.

Smith, L., Tanigawa, T., Takahashi, M.,

Mutou, K., Tachibana, N., Kage, Y. & Iso,

H. (2005) ‘Shiftwork locus of control,

situational and behavioural effects on

sleepiness and fatigue in shiftworkers’,

Industrial Health, 43, pp. 151-170.

Soonhee, K. (2002) 'Participative

management and job satisfaction: lessons

for management leadership', Public

Administration Review, 62 (2), pp. 231-

241.

Spinath, B. & Steinmayr, R. (2012) 'The

roles of competence beliefs and goal

orientations for change in intrinsic

motivation', Journal of Educational

Psychology, 104 (4), pp. 1135-1148.

Steed, L. & Symes, M. (2009) 'The role of

perceived wealth competence, wealth

values, and internal wealth locus of

control in predicting wealth creation

behavior', Journal of Applied Social

Psychology, 39 (10), pp. 2525-2540.

Teddlie, C. & Yu, F. (2007) 'Mixed

methods sampling a typology with

examples', Journal of Mixed Methods

Research, 1 (1), pp. 77-100.

Theuvsen, L. (2004) 'Doing better while

doing good: motivational aspects of pay-

for-performance effectiveness in nonprofit

organizations', Voluntas, 15 (2), pp. 117-

136.

Trautmann, K., Maher, J. & Motley, D.

(2007) 'Learning strategies as predictors of

transformational leadership: the case of

nonprofit managers', Leadership and

Organization Development Journal, 28

(3), pp. 269-287.

Tremblay, M., Blanchard, C., Taylor, S.,

Pelletier, L. & Villeneuve, M. (2009)

'Work extrinsic and intrinsic motivation

scale: its value for organizational

psychology research', Canadian Journal of

Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne

des Sciences du Comportement, 41 (4),

pp. 213-226.

Valentinov, V. (2007) 'The property rights

approach to nonprofit organization: the

role of intrinsic motivation', Public

Organization Review, 7 (1), pp. 41-55.

Van den Broeck, A., De Cuyper, N.,

Baillien, E., Vanbelle, E., Vanhercke, D.

& De Witte, H. (2014) 'Perception of



organization's value support and perceived

employability: insights from self-

determination theory', International

Journal Of Human Resource

Management, 25 (13), pp. 1904-1918.

Wilcox, R. R. (2012) Introduction to

robust estimation and hypothesis testing

[Electronic Book]. 3rd Ed. Amsterdam:

Academic Press, 2012.

Williams, S. (1997) 'Personality and self-

leadership', Human Resource

Management Review, 7 (2), pp. 139-155.

Wilson, J. H. (2011) 'Freedom at work:

psychological empowerment and self-

leadership', International Journal of

Business & Public Administration, 8 (1),

pp. 106-124.

Wright, B. & Pandey, S. (2009)

'Transformational leadership in the public

sector: does structure matter?', Journal of

Public Administration Research And

Theory, 20 (1), pp. 75-89.

Yeasmin, S. & Rahman, K. F. (2012)

‘‘Triangulation’ research method as the

tool of social science research’, BUP

Journal, ISSN: 2219-4851, 1 (1), pp. 154-

163



LIST OF FIGURES:

Figure 1: Theoretical Framework for IM in NPOs



Figure 4.2 – Responses for the various parameters

Your motivation at work

and Autonomy

Yo

ur

Mo

tiva

tio

n a

t w

ork

140

131 120 100

80 77

60

40 39 20

0 0 3

0 50 100 150

Autonomy

Figure 4.3 – Scatter diagram indicating linearity and direction of the correlation between your

motivation at work and Autonomy




and Competence

Yo

ur

Mo

tiva

tio

n a

t w

ork

200

150 143

100

50 62

34

0 0 11

0 50 100 150

Competence


motivation at work and Competence


and Self-Leadership

Yo

ur

Mo

tiva

tio

n a

t w

ork

200

173 150 100

78

50 40

0 0 9

0 50 100 150

Self-Leadership


motivation at work and Self-Leadership


and Organizational Settings

Yo

ur

Mo

tiva

tio

n a

t w

ork

150

122 100

50 54 55

0 3 16

0 50 100 150

Organizational Settings


motivation at work and Organizational Settings



LIST OF TABLES:

Table 4.1: Demographic Characteristics

Variables

Percentage

Age Group

21 to 30 2.0%

31 to 40 8.0%

41 to 50 44.0%

51 to 60 42.0 %

Over 60 4.0%

Gender

Male 48 %

Female 52 %

Education Level

Secondary 22%

Graduate 28%

Post Graduate 44%

Doctorate 4%

Vocational 2%

Qualification

Years of Experience in

NPOs

1 - 5 years 10 %

6 – 10 years 10 %

11 – 15 years 22 %

16 – 20years 14 %

21 – 25 years 22 %

Above 25 years 22 %

Employment Status

International 44 %

Local 52 %

Retired 4 %



Table 4.2 IM/Parameters 2

Number of Strongly

Strongly

Items respondents

Disagree Not sure Agree TOTAL

disagree

Agree

(N = 50)


I am motivated by the mission of my organization. 50 0 7 4 21 18

I think that the organization’s values fit my own 50 2

3 8 25 12

values.

Intrinsic motivation is very important for me. 50 0 3 5 18 24

My job provides me with enjoyment and fulfillment 50 2

2 6 28 12

regardless of salary and benefits.

Interacting with people at work and maintaining 50 0

3 4 17 26

interpersonal relations are very important for me.

TOTAL 4 18 27 109 92 250

Autonomy as opposed to control

I am very satisfied with the degree of autonomy that 50 0

0 9 27 14

is given to me.

The degree of autonomy given to me is in line with 50 0

3 6 30 11

the level of my responsibilities.

I feel confident to assume the autonomy and 50 0

0 4 24 22

responsibilities I’ve been entrusted with.

I feel I have the necessary skills and knowledge to 50 0

0 10 25 15

assume the autonomy given to me.

I feel I am trusted by others to make decisions. 50 0 0 10 25 15

TOTAL 0 3 39 131 77 250

Competence

I believe I have an accurate perception of my skills, 50 0

0 3 38 9

abilities, and knowledge.

I feel I am confident when I undertake new and 50 0

3 14 27 6

unstructured tasks.

I never postpone doing my tasks. 50 0 5 15 23 7

I regularly set my own learning goals. 50 0 1 16 24 9

I often try to transform a difficult task into an 50 0

2 14 31 3

interesting task.

TOTAL 0 11 62 143 34 250

Self-Leadership (one’s capacity to act with the environment the same way as

I feel I am aware enough of my strengths and

with oneself) 50 0 0 6 34 10

weaknesses to lead myself effectively.

I regularly set my own goals. 50 0 3 9 30 8

I often take initiatives in my job. 50 0 0 7 24 19

I feel I have control over my work. 50 0 3 2 32 13

I set my own goals in terms of career management. 50 0 3 10 28 9

I think that leading myself positively influences 50 0

0 6 25 19

others.

TOTAL 0 9 40 173 78 300

Organizational settings

I feel I work in a trustful environment. 50 2 6 15 20 7

I feel that the surrounding environment is conducive 50 1

6 16 16 11

to an overall social well-being.

I feel I am supported by managers, co-workers, and 50 0

4 11 28 7

subordinates.

I feel that my skills, abilities, and knowledge meet 50 0

0 2 34 14

the requirements of my job.

I feel that my tasks are interesting and challenging. 50 0 0 10 24 16

TOTAL 3 16 54 122 55 250

INTRINSIC MOTIVATION IN NOT-FOR-PROFIT …...the literature review, research methodology, findings, and discussions section. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW NPOs do face the challenge of continuously

Documents