Intrinsic motivation and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: A 40-year meta-analysis.

Abstract

More than 4 decades of research and 9 meta-analyses have focused on the undermining effect: namely, the debate over whether the provision of extrinsic incentives erodes intrinsic motivation. This review and meta-analysis builds on such previous reviews by focusing on the interrelationship among intrinsic motivation, extrinsic incentives, and performance, with reference to 2 moderators: performance type (quality vs. quantity) and incentive contingency (directly performance-salient vs. indirectly performance-salient), which have not been systematically reviewed to date. Based on random-effects meta-analytic methods, findings from school, work, and physical domains (k = 183, N = 212,468) indicate that intrinsic motivation is a medium to strong predictor of performance (ρ = .21-45). The importance of intrinsic motivation to performance remained in place whether incentives were presented. In addition, incentive salience influenced the predictive validity of intrinsic motivation for performance: In a "crowding out" fashion, intrinsic motivation was less important to performance when incentives were directly tied to performance and was more important when incentives were indirectly tied to performance. Considered simultaneously through meta-analytic regression, intrinsic motivation predicted more unique variance in quality of performance, whereas incentives were a better predictor of quantity of performance. With respect to performance, incentives and intrinsic motivation are not necessarily antagonistic and are best considered simultaneously. Future research should consider using nonperformance criteria (e.g., well-being, job satisfaction) as well as applying the percent-of-maximum-possible (POMP) method in meta-analyses.

Desire and climate on employee performance – a study on plantation state-owned enterprise in Indonesia

“…The results of this study are supported by the results of previous studies by Adeniji (2011); Cerasoli et al (2014), Millette and Gagné (2008), Zhang and Bartol (2010) which prove that motivation affects employees' performance. In addition, the results of this study are in accordance with the research done by Feng and Bergsteiner (2011) and also Manik (2016) which prove that the organizational climate affects employee performance.…”

“…The evidence is seen at employees of plantation state-owned enterprises in Indonesia. Cerasoli et al (2014) describes the characteristics of a person who has high achievement motivation. The characteristics are: the person gives satisfactory result; the person attempts to be a success, he/she is able to complete complex tasks, the person wants to master the certain field, the person completes the difficult job with satisfying results, the person wants to be the best compared with the others.…”

“…McClelland (Mangkunegara, 2013) believes an employee with high achievement motivation tends to work well since he/she knows good performance can improve organizational performance as well. According to the work context, motivation is an important factor in encouraging an employee to work (Cerasoli et al, 2014;Dobre, 2013). The basic elements in motivation are an effort, organizational goal, and needs.…”

Stroboscopic Visual Training: a Pilot Study with Three Elite Youth Football Goalkeepers

“…The qualitative findings suggest that football goalkeepers would benefit from introducing SVT from both the direct impact on onfield performance and the indirect impact of enhanced enjoyment. Extensive research has shown enjoyment to be linked to both motivation (McCarthy and Jones 2007) and sporting performance (Cerasoli et al 2014), and therefore, at the very least, SVT may have a positive placebo effect on athletes.…”

Investigating Intervention Components and Exploring States of Receptivity for a Smartphone App to Promote Physical Activity: Protocol of a Microrandomized Trial (Preprint)

“…However, financial incentives may reduce intrinsic motivation [36,37]; thus charity incentives have been proposed as an alternative incentive strategy. Charity incentives, i.e.…”