IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i9p3630-d352718.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Much Does Extrinsic Motivation or Intrinsic Motivation Affect Job Engagement or Turnover Intention? A Comparison Study in China

Author

Listed:
  • Siyuan Miao

    (School of Economics and Management, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, China)

  • Jaehoon Rhee

    (School of Business, Yeungnam University, Gyeongbuk 38541, Korea)

  • In Jun

    (School of Business, Yeungnam University, Gyeongbuk 38541, Korea)

Abstract

In recent years, the employee turnover rate for China’s youth labor market has been increasing, thus sparking many social issues. By incorporating social cognitive career theory, cognitive evaluation theory and a job demands-resources model, this study aims to compare levels of employee job engagement and examine the roles of motivation in enhancing job engagement and lowering turnover intention. Further, we try to reveal the moderating effects of feedback and self-efficacy in these processes. The research was divided into two stages. In December 2017, the survey was distributed to new employees in China with a total of 409 samples. A second survey was then distributed to the same respondents one year later. The data collection for stage 2 was completed in February 2019 with a sample size of 245. The empirical results showed that only self-efficacy moderated intrinsic motivation for job engagement. Both feedback and self-efficacy negatively moderated the influence of extrinsic motivation and positively moderated the influence of intrinsic motivation on turnover intention. The findings suggest that the key to improve employee engagement relies on maintaining their intrinsic motivation. In conclusion, implications for retaining talented young employees and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Siyuan Miao & Jaehoon Rhee & In Jun, 2020. "How Much Does Extrinsic Motivation or Intrinsic Motivation Affect Job Engagement or Turnover Intention? A Comparison Study in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-18, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:9:p:3630-:d:352718
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/9/3630/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/9/3630/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ernst Fehr & Holger Herz & Tom Wilkening, 2013. "The Lure of Authority: Motivation and Incentive Effects of Power," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(4), pages 1325-1359, June.
    2. Kevin Murdock, 2002. "Intrinsic Motivation and Optimal Incentive Contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(4), pages 650-671, Winter.
    3. Anitha J., 2014. "Determinants of employee engagement and their impact on employee performance," International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 63(3), pages 308-323, April.
    4. Kuvaas, Bård & Buch, Robert & Weibel, Antoinette & Dysvik, Anders & Nerstad, Christina G.L., 2017. "Do intrinsic and extrinsic motivation relate differently to employee outcomes?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 244-258.
    5. Meyer, John P. & Gagnè, Maryléne, 2008. "Employee Engagement From a Self-Determination Theory Perspective," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(1), pages 60-62, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shuai Zhang & Jiannan Du & Huiji Yue & Gui’an Li & Dian Zhang, 2023. "Study on the National Identity Education Intentions of Pre-Service Teachers: Evidence from PLS-SEM and fsQCA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-23, August.
    2. Feng Zeng Xu & Yun Zhang & Huixin Yang & Bob T. Wu, 2020. "Sustainable HRM through Improving the Measurement of Employee Work Engagement: Third-Person Rating Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-22, August.
    3. Asadi-Aliabadi, Mehran & Karimi, Seyed M & Tehrani-Banihashemi, Arash & Mirbaha-Hashemi, Fariba & Janani, Leila & Babaee, Ebrahim & Nojomi, Marzieh & Moradi-Lakeh, Maziar, 2022. "Effectiveness of pay for performance to non-physician health care providers: A systematic review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(7), pages 592-602.
    4. Martina Blašková & Dominika Tumová & Rudolf Blaško & Justyna Majchrzak-Lepczyk, 2021. "Spirals of Sustainable Academic Motivation, Creativity, and Trust of Higher Education Staff," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-25, June.
    5. Charmine Sheena Saflor & Klint Allen Marinas & Welajane Enano, 2024. "Investigating the Enduring Determinants of Workers’ Decision to Stay or Emigrate: An Extended Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-25, October.
    6. Jian Tian & Yan Peng & Xing Zhou, 2020. "The Effects of Abusive Supervision and Motivational Preference on Employees’ Innovative Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-15, October.
    7. Leonel Prieto & Muhammad Ruhul Amin & Arman Canatay, 2022. "Examining Social Sustainability in Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-43, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrej Woerner & Giorgia Romagnoli & Birgit M. Probst & Nina Bartmann & Jonathan N. Cloughesy & Jan Willem Lindemans, 2021. "Should Individuals Choose Their Own Incentives? Evidence from a Mindfulness Meditation Intervention," CESifo Working Paper Series 9494, CESifo.
    2. Sajid Hussain Awan & Nazia Habib & Chaudhry Shoaib Akhtar & Shaheryar Naveed, 2020. "Effectiveness of Performance Management System for Employee Performance Through Engagement," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(4), pages 21582440209, October.
    3. Ertac, Seda & Gumren, Mert & Gurdal, Mehmet Y., 2020. "Demand for decision autonomy and the desire to avoid responsibility in risky environments: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    4. David Danz & Dorothea Kübler & Lydia Mechtenberg & Julia Schmid, 2015. "On the Failure of Hindsight-Biased Principals to Delegate Optimally," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(8), pages 1938-1958, August.
    5. Jiabin Wu, 2018. "Indirect higher order beliefs and cooperation," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(4), pages 858-876, December.
    6. Inés Macho-Stadler & David Pérez-Castrillo, 2018. "Moral hazard: Base models and two extensions," Chapters, in: Luis C. Corchón & Marco A. Marini (ed.), Handbook of Game Theory and Industrial Organization, Volume I, chapter 16, pages 453-485, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Lucas C. Coffman & Alexander Gotthard-Real, 2019. "Moral Perceptions of Advised Actions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(8), pages 3904-3927, August.
    8. Ernst Fehr & Michael Powell & Tom Wilkening, 2014. "Handing Out Guns at a Knife Fight: Behavioral Limitations of Subgame-Perfect Implementation," CESifo Working Paper Series 4948, CESifo.
    9. Salar Hussain & Arjumand Bano Soomro & Arifa Bhutto & Sobia Shah & Shazia Shahab Shaikh, 2019. "Impacting Factors on the Employees’ Performance during Acquisitions: A Study on KASB Bank into Bank Islami Pakistan Ltd," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(4), pages 123-129, April.
    10. Silverman, Dan & Slemrod, Joel & Uler, Neslihan, 2014. "Distinguishing the role of authority “in” and authority “to”," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 32-42.
    11. Michael Vlassopoulos, 2017. "‘Putting a Foot in the Door’: Volunteer Hiring and Organizational Form," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 85(2), pages 133-162, March.
    12. Schinkel, M.P. & Tóth, L. & Tuinstra, J., 2014. "Discretionary Authority and Prioritizing in Government Agencies," CeNDEF Working Papers 14-15, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Center for Nonlinear Dynamics in Economics and Finance.
    13. Gary Charness & Ramón Cobo-Reyes & Juan A. Lacomba & Francisco Lagos & Jose Maria Perez, 2016. "Social comparisons in wage delegation: experimental evidence," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 19(2), pages 433-459, June.
    14. Brice Corgnet & Roberto Hernán-González, 2011. "Don't Ask Me If You Will Not Listen: The Dilemma of Participative Decision Making," Working Papers 11-04, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    15. Paul H. Jensen & Robin E. Stonecash, 2004. "The Efficiency of Public Sector Outsourcing Contracts: A Literature Review," Melbourne Institute Working Paper Series wp2004n29, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, The University of Melbourne.
    16. Prasenjit Banerjee & Vegard Iversen & Sandip Mitra & Antonio Nicolò & Kunal Sen, 2018. "Politicians and Their Promises in an Uncertain World: Evidence from a Lab-in-the-Field Experiment in India," Economics Discussion Paper Series 1806, Economics, The University of Manchester.
    17. David Bardey & Luigi Siciliani, 2021. "Nursing‐homes' competition and distributional implications when the market is two‐sided," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 472-500, May.
    18. Kristensen, Søren Rud & Siciliani, Luigi & Sutton, Matt, 2016. "Optimal price-setting in pay for performance schemes in health care," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 57-77.
    19. De Chiara, Alessandro & Engl, Florian & Herz, Holger & Manna, Ester, 2022. "Control Aversion in Hierarchies," FSES Working Papers 527, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Freiburg/Fribourg Switzerland.
    20. Kohei Kawaguchi, 2021. "When Will Workers Follow an Algorithm? A Field Experiment with a Retail Business," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1670-1695, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:9:p:3630-:d:352718. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.