100%(1)100% au considerat acest document util (1 vot)
112 vizualizări23 pagini
This paper aims at giving a deep insight on prosocial motivation. Adam M. Grant is an award-winning teacher, researcher, and management professor. More research should be done to close the remaining gaps existing in the current literature.
This paper aims at giving a deep insight on prosocial motivation. Adam M. Grant is an award-winning teacher, researcher, and management professor. More research should be done to close the remaining gaps existing in the current literature.
This paper aims at giving a deep insight on prosocial motivation. Adam M. Grant is an award-winning teacher, researcher, and management professor. More research should be done to close the remaining gaps existing in the current literature.
Chair: Prof. Dr. Isabell M. Welpe, Lehrstuhl fr Strategie und Organisation
Author: Alejandro Aznar Argelich, Matr. Nr. 03295680
Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
2
OVERVIEW
1. Introduction page 3
2. Personal networks
2.1. Definitions page 4 2.2. Relational job design and prosocial motivation page 6 2.3. Prosocial motivation at work page 13 2.4. Intrinsic and prosocial motivation page 14
3. Conclusions page 16
4. References page 22
Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
3
1. INTRODUCTION
The present paper aims at giving a deep insight on prosocial motivation. Adam M. Grant, an award-winning teacher, researcher, and management professor at Wharton Business School, has published several articles on prosocial motivation. Grants experience and level of expertise on several fields among business psychology have made him a very good option when selecting papers about motivation at a business level. The paper has been mainly based on three of his latest articles, since they provide a very deep insight on the topic and also present new ideas and future lines of research on prosocial motivation. These mentioned articles have helped in a significant manner to the composition of the paper.
Prosocial motivation is a very important resource that significantly contributes to the improvement of the workers performance and productivity. This paper focuses on three main topics within the context of prosocial motivation: first, the relational architecture of jobs, defining in several jobs and closely related to personal relationships; second, the collective orientation of employees, so as to achieve global visions and goals within the company; and third, the intensifying effect of intrinsic motivation in employees making a prosocial difference.
In relation to the future, more research should be done to close the remaining gaps existing in the current literature. Some of the main issues would be the negative aspects or consequences of prosocial motivation, which can hinder employees performance and productivity, a deeper understanding of the varied relational characteristics of jobs and the way they affect relationships and employees actions and Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
4
identities, or prosocial motivation related to social entrepreneurship, CSR, and sustainability issues such as climate change or oil depletion.
The paper will proceed with the following structure: first, the present introduction, on which brief comments about the paper and its structure are made; second, the main part, on which definitions, explanation of the relational job design, prosocial motivation in the context of work, and the difference between prosocial and intrinsic motivation will be given; third, the conclusion, on which a general overview from the whole paper and comments on the limitations and possible future lines of research will be provided.
Regarding citations, they will be inserted in the paper directly after the thought they refer to, according to APA-style.
2. PROSOCIAL MOTIVATION
2.1 Definition
Motivation denotes a desire or reason to act, and prosocial means for the benefit of others or with the intention of helping others (Oxford English Dictionary, 2009).
Prosocial behavior is the behavior that benefits others or has positive social consequences and it can take many forms, including helping behaviors, cooperation and Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
5
solidarity (Moivas, 1996).
Prosocial motivation takes place when employees are willing to carry out the activities related to a determined job with the aim of helping and improving the quality of life of customers, co-workers and communities (Grant, 2007).
Prosocial motivation can operate as an enabling condition for outcomes that are often viewed as positive for employees, such as meaningful work and strengthened social bonds, and for organizations, such as effort, persistence, performance, creativity, citizenship and proactive behavior. It can also serve as a lens for understanding employees quests to create positive outcomes for others, providing insight into how employees experience and pursue the desire to protect and promote the well-being of coworkers, customers, and communities (Grant and Berg, 2011).
Psychologists have argued that prosocial motivation operates at three hierarchical levels of generality: global, contextual, and situational (Vallerand, 1997). Global motivation focuses on an employees relatively stable dispositional orientation toward particular goals and actions across time and situations. Contextual motivation focuses on an employees motivation toward a specific domain or class of behavior, and is moderately variable across time and situations. Situational motivation focuses on an employees motivation toward a particular behavior in a particular moment in time, and is highly variable. Thus, at the extremes, global motivation can be viewed as a traitlike concept, while situational motivation matches prototypes of psychological states (Chaplin, John, & Goldberg, 1988).
Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
6
2.2 Relational job design and prosocial motivation
In this part of the paper, work contexts and their relationship with prosocial motivation will be analyzed. Also the way jobs spark the motivation of employees to make a prosocial difference, as well as the way prosocial motivation affects their actions and decisions. The most important and new fact compared to other existing literature that Grant (2007) throws light on is the way relational architecture of jobs shapes the motivation to make a prosocial difference.
Employees have in mind making a positive difference in other peoples lives (Borstein, 2004). This motivation to make a prosocial difference is defining in several jobs. Some examples of jobs on which prosocial motivation is an important pillar would be firefighting they need to risk their life for people almost every day- or inner-city attorneys as they get emotionally attached to their clients, they work more and for less money just to help them.
It is usually important that employees count on altruistic values so as them to be willing to make a positive difference in others lives. But which would be the way companies have to encourage their employees to follow a prosocial motivation? According to Hackman and Oldham (1980), this could be the task significance or the extent to which employees work affects other people health and well-being- that makes the employees considering their work as meaningful. Also interpersonal relationships play key role in enabling employees to experience their work as important and meaningful (Barry & Crant, 2000). Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
7
Prosocial motivation can be regarded as a relational phenomenon, closely attached to the concept of interpersonal relationships and its importance at work. In the literature researched, this has been found to be a popular topic, independently from the year of publication. Currently, it could be said that this importance is greater since these relationships- both the external and the internal- are one of the most important aspects of the service sector, and this sector is the most significant one in the US, and it is growing very fast in Europe. Employees are increasingly being encouraged to have good relationships and therefore improve the lives of their co-workers, supervisors, clients and customers (Grant, 2007).
When analyzing prosocial motivation, it is also crucial to discuss how jobs cultivate the motivation to make a prosocial difference. A very good model to explain this is the relational job design (Hackman and Oldham, 1980; Grant, 2007).
The relational job design signifies that jobs are designed with elaborate relational architectures that affect employees interpersonal interactions and connections (Grant, 2007). These relational architectures are important in the development of relationships with co-workers and customers, and also with regard to cooperation and collaboration. Relational job design has an influence on the impact of employees on the beneficiaries individuals benefited from the work of employees, such as co-workers, supervisors, subordinates, clients and customers. The two dimensions on relational job design are job impact and contact with beneficiaries, both of which will be explained further in this paper.
Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
8
Regarding relational architecture of jobs, we can affirm that it refers to the structural properties of work that shape employees opportunities to connect and interact with other people (Grant, 2007). For instance, firefighting jobs or jobs related to the delivery of emergency medical services have an enriched impact and high frequency of contact with beneficiaries, completely opposed to janitorial jobs. There can also be difference within a same job type, such as journalists, who can communicate important news and have feedback from beneficiaries, and can also be transmitting trivial information to small audiences and receiving no feedback.
Job impact can be defined as the degree to which a job provides opportunities for employees to affect the lives of beneficiaries (Grant, 2007). Jobs can impact different dimensions of beneficiaries well-being: hedonic well-being related to health and safety of other (nurse, police officer), eudaimonic well-being promoting the development of others (coach, teacher) and material well-being (accountants, attorneys).
There are four key dimensions regarding potential impact on beneficiaries: magnitude (e.g. surgeons have enduring impacts since they save lives, not the same happens with cashiers), scope (e.g. automobile designers affect a lot more people than speech therapists), frequency (e.g. chefs preparing meals that impact people many times per day, in front of research chemists) and focus of impact (e.g. lifeguards protecting swimmers from drowning in front of gasoline station attendants preventing harms of lower magnitude; special teachers promoting gains of high magnitude, in front of comedians). Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
9
The figure 1 explains how work contexts motivate employees to care about making a positive difference in other peoples lives.
Figure 1. The Job Impact Framework. Source: Grant (2007). Relational job design and the motivation to make a prosocial difference, Academy of Management Review, page 396.
In relation to contact with beneficiaries, it can be defined as the degree to which a job is relationally structured to provide opportunities for employees to interact and communicate with the people affected by their work (Grant, 2007). This contact can range from everyday contact to occasional calls or emails. It is necessary to highlight here that employees can be carrying out impactful tasks, but this does not mean that they are having a personal or emotional connection with beneficiaries, or vice versa. Employees look for meaningful tasks but also meaningful relationships (Kahn, Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
10
1990).
Grant (2007) suggests five dimensions of contact with beneficiaries: frequency of contact (e.g. taxi drivers in front of commercial pilots), duration (e.g. hairstylists have longer contact with beneficiaries than flight attendants), physical proximity (e.g. clinical psychologists as opposed to manufacturing employees), depth (social workers against telephone operators) and breadth of contact (an orchestra musician has contact with the conductor, audience members and the fellow musicians, while a clerical worker has a narrow contact with beneficiaries). The greater this dimensions are, the more meaningful is regarded work by employees.
It would also be important to analyze how the relational job design has an impact on motivation. For that purpose, it is necessary to refer to perceived impact and its relation with contact with beneficiaries. Perceived impact is the degree to which employees know that their actions have an effect on others. It is a way of experiencing ones job as affecting welfare of other individuals, which establishes a connection employee-beneficiary (Grant, 2007). The greater whichever of the previously mentioned magnitudes of job impact are, the higher is the perceived impact or objective opportunity to significantly affect others (e.g. ambulance drivers can save victims life, while cashiers dont have a strong perceived impact). Usually, the jobs preventing harm are more meaningful for employees than the jobs focusing on promotion of gains. Regarding the relation with beneficiaries, it can be argued that it is crucial for employees to receive feedback on whether they are having an impact or not on beneficiaries welfare (e.g. production times isolated from costumers lose awareness of customers expectations). Besides, the greater the frequency, duration, physical Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
11
proximity, depth, and breadth of contact with beneficiaries provided by the job, the stronger the employees perception of impact (Grant, 2007).
Another important aspect for employees to make a prosocial difference is their affective commitment to beneficiaries, which refers to emotional concern for and dedication to the people and groups of people impacted by ones work (Grant, 2007). As an example, domestic violence counselors care about their clients, and tend to develop affective commitment to the whole group. This concept is strongly related to the already analyzed perceived impact, since the personal contact and closeness to beneficiaries is likely to enable employees to really care about beneficiaries and identify themselves with them. Therefore, it can be said that the previously mentioned dimensions of personal contacts and perceived impacted are very related to the affective commitment the higher these dimensions, the greater the commitment to beneficiaries.
As far as employees reactions to relational job design are concerned, it can be suggested that they are likely to be influenced by social information, which shapes the ways in which the employees evaluate the beliefs, emotions, behaviors, group memberships, and intrinsic worth of beneficiaries (Grant, 2007). Beneficiaries are regarded as important and valuable individuals according to organizational and occupational ideologies (e.g. Wal-Marts ideology of customers having the right to buy quality products at good prices). This is the case when beneficiaries are kind, amiable and easy to help in their interactions with employees. These ideologies can, however, devaluate beneficiaries, when they are regarded by employees as difficult to help, rude or disrespectful. Consequently, it can be concluded that interactions with beneficiaries can provide whether positive or negative social information about them. Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
12
It can be further argued that social information moderates the effect of affective commitment to beneficiaries, mentioned earlier in this section of the paper. When the employees are exposed to positive social information of the beneficiaries, they are more committed to help beneficiaries, since this information triggers employees prosocial identities and become connected to the welfare of others. On the other hand, when employees receive negative social information from beneficiaries, they seek emotional distance from them (Grant, 2007).
Getting back to the motivation to make a prosocial difference, it is found that the previously discussed elements are closely related to prosocial motivation. Perceived impact is likely to increase prosocial motivation, because employees feel capable of making a prosocial difference on other peoples lives. But there is another dimension which enhances prosocial motivation even with a higher degree of probability: affective commitment. Affective commitment to beneficiaries will raise the likelihood for employees to be motivated in a prosocial manner, since employees personally caring about beneficiaries are emotionally attached to them and they will therefore be motivated spend more energy to improve their well-being (Grant, 2007).
Until now, the most important implications of prosocial motivation have been analyzed. However, it is worth also referring to the consequences that this type of motivation can have. First, behavioural consequences can be mentioned. Making a prosocial difference requires more effort, persistence and helping behavior voluntary work, spend more time and energy. In second place, identity consequences: the previously mentioned behavioural consequences can affect employees identities, being Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
13
these ones the competence, self-determination and social value of employees all of which can be related to impact. When employees display high levels of effort, persistence, and helping behavior in the interest of making a prosocial difference, they are likely to construct identities as competent, self-determined, socially valued individuals (Grant, 2007).
2.3 Prosocial motivation at work
In the organizational behavior context, it makes a lot of sense to explain the way prosocial motivation works within a company, while the employees are performing their job. In Grant (2008a), several facts on behavioral consequences of prosocial motivation at work are analyzed, and a lot of questions are left open so as them to be solved by future research. In this section of the paper, several facts and implications will be explained so as to further the understanding on how prosocial motivation at work can change and how these changes can be sustained in the long term.
According to Grant and Berg (2011), employees are more likely to experience prosocial motivation when organizations maintain collectivistic rather than individualistic norms and rewards. If collective goals are established, there is a higher probability that employees are willing to contribute to common goals and also feel concerned about other peoples welfare whether co-workers or customers.
In shaping prosocial motivation, transformational leadership can also play an important role, given that they are able to link employees work to organizational goals Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
14
and values, which can lead employees to prioritize the interests of the organization over and above their own self-interests (Bass, 1999). This can be achieved, thanks to the fact that transformational leaders are regarded as role models and prove support to their employees. Nevertheless, the effects of transformational leadership may vary as a function of the type of charismatic relationship that employees have with their leaders (Grant and Berg, 2011).
Another important fact, already mentioned in the previous section, would be the individual differences among employees. There are two different classifications of individuals according to Grant and Berg (2011). The first one refers to the level of familiar or universalism values: the individuals with stronger familiar values will be sensitive to contact and relationships with beneficiaries, whereas the concern on the ones with high universal values will not depend that much on contact but will be rather broad and more sustainable. The second distinction mentions agreeable individuals whose prosocial motivation will be more focused toward individuals- and conscientious employees who will direct their prosocial motivation to being responsible and complying with rules; less personal.
2.4 Intrinsic and prosocial motivation
Authors usually have trouble on differentiating between intrinsic and prosocial motivation. The article of Grant (2008a) provides a deep insight on the matter defining both concepts in-depth and referring to different dimensions that affect them and can serve as a basis to achieve a clear distinction. According to Grant (2008a), intrinsic Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
15
motivation is driven by pleasure, interest and enjoyment, whereas prosocial motivation is driven by meaning and purpose, with the aim of helping others. There are three dimensions on which this difference is based: self-regulation (autonomous vs. introjected/identified), goal directedness (process vs. outcome), and temporal focus (present vs. future).
Individuals who are intrinsically motivated are naturally drawn to do their job, they are autonomous, process-based and focused in the present, since their only aim is pure enjoyment; however, prosocially motivated people are more based on conscious self-regulation and self-control, they are outcome based they want to achieve a goal, which is other people welfare- and are evidently focused in the future. For instance, the case of a university professor presenting a lecture to students. When intrinsically motivated, the teachers effort is based on enjoyment of the task of lecturing, which provides joy and pleasure in the process of performing. When prosocially motivated, the teachers effort is based on a desire to educate students, which provides meaning and fulfillment in the outcome of student learning (Grant, 2008a).
In his article, Grant (2008a) proved the hypothesis that intrinsic motivation moderates the relationship between prosocial motivation and persistence, performance, and productivity, the dimensions explained in the previous section of the paper. He was able to demonstrate, by a study on which he observed firefighters and fundraising callers while working, that the higher the intrinsic motivation, the stronger the positive association between prosocial motivation and persistence, performance, and productivity. In both contexts, prosocial motivation was a psychologically meaningful variable. Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
16
3. CONCLUSIONS
Prosocial motivation appears as a crucial element to improve employees work performance and productivity. It goes without saying that the analysis of the different implications and consequences of prosocial motivation is useful for managers in order to better design jobs, to re-define the business with a more ethical and environmentally sustainable view, to improve the relationships within the company and from the company to the outside world, to know the best way to create a collective identity towards a common organizational goal, and it is also a good indicator to know whether to select and train certain individuals instead of others.
As a conclusion for the section of relational architecture of jobs, it can be said that jobs have important relational architectures that can motivate employees to care about improving the welfare of other people. This article thus enriches our understanding of how making a difference makes a difference for employees and their organizations (Grant, 2007).
When employees have opportunities to affect beneficiaries, they are aware of their impact on beneficiaries, they are affectively attached to them, and, consequently, they are more likely to develop a prosocial motivation. Then it can be concluded that relationships are shaped by the motivation to make a prosocial difference (Grant, 2007).
Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
17
Regarding job impact, it can be said that impactful jobs provide meaningful opportunities for impact on and relationships with beneficiaries, both affecting beneficiaries lives and creating connections with these beneficiaries. The article of Grant (2007) provides deeper insight on how this is made in comparison to previous literature.
The previous literature also brought up the questions of whether employees cared about other people and which kind of employees were the ones caring about others. Grant (2007), however, proposed the question of when and under what conditions employees cared about other individuals, concluding that well-designed jobs were the key to trigger prosocial motivation, and considering altruistic-egoistic motives as complementary to this triggering. It can be argued that the article furthers the understanding of the way to achieve this type of motivation in organizations, making employees to care about and cooperate with others.
It would be also worth adding that jobs with enriched relational job architectures can usually satisfy both the employees needs of differentiation achieved through competence and self-determination, making distinct contributions to other peoples lives- and integration achieved through feeling valued and connected to the beneficiaries of these contributions (Grant, 2007).
Regarding the future, researchers should be able to measure the relational architecture of jobs. This would provide them with a deeper understanding of the varied relational characteristics of jobs, and the mechanisms through which they affect the actions, relationships, experiences and identities of employees (Grant, 2007). It would Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
18
be also useful to look for the sources of relational job design: not only managers goals and organizational structures, but also the way employees play a role on shaping these structures, and the way employees craft their jobs, enabling them to become aware of their impact and redefine work including new activities so as to make a prosocial difference on beneficiaries.
Adverse work conditions and individual differences that can hinder the development of a prosocial motivation (Frey and Meier, 2003), and the effect that these adverse conditions or differences can have on relational job design should be also an issue of attention for future researchers. Answering the questions of why employees decide to favour beneficiaries with similar backgrounds and experiences and however they discriminate against dissimilar ones or how to moderate the effect of individual differences on employees reactions to different types of beneficiaries would have an enormous effect on understanding prosocial motivation.
It would also be worth widening the amount of existing literature about jobs with enriched relational job architectures and their influence on satisfaction of employees needs of differentiation and integration.
In relation to limitations of the article of Grant (2007) and the rest of the existing literature about relational architecture of jobs, it can be suggested that little research has been done on job design examining the relational structures of jobs, and therefore several of the hypotheses presented in his article should be more extensively researched. There is also a need for a deeper understanding of how work contexts cultivate the motivation to make a prosocial difference, and articles that include jobs interpersonal Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
19
relationships in theories of motivation.
There are also limitations regarding job redesign, which can have weak effects or negative consequences, because it enriches tasks rather than enriching relational architecture of jobs. Relationships are more flexible and easy to intervene, which reduces the time and effort that the managers need to increase employees contact with beneficiaries (Grant, 2007).
In relation to motivation at work, it can be concluded that collectivistic goals and aims, and individual differences have an important influence on prosocial motivation. It can be added that, in spite of the not very significant amount of literature referred to the topic, transformational leaders can also have an undeniable effect in the process of triggering prosocial motivation.
As far as prosocial motivation at work is concerned, there are several questions that are yet to be answered by future research. One of the most important and less attention-grabbing aspects of prosocial motivation to researchers until the present time are the drawbacks of prosocial motivation. Grant and Berg (2011) consider prosocial motivation as a double-edged sword, since it can trigger not very ethical and even harmful attitudes, such as managers exploiting prosocially motivated employees by making them working overtime or underpaying them, employees being excessively loyal to beneficiaries and therefore violating justice and ethics or breaking rules
Some other possible future lines of research on the topic within the context of Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
20
work could be the exploration of the development and impact of collective prosocial motivation, proving if effects of prosocial motivation are greater or not among groups of workers, or if the existence shared identities, goals, and missions enhance prosocial motivation; the way organizations start, keep, and hinder prosocial motivation; and prosocial motivation related to social entrepreneurship, CSR, and sustainability issues, studying the role of prosocial motivation in solving problems of social and societal importance, asking questions such as how does prosocial motivation influence individual and organizational actions toward the environment? or if firms run by prosocially motivated executives engage in more corporate social responsibility and environmental activities (Grant and Berg, 2011).
In relation to intrinsic and prosocial motivation, it can be concluded that there is a synergy between prosocial and intrinsic motivations, and this synergy is more likely to enhance persistence, performance, and productivity, in comparison to each type of motivation in a separate way. This fact will be of great usefulness for managers, who could take into account this synergy in their selection and socialization practices, with the objective of increasing effectiveness outcomes. Thanks to these results, managers could also consider measuring the prosocial and intrinsic motivational orientations to hire employees who display dispositional tendencies to experience high levels of both motivations (Grant, 2008a).
Regarding future research about prosocial related to intrinsic motivation, it would be useful to investigate which are the psychological mechanisms that mediate between prosocial and intrinsic motivations and the implications of persistence, performance, and productivity. Also conscientiousness, perceived job characteristics and Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
21
positive affect, so as to know which are the relative contributions of intrinsic and prosocial to these effects. It would be also important to prove the hypothesis that multiple motivations cannot coexist in the same period of time.
It can finally be said that more research should be done on prosocial motivation at work, in spite of the article of Grant and Berg (2011), since it is rather a unique study on this topic. The idea would be to learn more on both positive sides and drawbacks of prosocial motivation at work, possible illusions of capabilities or achievements, and the sustainability of the mentioned prosocial motivation in the long term. It would be also helpful to gain more insight on intrinsic motivation and its relationship with prosocial motivation, so as to perfectly define the differences between both of them and their defining components and characteristics. The article of Grant (2008a) needs to be taken as the first step towards more investigation on the understanding of the previously mentioned topic.
Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
22
4. REFERENCES
Bass, B. M. (1999). Two decades of research and development in transformational leadership. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, 932.
Chaplin, W. F., John, O. P., & Goldberg, L. R. (1988). Conceptions of states and traits: Dimensional attributes with ideals as prototypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 541-557.
Frey, B. S. & Meier, S. (2003). Pro-social behavior in a natural setting. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 54, 6588.
Grant, A. M. (2007). Relational job design and the motivation to make a prosocial difference. Academy of Management Review, 32, 393-417.
Grant, A. M. (2008a). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 48-58.
Grant, A. M., & Berg, J. M. (2011). Prosocial motivation at work: When, why, and how making a difference makes a difference. In K. Cameron and G. Spreitzer (Eds.), Oxford handbook of positive organizational scholarship: 28-44. New York: Oxford University Press.
Prosocial motivation Alejandro Aznar Argelich
23
Grant, A. M. (2012). Leading with meaning: Beneficiary contact, prosocial impact, and the performance effects of transformational leadership. Forthcoming in the Academy of Management Journal.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250-279.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading, MA: Addison- Wesley.
Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33, 692-724.
Moivas, A (1996). La conducta prosocial. Cuadernos de trabajo, 9, 125-142. Universidad Complutense.
Tonin, M. & Vlassopoulos, M. (2010). Disentangling the sources of pro-socially motivated effort: A field experiment. Journal of Public Economics, 94 (1112), 1086- 1092.
Knutson, T. J., Komolsevin, R., Chatiketu, P., & Smith, V. R. (2003)A cross-cultural comparison of Thai and US American rhetorical sensitivity: implications for intercultural communication effectiveness