Individual critique
SOURCES OF MOTIVATION AND HOW EMPLOYEES VALUE THEM
ADI SHUKLA
Faculty of Management, Laurentian University
HROB-2001: Introduction to Organizational Behaviour
Dr. Ivy Kyei-Poku
November 20, 2022
The primary set of arguments in the article “The impact of intrinsic and extrinsic motivators on
employee engagement in information organizations” by Rajesh Singh explores various sources of
motivation and the impact each would have across the 4 student cohorts or 98 students in the library
and information science programs.
The abstract implies that there are better ways to build employee motivation than a simle carrot and
stick method. The author focuses on various forms of motivation, in an effort to effectively represent
what motivates these students as employees. From the data collected it is abundantly clear that
intrinsic motivators the fulfill other needs such as the need for affiliation or achievement are more
valued by the examined group than money. Ultimately the article proposes that a shift in the focus of
leaders to provide “a culture of respect, recognition, trust and autonomy”(Singh 197).
The article spends some time discussing the genealogy of the discovery of intrinsically motivated
employees, from the micromanagement of taylor’s principles of scientific management to maslows
hierarchy of needs to vroom’s expectancy theory. At the time of the articles publishing, there were few
if any articles directly tacking the difference between employees motivated from intrinsic to extrinsic
motivators.
The method of data collection was simply noting 3 factors that would encourage the student to put
everything they had into a job they might have. From the findings, work engagement was the biggest
source of effort, ahead of money by 23% and 12% more than a culture of trust and rapport(Singh 202).
The findings also have the implication that a manger makes most of the difference, as a culture of trust,
recognition and autonomy each are managerial responsibilities. This is a matter of 55% being controlled
by external factors and management.
The discussion surrounding money is quite a well framed one, as it suggests that while it was not a major
factor compared to the other factors, “without enough to live on, other motivations don’t matter”
(Singh 202). Money has the power to motivate but it reaches a point where the employee’s basic needs
are met that the assumption of “more carrots will help motivate them” (Singh 202).
The next factor that’s examined is autonomy. While this was 1% more than money, the important point
in this factor is that autonomy without accountability is quite harmful to an organization.
“Contemporary behavioral studies show that people want to be accountable—and making sure that
they have control over their task, their time, their technique, and their team is the most effective
pathway to that destination.”(Singh 203). While this is a reasonable argument to make, the ratio of
responsibility to accountability differs greatly from industry to industry, making this argument
somewhat irrelevant to the broader idea of improvements in management.
Recognition is presented as the “psychological feeling of being valued and praised for contributions”
(Singh 203). There is little discussion on the alignment of the employee’s goals with the organizational
goals. While the author does mention sincerity being a factor, there is little exploration in the nuances of
organizations making statements without meaning them. This seems to be somewhat of a major
oversight as much of the response from the students implied the intrinsic motivators associated with
recognition which does have a base expectation of sincerity.
From the responses presented in the article, it seems more fair to describe this category as a culture of
trust and support. Regardless, the author makes a solid case for the presence of positive mentors, and
seeking to make a difference(Singh 204). This thought process is an extremely effective “in” for the
management to give attention to the intrinsic motives of the employee.
Within the context of the implications section, the author draws particular attention to the difference
between organizations, and countries. Along with this, “extrinsic motivators, is not appropriate for our
current service oriented and knowledge-based work environment”(Singh 205). This is extremely
important to note, as a large proportion of service industries lack the presence of mind to pay
employees enough, and occasionally attempt to fulfil intrinsic motivators without clearing that initial
barrier.
This article effectively presents its points about the method of management associated with libraries.
The implications of the study are well defined and supported by the data presented. Each factor in the
survey is defined before an interpretation is offered, and the interpretations are logical in the context of
the specific results and quotes offered. Little is offered in the realm of counterpoints, though the
improved employee output is difficult to ignore. There is enough nuance in the arguments made with
enough specificity to not outright invalidate various claims.
Singh, Rajesh. “The Impact of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivators on Employee Engagement in Information
Organizations.” Journal of Education for Library and Information Science, vol. 57, no. 2, 2016, pp.
197–206.