Motivation to improve performance on the basis of an evaluation system: the ascendancy of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation

Abstract

The decomposition of the terms of the psychological contract of workers from the public sector and the observation of the construct ‘motivation of public service’, given its preponderance in this sector, point towards a greater emphasis on intrinsic motivation and rewards of an intrinsic nature on the part of these workers, rather than a more extrinsic orientation.

The problem is that the majority of performance appraisal systems implemented through administrative reforms, carried out within the scope of New Public Management (NPM), assumes that the action and the behaviour of civil servants are self-interested and will be better controlled by extrinsic mechanisms. This may be observed in the Portuguese case, if we take as an example the effects of performance appraisals carried out in the context of the Integrated System of Performance Management and Appraisal in the Public Sector, known as SIADAP: awards for performance or change of remuneration positioning in the worker’s career, for example.

Hence, it may be deduced that NPM doctrines favour the emphasis on extrinsic motivation, potentially at the expense of intrinsic motivation of public sector employees. However, this perspective may have harmful effects on motivation and performance, if we consider that extrinsic rewards may lead individual perceptions towards the idea that their behaviour is under the control of rewards and that this, in turn, will reduce intrinsic motivation (cf. Cho and Perry, 2012). In short, the explicit link between extrinsic rewards and the performance of appraisal systems may lead to demotivation of a large number of civil servants, rather than motivating them.

Considering that one of the main purposes of the performance appraisal process should be to provide motivation, so as to improve performance and encourage individuals to positively change their behaviour, particular emphasis should be placed on the analysis of whether SIADAP is the most appropriate appraisal system to motivate Portuguese civil servants, given the issues presented above. Hence, our first hypothesis is: “intrinsically motivated individuals will have more negative beliefs about SIADAP’s motivational power”.

However, a caveat is in order: to be intrinsically motivated does not necessarily mean that extrinsic motivations are not important, given their ability to meet multiple levels of needs. Moreover, there may even be civil servants who favour extrinsic rewards, hence our second hypothesis: “extrinsically motivated individuals will have more positive beliefs about SIADAP’s motivational power”.

For the verification of these hypotheses, a study of transversal nature has been carried out, on the basis of the responses of 334 workers (n = 334) from three public institutions. The statistical treatment had both a descriptive and an inferential component, based on data collected through a questionnaire. This was developed from previously tested and validated scales.

The values of the measures of central tendency (mean and median) demonstrate that respondents tend to reveal that SIADAP has a small impact in their motivation to improve their performance (28.94 ; 25.00). Moreover, they are highly motivated intrinsically (74.11 ; 73.33), although their extrinsic motivation should not be neglected (53.45 ; 53.33). On the basis of these results, it may be concluded that there is the need for a balance between extrinsic and intrinsic rewards, so as to motivate Portuguese public servants. It will not be an easy task: it is necessary to conceive that rewards of an extrinsic nature, while necessary, should not destroy or ignore public servants’ intrinsic needs.

Regarding the working hypotheses, if we considered only the correlation between the variables, we could analyse their agreement concerning their directionality: the value of r_s is negative (r_s = -0.07) for the first hypothesis, whereas, for the second hypothesis, the value of r_s is positive (r_s = +0.15). However, concerning the first hypothesis, the correlation is not significant, given that p = 0.108, so it is not corroborated. However, a problem regarding the second hypothesis should be noticed: as observed, the value of r_s is very close to zero (r_s = 0.15), which means that extreme caution should be used in the verification of this hypothesis, as it indicates a weak correlation between the two variables. In short, we cannot infer, on the basis of the results, with some degree of confidence, whether intrinsic motivation or extrinsic motivation influence, in some way, the acceptance of SIADAP by civil servants.