Self-determination theory (SDT) conceptualizes basic psychological needs for autonomyMotivation, or the "energetic forces that initiate work-related behavior and determine its form, direction, intensity and duration" (Pinder, 2008: 11), is a critical issue for organizations and employees. It has been linked to increased employee productivity and organizational revenue, as well as employees' well-being and thriving (Steers, Mowday, & Shapiro, 2004). Given its important role, a good deal of research has focused on the type and extent of motivation employees experience (e.g., Diefendorff & Chandler, 2011;Latham & Pinder, 2005). Within this research area, a prominent focus has been on how the satisfaction of needs, or "some type of internal tension or arousal" (Kanfer, 1990: 81), enhances employee motivation. For example, needs have figured in historical frameworks from Maslow's (1943) need hierarchy to McClelland's (1965) work on needs for achievement, affiliation, and power. More recently, researchers have proposed alternate needs, such as the need for status (Hogan, 1998) and the need for relatedness (Baumeister & Leary, 1995;.Yet few need frameworks have spurred as much research on needs as self-determination theory (SDT; . SDT argues that humans are optimally motivated and experience well-being when they have three basic psychological needs satisfied: the need for autonomy, the need for competence, and the need for relatedness ( The increasing importance and popularity of basic psychological needs in the organizational domain, combined with the lack of any existing reviews on the topic, highlights the need for a conceptual and empirical review of the management research on this topic. 1 To this end, our paper provides a meta-analytic overview of organizational research on basic psychological needs, demonstrating the breadth of constructs (i.e., antecedents and consequences) that basic psychological needs have been found to relate to. We also had three more specific aims with our review: to test SDT's requirement that each basic psychological need should uniquely predict psychological growth, internalization, and well-being; to test whether use of an overall need satisfaction measure is appropriate; and to test whether the scale used to assess basic psychological needs (i.e., the measure developed by Deci et al. In accomplishing these aims, our review provides both contributions and challenges to the SDT literature. In particular, our results indicate research on basic psychological needs is both vibrant and prolific, with need satisfaction relating to a wide variety of antecedents and outcomes. Moreover, we find general support for SDT's requirement that each need should independently predict indicators of psychological growth, internalization, and well-being. However, our findings also illustrate that contrary to SDT, the variance basic psychological needs account for in some of these outcomes is statistically significant but practically insignificant; our review also surfaces issues with the literature's most...

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Using self-determination theory, two studies found that holding an extrinsic, relative to an intrinsic, work value orientation was associated with less positive outcomes (i.e. less satisfaction with, dedication to and vitality while on the job) and more negative outcomes (i.e. higher emotional exhaustion, short-lived satisfaction after successful goal-attainment, and turn-over intention). These relations were not limited to job outcomes, but also emerged using indicators of employees' general mental health. Moreover, income level did not moderate these relations. Study 2 found that holding an extrinsic, relative to an intrinsic, work value orientation was detrimental to employees' job outcomes because these orientations thwarted the satisfaction of the basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness at work.

Self-determination theory proposes that individuals experience distinct types of motivation to varying degrees. While it is well documented that these types of motivation differentially predict outcomes, very little attention has been paid to how they interact within individuals. The current study addresses the simultaneous occurrence of multiple motivations types within individual workers by adopting a person-centered approach on two samples of employees from different countries (n = 723 & 286). Four very similar motivation profiles were found across samples, representing amotivated, externally regulated, autonomously regulated and highly motivated employees. In Sample 1, governmental employees presented a greater likelihood of membership into the least desirable amotivated profile, whereas white-collar employees presented a greater likelihood of membership in the highly motivated profile. In Sample 2, autonomously and highly motivated profiles showed superior work performance and higher levels of wellbeing, while the amotivated profile fared the worst. The presence of external regulation in a profile appears unimportant when combined with autonomous forms of motivation, and detrimental to outcomes in the absence of autonomous forms of motivation. These results support the hypothesis that autonomous forms of motivation are far more important in promoting positive workplace outcomes than more controlling forms.

The satisfaction of the basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness, as defined in Self-Determination Theory, has been identified as an important predictor of individuals' optimal functioning in various life domains. The study of work-related need satisfaction seems, however, hampered by the lack of a validated measure. To assist future research, the present study aimed to develop and validate a Work-related Basic Need Satisfaction scale (W-BNS). Using four Dutch-speaking samples, evidence was found for the three-factor structure of the scale, the discriminant validity, and the reliability of the three need satisfaction subscales as well as their criterion-related and predictive validity. The W-BNS may therefore be considered as a promising tool for future research and practice.

High quality work design is a key determinant of employee well-being, positive work attitudes, and job/organizational performance. Yet many job incumbents continue to experience deskilled and demotivating work. We argue that there is a need to understand better where work designs come from. We review research that investigates the factors that influence work design, noting that this research is only a small fragment of the work design literature. The research base is also rather disparate, spanning distinct theoretical perspectives according to the level of analysis. To help integrate this literature, we use a framework that summarizes the direct and indirect ways in which work design is shaped by the higher-level external context (global/ international, national and occupational factors), the organizational context, the local work context (work group factors), and individual factors. We highlight two key indirect effects: first, factors affect formal decisionmaking processes via influencing managers' work design-related motivation, knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs), and opportunities; and second, factors shape informal and emergent work design processes via influencing employees' work design-related motivation, KSAs and opportunities. By reviewing the literature according to this framework, we set the stage for more comprehensive theoretical development and empirical studies on the factors that influence work design. 3Work Design Influences A Synthesis of Multi-Level Factors that Affect The Design of WorkWork design refers to "the content and organization of one's work tasks, activities, relationships, and responsibilities" (Parker, 2014, p. 662). When work is designed so that it has motivating characteristics like job autonomy and social support, as well as reasonable levels of job demands, multiple positive individual and organizational outcomes arise. A vast amount of research shows that work design affects work stress, job satisfaction, performance, absenteeism, accidents, team innovation, company financial revenue, and more (e.g. see the meta analysis by Humphrey, Nahrgang, & Morgeson, 2007).Yet, despite extensive evidence about the benefits of well-designed work, there are still many poorly designed jobs in both advanced and developing economies. For example, in Europe, Lorenz and Valeyre (2005) reported that one third of workers had jobs that were deskilled or that involved excessive demands. Significant technological and societal change is also affecting work and organizing, yet we know little about how this change might affect people's work design (Parker, 2014). Both of these forces -the continued prevalence of poor quality work designs and the vast change occurring in work -highlight the importance of having a comprehensive, evidence-based understanding of the forces that affect work design.Such an understanding is currently lacking. In most theory and research pertaining to the design of jobs, work design is modeled at the start of a causal chain leading to outcomes via intermediary pr...