Positive Management of Universities: A Model of Motivation to Strive for Scientific Excellence

• Autorzy: Beata A. Basińska , Krzysztof Leja , Magdalena Szuflita-Żurawska
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Objective: The aim of the article is to conceptualise a model of work motivation in the management of universities striving for scientific excellence.

Research Design & Methods: The most relevant for our aim is the self-determination theory that is applied to the work and organisational domain. We used a narrative literature review.

Findings: The proposed model is derived from the self-determination theory. It includes three types of motivation: autonomous motivation, controlled motivation, and amotivation, as well as three psychological needs, i.e. autonomy, mastery, and purpose. These motives and needs can interact to enhance scientific effectiveness further.

Implications & Recommendations: Universities need innovative staff who can contribute to strengthening scientific productivity and enhance the influence of the university at the international level.

Contribution & Value Added: Connection of three perspectives - institutional, individual and scientific disciplines - will capture the complexities of managing work motivation oriented to scientific effectiveness. (original abstract)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Higher education; Education management

PL

Szkolnictwo wyższe; Zarządzanie szkolnictwem

• Czasopismo: Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review
• Rocznik: 2019
• Tom: 7
• Numer: nr 3
• Strony: 237--250

Twórcy

autor

Beata A. Basińska

• Politechnika Gdańska

autor

Krzysztof Leja

• Gdansk University of Technology, Poland - GUT

autor

Magdalena Szuflita-Żurawska

• University of Boras, Sweden

Bibliografia

• Albert, C., Davia, M.A., & Legazpe, N. (2018). Job satisfaction amongst academics: the role of research productivity. Studies in Higher Education, 43(8), 1362-1377.
• Alimo-Metcalfe, B., Alban-Metcalfe, J., Bradley, M., Mariathasan, J., & Samele, C. (2008). The impact of engaging leadership on performance, attitudes to work and wellbeing at work: A longitudinal study. Journal of Health Organization and Management, 22(6), 586-598.
• Bar-Ilan, J. (2010). Web of Science with the Conference Proceedings Citation Indexes: The case of computer science. Scientometrics, 83(3), 809-824. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0145-4.
• Baumeister, R.F., & Leary, M.R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews. Review of General Psychology, 1(3), 311-320.
• Blind, K., Pohlisch, J., & Zi, A. (2018). Publishing, patenting, and standardization: Motives and barriers of scientists. Research Policy, 47(7), 1185-1197.
• Bukowska, G., & Łopaciuk-Gonczaryk, B. (2013). Determinanty sukcesow publikacyjnych naukowcow. Nauka, (3), 59-86.
• Cameron, K., Dutton, J., & Quinn, R.E. (Eds.) (2003). Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline. San Francisco, California: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
• Cameron, K.S., & Spreitzer, G.M. (Eds.), (2011). The Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Cavero, J.M., Vela, B., & Caceres, P. (2014). Computer science research: More production, less productivity. Scientometrics, 98(3), 2103-2111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1178-2.
• Cerasoli, C.P., Nicklin, J.M., & Ford, M.T. (2014). Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: A 40-year meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 980-1009.
• Christensen, M., Dyrstad, J.M., & Innstrand, S.T. (2018). Academic work engagement, resources and productivity: empirical evidence with policy implications. Studies in Higher Education, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2018.1517304.
• Carivate Analytics. (2017). InCities Indicators Handbook.
• Cohen, M. (1998). The performance paradox. Academy of Management Executive, 12(3), 30-40.
• Cole, J., & Cole, S. (1973). Social Stratification in Science. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
• Dahling, J.J., & Lauricella, T.K. (2016). Linking job design to subjective career success: a test of selfdetermination theory. Journal of Career Assessment, 25(3), 371-388.
• Deci, E.L., Olafsen, A.H., & Ryan, R.M. (2017). Self-determination theory in work organizations: the state of a science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 19-43.
• Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2000). The "what" and /"why" of goal pursuits: Human needs and the selfdetermination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.
• Gagne, M., & Deci, E.L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331-362.
• Gagne, M., Forest, J., Vansteenkiste, M., Crevier-Braud, L., Van den Broeck, A., Aspeli, A.K., ... & Halvari, H. (2015). The Multidimensional Work Motivation Scale: Validation evidence in seven languages and nine countries. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(2), 178-196.
• Gillet, N., Becker, C., Lafreniere, M.A., Huart, I., & Fouquereau, E. (2017). Organizational support, job resources, soldiers' motivational profiles, work engagement, and affect. Military Psychology, 29(5), 418-433.
• Goodrum, A.A., McCain, K.W., Lawrence, S., & Lee Giles, C. (2001). Scholarly publishing in the Internet age: a citation analysis of computer science literature. Information Processing & Management, 37(5), 661-675. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4573(00)00047-9.
• Howard, J., Gagne, M., Morin, A.J., & Van den Broeck, A. (2016). Motivation profiles at work: A selfdetermination theory approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 95, 74-89.
• Kim, M., & Beehr, T.A. (2017). Can Empowering Leaders Affect Subordinates' Well-Being and Careers Because They Encourage Subordinates' Job Crafting Behaviors?. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies,1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051817727702.
• Klaeijsen, A., Vermeulen, M., & Martens, R. (2017). Teachers' Innovative Behaviour: The Importance of Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction, Intrinsic Motivation, and Occupational Self-Efficacy. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 62(5), 1-14.
• Krupski, R., Niemczyk, J., & Stańczyk-Hugiet, E. (2009). Koncepcje strategii organizacji. Warszawa: Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne.
• Kulczycki, E., Engels, T.C.E., Polonen, J. Bruun, K., Duškova, M., Guns, R., Nowotniak, R., Petr, M., Sivertsen, G., Starčič, A.I., & Zuccalaet A. (2018). Publication patterns in the social sciences and humanities: evidence from eight European countries. Scientometrics, 116(1), 463-486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2711-0.
• Kwiek, M. (2015). Uniwersytet w dobie przemian: instytucje i kadra akademicka w warunkach rosnącej konkurencji. Warszawa: PWN.
• Kwiek, M. (2018). High research productivity in vertically undifferentiated higher education systems: Who are the top performers? Scientometrics, 115(1), 415-462.
• Landry, A.T., Gagne, M., Forest, J., Guerrero, S., Seguin, M., & Papachristopoulos, K. (2017). The relation between financial incentives, motivation, and performance: An integrative SDT-based investigation. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 16(2), 61.
• Leja, K. (2013). Zarządzanie uczelnią. Koncepcje i współczesne wyzwania. Warszawa: Oficyna Wolters Kluwer.
• Leja, K. (2015). Positive management of the university. Journal of Positive Management, 6(2), 59-71.
• Lewis, M. (2000). Exploring paradoxes: Toward a more comprehensive guide. Academy of Management Review, 25(4), 770-776.
• Olafsen, A.H., Halvari, H., Forest, J., & Deci, E.L. (2015). Show them the money? The role of pay, managerial need support, and justice in a self-determination theory model of intrinsic work motivation. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 56(4), 447-457.
• Pink, D.H. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York: Penguin.
• Ryan, J.C., & Berbegal-Mirabent, J. (2016). Motivational recipes and research performance: A fuzzy set analysis of the motivational profile of high performing research scientists. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), 5299-5304.
• Schaufeli, W.B. (2015). Engaging leadership in the job demands-resources model. Career Development International, 20(5), 446-463.
• Scott, J.C. (2006). The Mission of the University: Medieval to Postmodern Transformations. Journal of Higher Education, 77(1), 1-39. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2006.0007.
• Siegrist, J. (1996). Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1(1), 27-41.
• Smith, W.K., & Lewis, M.W. (2011). Toward a theory of paradox: a dynamic equilibrium model of organizing. Academy of Management Review, 36(2), 381-403.
• Spreitzer, G., Sutcliffe, K., Dutton, J., Sonenshein, S., & Grant, A.M. (2005). A socially embedded model of thriving at work. Organization Science, 16(5), 537-549.
• Szuflita-Żurawska, M., Basińska, B.A., & Leja, K. (2018). New model of motivation among academics: data of polish scientific productivity. Unpublished manuscript. Gdańsk: Faculty of Management and Economics, Gdansk University of Technology.
• Tabatoni P. (2002). Strategic management, a tool of leadership - concepts and paradoxes. In P. Tabatoni, J. Davies, & A. Barblan (Eds.), Strategic management and universities institutional development. EUA-European University Association.
• Teye, E.T., Abosi, B.A., Tetteh, A.N., Ntim, S.Y., Teye, A., Aseidua-Ayeh, O.L., & Dubi, S.A. (2019). Linking motivation and alliance to perceived ambidexterity outcomes at the individual level in academia. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-10-2018-0205.
• Tremblay, M.A., Blanchard, C.M., Taylor, S., Pelletier, L.G., & 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), 213-226.
• Van den Broeck, A., Ferris, D.L., Chang, C.H., & Rosen, C.C. (2016). A review of self-determination theory's basic psychological needs at work. Journal of Management, 42(5), 1195-1229.
• Van der Burgt, S.M.E., Kusurkar, R.A., Wilschut, J.A., Tjin A Tsoi, S.L.M.M., Croise, G., & Peerdeman, S.M. (2018). Motivational Profiles and Motivation for Lifelong Learning of Medical Specialists. The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 38(3), 171-178. https://doi.org/10.1097/CEH.0000000000000205.
• Wolszczak-Derlacz, J. (2017). An evaluation and explanation of (in) efficiency in higher education institutions in Europe and the US with the application of two-stage semi-parametric DEA. Research Policy, 46(9), 1595-1605.
• Wolszczak-Derlacz, J., & Parteka, A. (2011). Efficiency of European public higher education institutions: a two-stage multicountry approach. Scientometrics, 89(3), 887-917.
• Wollersheim, J., Lenz, A., Welpe, I.M., & Sporrle, M. (2015). Me, myself, and my university: a multilevel analysis of individual and institutional determinants of academic performance. Journal of Business Economics, 85(3), 263-291.
• Zaharie, M.A., & Seeber, M. (2018). Are non-monetary rewards effective in attracting peer reviewers? A natural experiment. Scientometrics, 117(3), 1587-1609.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15678/EBER.2019.070313