Intrinsic and internalized modes of teaching motivation
| Published date | 13 May 2014 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-07-2013-0022 |
| Date | 13 May 2014 |
| Pages | 6-27 |
| Author | Uwe Wilkesmann,Christian J. Schmid |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour,Global HRM |
Intrinsic and internalized modes
of teaching motivation
Uwe Wilkesmann and Christian J. Schmid
Center for Higher Education, TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany
Abstract
Purpose – The introduction of New Public Management in the German system of higher education
raises issues of the academics’ motivation to do research and to teach. The purpose of this paper is to
present evidence-based findings about contextual factors which influence intrinsic and related modes
of internalized teaching motivation in German higher education institutions. The paper discusses
parallels between internalized forms of motivation and public service motivation (PSM). In accordance
with self-determination theory (SDT), the paper empirically tests factors which correlate with
autonomous motivation to teach. The paper also addresses the issue of the crowding effect of intrinsic
motivation by selective incentives.
Design/methodology/approach – The analyses are based on the data of two online surveys among
German professors (n¼2,061) representative for the population of state-governed universities. To test
the theory-driven hypotheses the paper used multivariate reg ression analysis.
Findings – The results support the basic claims of the SDT that intrinsic teaching motivation is
facilitated by social relatedness, competence, and partly by autonomy for German professors, too.
If teaching is managed by objective agreements intrinsic motivation is significantly decreased.
Originality/value – The authors translated, reformulated, and applied the SDT framework to
academic teaching. The analysis presents evidence that the management of autonomy-supportive work
environmentalfactors is also superiorto selective incentives in highereducation institutions.The study on
academic teaching motivation is a specific contribution to PSM research. Academic teaching in public
higher education institutions is a service to the public.
Keywords Employee motivation, HRM in the public sector
Paper type Research pap er
1. Introduction
Professors must fulfill at least two tasks (besides all the administrative work): research
and teaching. Academic careers are dependent on reputation as a researcher.
Consequently, teaching is said to be the professoriate’s neglected stepchild. Therefore,
rectorates believe that they have to reinforce the academics’ effort and investment in
teaching. Theoretically, the governing body at universities has two possibilities to
increase the motivation to teach (and the overall motivation).
First, by introducing private sector management tools, like pay-for-perfor mance,
management by objectives (MbO), and performance-related budgeting (de Boer et al.,
2007; Enders et al., 2002; Kehm and Lanzendorf, 2007; Leis
ˇyt.
eet al., 2009), policy
makers build on the extrinsic dimension of motivation. This is the way new public
management (NPM) has been adopted to universities. Existing research provides evidence
that selective incentives have either no effect or a negative effect on teaching (Wilkesmann
and Schmid, 2012).
A second option is to rely on existing intrinsic motivation. Traditionally, professors
were considered to be highly intrinsically motivated to teach and to do research because
otherwise they would not endure the pressures and imponderables of accomplishing
successfulacademic careers: “Wemay say that it is this intrinsicmotivation which makes
academics commit themselves to their scholarly activities not as a job but asa vocation,
professionand hobby; which sustains them despitedeteriorating workingconditions and
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/2049-3983.htm
Received 26 July 2013
Revised 26 November 2013
11 December 2013
Accepted 13 December 2013
Evidence-based HRM: a Global
Forum for Empirical Scholarship
Vol. 2 No. 1, 2014
pp. 6-27
rEmeraldGroup PublishingLimited
2049-3983
DOI 10.1108/EBHRM-07-2013-0022
6
EBHRM
2,1
salaries” (Moses and Ramsden, 1992, p. 105). Intrinsic motivation, that is to enjoy
the activity itself, cannot be externally enforced upon the employees; it can only be
governed indirectly by thedesign of the work environment. Therefore,our main research
question is:
RQ1. Which contextual factors in the work environment facilitate intrinsic teaching
motivation?
Then again, private sector management tools could have unintended and unwanted
effects of corrupting possible intrinsic pleasures of teac hing. Therefore, an additional
research question is whether selective incentives actually crowed out intrinsic
teaching motivation.
The paper is organized as follows. After conceptualizing motivation with
self-determination theory (SDT; Ryan and Deci, 2000b) as our de pendent variable,
we also discuss parallels betwe en SDT and public service motivation (PSM). Moreover,
SDT implies core assumptions and hypotheses about the interrelation between
motivation and exogenous factors, which can be tested empirically. For this purpose,
we use data from two representative surveys about governance of academic teaching
in Germany where we questioned 1,119 professors at research universities and 942
professors at universities of applied sciences. The main difference between these two
types of HEI in Germany is the objective to educate practice-oriented work forces at the
universities of applied science vs research-oriented academics at traditional researc h
universities. To qualify for a position at a university of applied sciences applicants
are required to work in private industry for at least three years. The teaching load of
professors at research universities is nine hours per week, whereas at universities
of applied science the teaching load is 18 hours per week.
2. SDT
To be motivated means in our context to be motivated to teach, performing acts of
teaching (Ryan and Deci 2000a, p. 54). In the SDT, Ryan and Deci (2000a,b) distinguish
between different reasons that evoke action. Intrinsically motivated action equals
any action which is performed for pure enjoyment and satisfaction. In comparison,
if an action is accomplished for separable outcomes, the motivation is extrinsic
(see Ryan and Deci, 2000a, p. 56, 2006, p. 1562). Intrinsically motivated behavior
satisfies three basic, innate psychological ne eds. These are relatedness, competence,
and autonomy (Reeve et al., 2004; Ryan and Deci, 2000b, p. 74; see also Ryan and Deci,
2006; Niemiec and Ryan, 2009). Our first three hypotheses focus on these primary
human needs. Research in the tradition of SDT empha sizes the autonomy-supp ortive
work environment as a relevant prerequisite to foster intrinsic motivation (Ryan and
Deci, 2000a, p. 58).
The SDT also incorporates amotivation, which is any behavior that is not valuing or
any compulsory task performed by actors who feel absolutely incomp etent. Extrinsic
motivation is further subdivided into four qualitatively different types with regard
to the perceived locus of causality: external, introjected, identified, and integrated
(see Figure 1). Ryan and Deci (2000a, pp. 61-62) define external motivati on as behavior
which is rewarded and/or punished by others. The other three types of extrinsic
motivation differ in accordance with the level of internalization of goals. Introjected
motivation “[y] describes a type of internal regulation that is still quite controlling
because people perform such actions wit hthe feeling of pressure in order to avoid guilt
7
Modes of
teaching
motivation
To continue reading
Request your trial