Journal of Applied Psychology © 2017 American Psychological Association

2017, Vol. 102, No. 3, 338 –355 0021-9010/17/$12.00 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000133

Motivation Related to Work: A Century of Progress

Ruth Kanfer Michael Frese

Georgia Institute of Technology National University of Singapore and Leuphana
University of Lueneburg

Russell E. Johnson
Michigan State University

Work motivation is a topic of crucial importance to the success of organizations and societies and the
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

well-being of individuals. We organize the work motivation literature over the last century using a
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

meta-framework that clusters theories, findings, and advances in the field according to their primary
focus on (a) motives, traits, and motivation orientations (content); (b) features of the job, work role, and
broader environment (context); or (c) the mechanisms and processes involved in choice and striving
(process). Our integrative review reveals major achievements in the field, including more precise
mapping of the psychological inputs and operations involved in motivation and broadened conceptions
of the work environment. Cross-cutting trends over the last century include the primacy of goals, the
importance of goal striving processes, and a more nuanced conceptualization of work motivation as a
dynamic, goal-directed, resource allocation process that unfolds over the related variables of time,
experience, and place. Across the field, advances in methodology and measurement have improved the
match between theory and research. Ten promising directions for future research are described and field
experiments are suggested as a useful means of bridging the research–practice gap.

Keywords: motivation, resource allocation, goals, self-regulation, intrinsic motivation

Motivation related to work remains one of the most enduring publications that have appeared in Journal of Applied Psychology
and compelling topics in industrial/organizational (I/O) psychol- (JAP). As shown in Figure 1, the number of these publications (as
ogy. As part of the larger field of motivational science, motivation indexed by keyword count) has increased over the decades. How-
related to work examines fundamental questions about the influ- ever, a more thorough perusal of these articles indicates that
ence of nonability person attributes (e.g., motives, traits, goals), motivation (although always considered important) did not truly
work ecologies, and the mechanisms and processes involved in emerge as a major research topic in JAP until the mid-20th
purposive action. Work motivation affects the skills that individ- century, with the introduction of theories by Atkinson (1958),
uals develop, the jobs and careers that individuals pursue, and the Bandura (1977), Carver and Scheier (1981), Deci (1975), Fishbein
manner in which individuals allocate their resources (e.g., atten- and Ajzen (1975), Hackman and Oldham (1975), Locke (1966),
tion, effort, time, and human and social capital) to affect the Vroom (1964), and others. As these research streams have ma-
direction, intensity, and persistence of activities during work. At
tured, motivation-related publications in JAP have focused on the
the same time, work motivation is a topic of critical importance to
role of individual differences (e.g., traits and motives), resource
public policymakers and organizations concerned with developing
allocation and self-regulation processes, and the sociostructural
work environments, human resource policies, and management
context of work. As JAP celebrates its centennial, theory and
practices that promote vocational adjustment, individual well-
research on work motivation stands at an important crossroad.
being, and organizational success. As such, work motivation
stands at the nexus of society, science, and organizational success. Recent changes in the nature of work and the workforce have
The increasing importance of motivation over the last century is increased the need for new knowledge that can be used to cultivate
reflected in both the number and nature of motivation-related and sustain work motivation. These trends, along with the avail-
ability and increasing use of new methodologies to track work
experiences, assess motives, and evaluate motivational processing
across levels and over time suggest that the field is well-positioned
This article was published Online First February 2, 2017. (and overdue) for yet another round of innovation and growth.
Ruth Kanfer, School of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology; With these developments in mind, the purpose of this article is
Michael Frese, Department of Management & Organization, National threefold: (1) to provide a meta-framework for organizing and
University of Singapore and Department of Management & Organization,
understanding the work motivation literature as it has evolved over
Leuphana University of Lueneburg; Russell E. Johnson, Department of
Management, Michigan State University.
the last century, (2) to highlight major contributions and themes in
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Ruth different parts of the meta-framework (with an emphasis on works
Kanfer, School of Psychology, Georgia Institute of Technology, 0170, 654 published in JAP), and (3) to identify major trends and promising
Cherry Street, Atlanta, GA, 30332-0170. E-mail: rk64@prism.gatech.edu future research directions.
338
 MOTIVATION RELATED TO WORK: A CENTURY OF PROGRESS 339

45 this organization on the observation that motivation theory and

40 research in JAP and related journals has been driven by three
fundamental questions: (1) What desires, wants, and needs elicit
35
action? This is the classic question of what features of the indi-
30
vidual spurs action, and pertains to the role of needs, universal
25 motives (e.g., mastery, autonomy), and trait-based preferences. (2)
20 What role do environmental factors play in motivation? Most
15 theories of motivation recognize that behavior is also influenced
by its context. Recently, Johns (2006) has suggested a multilevel
10
perspective in which discrete contextual variables, such as job-
5
related characteristics, sociostructural variables, physical condi-
0 tions, and work events are nested within broader omnibus contex-
tual variables, such as occupation, culture, and economic
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

conditions. Most theory-driven research in JAP has focused on

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

proximal or discrete contextual variables. (3) Through what psy-

chological processes and mechanisms do person and environment
Mo va on Self-regula on factors affect the direction, intensity, and persistence of action?
Process-oriented research focuses on the “how” of motivation.
Figure 1. Number of Journal of Applied Psychology articles containing That is, what are the cognitive and affective mechanisms and
“motivation” and “self-regulation” keywords by time periods. processes by which individuals integrate person and environmental
inputs to form goals, plans, and intentions (goal choice), and
regulate their affect, attention, effort, and behavior for the purpose
Toward a Meta-Framework: Conceptualizing the of goal accomplishment (goal striving). Several process-oriented
Phenomena and Rendering the Construct Space theories currently popular in work motivation provide an integra-
Motivation is frequently used as an umbrella term meant to tive conceptualization of the processes involved in goal choice and
capture the dense network of concepts and their interrelations that goal striving.
underlie observable changes in the initiation, direction, intensity, Our organization of the field and major contributions follows
and persistence of voluntary action. As in other complex areas of from our systems approach, rather than adopting a strict historical
human functioning, researchers have pursued different aspects of perspective. As shown in Figure 2, within each section, theories,
the phenomena in ways that have sometimes led to confusion in constructs, and research findings are clustered in terms of concep-
understanding, studying, and managing work motivation. We pro- tual communalities and differentiated in terms of when we noted
pose a heuristic meta-framework (see Figure 2) that expands the each approach to appear most prominently in the work motivation
often used process-content organization of relevant theories and literature (often years after a theory’s introduction in the broader
motivation-related concepts into a tripartite organization: content, psychology literature). In the content segment, we highlight theo-
context, and process (Kanfer, Chen, & Pritchard, 2008). We base ries and empirical findings on motives presumed fundamental for

CONTENT-BASED APPROACHES CONTEXT-BASED APPROACHES

Need Fulfilment
socio-cultural forces
Intrinsic Motivation /CET
self-determination theory
NORMATIVE Organizational Culture/Climate
Justice/affiliation/belonging Team Characteristics
Achievement Movaon Job Characteristics/
Explicit Personality Traits relational work design
TRAIT-BASED Goal Orientation
Regulatory Focus Behavior Analysis/Modificaon
Implicit Motives

PROCESS-BASED APPROACHES
GOAL CHOICE Goal Setting/Social Cognitive
Legend: GOAL STRIVING
1960s- 1980s Expectancy-Value (VIE) Cybernetic Control Theory
Theory of Reasoned Action/ Self-Regulation
1970s - 2000s Action Regulation Self-Efficacy
1980/90s-Present Theory of Planned Behavior
2000s–present Resource Allocation
resource depletion

Stream of Behavior

Figure 2. A heuristic meta-framework of work motivation construct networks and representative theories. See
the online article for the color version of this figure.
 340 KANFER, FRESE, AND JOHNSON

all humans, followed by influential work on individual differences onomy (Ronen, 1994), there was little support for the prepotent
in personality traits and motivation orientations. In the context nature of needs and the utility of need theories more generally
section, we use a multilevel organization to distinguish advances (e.g., they do not predict specific behaviors; Campbell & Pritchard,
based on the level (e.g., job, team) at which contextual variables 1976).
are typically studied. In the process section, theories and concepts Some of these issues are redressed by contemporary need the-
are organized by their focus on goal choice, goal striving, and the ories. For example, Self-Determination Theory (Deci & Ryan,
dynamics of goal choice and striving over time. Figure 2 also 1985) specifies how satisfying basic needs for autonomy (i.e.,
illustrates how these areas are related to one another and to action. personal causation), competence (i.e., mastery experience), and
Although a number of studies provide evidence for the direct relatedness (i.e., genuine interpersonal connections) impact perfor-
effects of content and context variables on work outcomes (as mance through intrinsic motivation.
represented by the small arrows), the preponderance of evidence Intrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation exists when people
relating person and contextual variables to outcomes indicates that complete tasks because they are interesting and enjoyable (vs.
they exert their influence indirectly via their effects on motiva- solely as a means for gaining extrinsic incentives). Tasks that are
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

tional processes involved in goal choice and goal striving. interesting and enjoyable are believed to satisfy one or more of the
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

universal needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Al-

though the concept of intrinsic motivation has been integral to
Progress in Work Motivation Research Over the Last
theories of learning in educational psychology, an intriguing work-
Century: Content-Oriented Theories
related proposition is that extrinsic incentives corrupt intrinsic
Content-oriented theories specify the psychological traits, mo- motivation (Deci, 1975). Although some studies have indeed
tives, tendencies and orientations that instigate motivational and found that offering incentives can reduce intrinsic motivation
volitional processes. These determinants reside within people (be- (Pritchard, Campbell, & Campbell, 1977), especially when incen-
ing either hardwired or learned) and give rise to enduring prefer- tives are contingent (Pinder, 1976) and tasks are highly interesting
ences for particular goals, strategies, and behaviors. Some person- (Daniel & Esser, 1980), other studies have failed to observe these
based determinants are believed to represent universal sources of undermining effects (Cameron & Pierce, 1994; Phillips & Lord,
motivation for most people, whereas others exhibit more interin- 1980). Further, although Deci, Koestner, and Ryan’s (1999) meta-
dividual variance in their level and importance. analysis found support for the undermining effects of incentives,
Eisenberger, Pierce, and Cameron’s (1999) meta-analysis found no
clear-cut support for such effects in applied settings.
Universal Motives
According to self-determination theory, a key driver of intrinsic
Psychological discourse concerning universal motives can be motivation is whether or not task choice and behavior are per-
traced back to works in the early 20th century that emphasized ceived to be self-determined. Early findings testing cognitive eval-
biological bases of motivation like instincts and drives (e.g., Freud, uation theory (a central element of self-determination theory; Deci,
1913; James, 1890). However, this older biological perspective fell 1975) found few detrimental effects for extrinsic rewards that were
out of favor because it was scientifically vague and had question- perceived to be informational (rather than controlling). Although
able utility. In its place, more comprehensive theories were intro- self-determination theory is more aptly described as a grand per-
duced that included psychological and social needs, which precip- spective rather than a testable theory per se, parts of the theory
itated an outpouring of motivation theories, as documented in the have been successfully used to explain work motivation and be-
first work motivation text by Viteles (1953). havior (Gagné & Deci, 2005). For example, Grant (2008a) found
Need fulfillment. Needs are internal forces that are essential that firefighters and fundraisers worked longer and performed
for supporting life and growth. Unmet needs create states of better when intrinsic motivation was high versus low (especially
physical and psychological tension that energize action (Murray, when paired with high prosocial motivation). In general, intrinsic
1938). Needs operate cyclically (i.e., they are not permanently motivation appears beneficial for performance on complex tasks,
satisfied), the strength of unmet needs corresponds to the tension whereas extrinsic motivation aids performance on mundane tasks
they elicit, and satisfying unmet needs is posited to be rewarding. (McGraw & McCullers, 1979). Work environments that support
Although the needs described herein are common to everyone, (vs. frustrate) self-determination enhance other outcomes besides
there is between-person variance in motivation contingent on performance, such as creativity (Liu, Chen, & Yao, 2011), satis-
whether the needs are nourished or frustrated by the environment. faction (Deci, Connell, & Ryan, 1989), commitment (Greguras &
Maslow’s (1943) hierarchical theory of needs posited behavior Diefendorff, 2009), and retention (Liu, Zhang, Wang, & Lee,
to be governed by five needs: physiological (e.g., nutrition), safety 2011). Meta-analytic results obtained by Cerasoli, Nicklin, and
(e.g., stable employment), love (e.g., friendship), esteem (e.g., Ford (2014) further indicate that intrinsic motivation has a stronger
achievement), and self-actualization (e.g., self-fulfillment). Al- impact on performance vis-à-vis extrinsic motivation when per-
though all five needs fuel motivation, they are arranged hierarchi- formance is defined in terms of quality (vs. quantity) and when
cally based on their prepotency (i.e., urgency for survival). Once extrinsic rewards are only indirectly tied to performance.
physiological and safety needs are satisfied and hence become less Justice motives. Employees also have a universal desire for
salient, less prepotent needs (e.g., love and esteem) become influ- fairness. Early work on equity theory (Adams, 1965) emphasized
ential. Despite the popularity of need theories during the 1960s and fair outcomes, finding that employees compare their inputs (e.g.,
1970s (e.g., Alderfer, 1969), empirical support was mixed at best effort) and outcomes (e.g., pay) with those of others, and any
(Wahba & Bridwell, 1976). Although there was some support for perceived imbalances create a psychological tension that they are
the structure and cross-cultural generalizability of Maslow’s tax- motivated to reduce. As research in this area progressed, it was
 MOTIVATION RELATED TO WORK: A CENTURY OF PROGRESS 341

realized that the procedures used to determine outcomes, the research in general (Mischel, 1968) and in I/O psychology specif-
respect conferred during interactions, and the candidness of expla- ically (Mitchell, 1979).
nations are crucial as well (Bies, 2001; Thibaut & Walker, 1975). Personality traits. The introduction of the five factor model
Indeed, employee perceptions of fairness predict a wide variety of revitalized research interest in delineating the effects of personality
attitudinal, behavioral, and health outcomes (Colquitt, Conlon, on motivation and performance. This interest was bolstered by
Wesson, Porter, & Ng, 2001; Robbins, Ford, & Tetrick, 2012). Barrick and Mount’s (1991) meta-analytic findings that showed
In addition to establishing different types of justice, researchers conscientiousness and neuroticism to be reliable predictors of
have explored why employees care about justice. In general, performance in most jobs, whereas other traits predicted perfor-
fairness is valued for instrumental reasons (e.g., it reduces uncer- mance on specific dimensions or in certain jobs (e.g., extraversion
tainty and fears of exploitation), relational reasons (e.g., it com- and sales). Observing reliable relationships of distal personality
municates positive social worth), and moral reasons (e.g., it aligns traits with performance led organizational researchers to more
with normative standards of ethical conduct). It is therefore not closely examine the motivational pathways by which such effects
surprising that fairness has indirect effects on behavior via instru- might occur. For example, Barrick, Stewart, and Piotrowski (2002)
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

mental mediators like perceptions of social exchange (e.g., and Judge and Ilies (2002) showed that traits are linked to perfor-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Colquitt et al., 2013), relational mediators like social identity (e.g., mance via the mediating effects of motivation (e.g., setting goals,
Johnson & Lord, 2010), and affect-imbued morality mediators like gauging self-efficacy).
anger (e.g., Weiss, Suckow, & Cropanzano, 1999). Other investigations have examined the influence of personality
Recent studies have explored ebbs and flows in daily justice traits not included in the Big Five, such as action-state orientation
experiences (Loi, Yang, & Diefendorff, 2009), the motives that (Kuhl, 1994; e.g., Diefendorff, Hall, Lord, & Strean, 2000) or have
drive justice behaviors (Scott, Colquitt, & Paddock, 2009), the employed different integrative organizations of trait variables.
characteristics of recipients that elicit fairness (Scott, Colquitt, & Judge, Locke, and Durham (1997) integrated self-esteem, gener-
Zapata-Phelan, 2007), and the depleting and restorative effects of alized self-efficacy, emotional stability, and locus of control to
fair behaviors (Johnson, Lanaj, & Barnes, 2014). Initial evidence form the construct of core self-evaluation, or fundamental apprais-
has also documented physiological and neurological processes that als about one’s worth and identity. Core self-evaluations predict a
underlie justice experiences (Dulebohn et al., 2015; Yang, Bauer, variety of affective, cognitive, and behavioral outcomes, including
Johnson, Groer, & Salomon, 2014). These findings suggest that variables such as effort and persistence (Chang, Ferris, Johnson,
justice motives are important contributors to work motivation. Rosen, & Tan, 2012), that in turn mediate the effects of core
self-evaluations on work outcomes (Ferris et al., 2013). Kanfer and
Heggestad (1997) and Elliot and Thrash (2002) distinguish indi-
Trait-Based Motives vidual differences as markers of broader approach and avoidance
motivations. Approach motivation guides behavior toward positive
As attention shifted from biological to psychological and social objects and outcomes, includes indicators like extraversion, and is
needs, researchers also began systematic study of interindividual associated with the behavioral activation system. Avoidance mo-
differences in motives. Initial work mostly concerned achievement tivation, which guides behavior away from negative objects and
motivation, but trait-based approaches increased exponentially outcomes, includes neuroticism is and associated with the behav-
with the rise of the five factor model of personality in the 1980s. ioral inhibition system. Approach and avoidance motivation
Since then, researchers have focused more attention on motivation frameworks are useful because they have clearer ties to motivation
traits and orientations that fall outside the five major trait catego- than the five factor model, and have direct implications for goals
ries. that people set, the strategies they pursue, and the motivational
Achievement, power, and affiliation motives. These mo- skills they develop.
tives have a long history in the motivation literature. Research on Motivation orientations. A related area of growing interest
achievement motivation (i.e., the desire to accomplish something pertains to the role of inter-individual differences in the purpose of
difficult by attaining high standards of excellence) began with goal pursuits. For example, regulatory focus theory (Higgins,
Murray’s (1938) pioneering work on needs. McClelland (1961)—a 1997) posits that goals may be pursued by maximizing gains to
student of Murray’s—popularized the idea of achievement moti- ensure success (promotion focus), or by minimizing losses to avoid
vation and spearheaded a large research program on this motive. In failure (prevention focus). These foci are rival means for accom-
general, higher levels of achievement motive are associated with plishing the same ends, yet they have important implications for
setting more challenging goals and attaining higher performance performance at work (Lanaj, Chang, & Johnson, 2012). For ex-
(Phillips & Gully, 1997). The other two motives (power and ample, whereas prevention focus is a better predictor of safety
affiliation), which have received less attention, are more social in (Wallace & Chen, 2006), promotion focus is a better predictor of
nature. The former motive refers to preferences for seeking and productivity and also tends to foster greater well-being because
occupying positions of high social power, and the latter motive maximizing gains elicits stronger positive emotions than minimiz-
refers to preferences for establishing and sustaining positive rela- ing losses (e.g., joy vs. relief; Ferris et al., 2013).
tions with others. Studies have found, for example, differences in People also differ in the purpose of goal pursuit. Educational
motive profiles among entrepreneurs and managers (McClelland, psychologists in the 1980s (e.g., Dweck, 1986; Nicholls, 1984)
1965; McClelland & Boyatzis, 1982) and positive relations of identified two reasons for goal pursuit: to develop competence
motives with starting a firm and entrepreneurial success (Rauch & (learning goal orientation) versus demonstrating competence so as
Frese, 2007; Wainer & Rubin, 1969). Research on motives waned, to receive favorable appraisals from others (performance goal
however, during the 1970s owing to criticisms about personality orientation). Learning goal orientation derives from incremental
 342 KANFER, FRESE, AND JOHNSON

beliefs (i.e., abilities are malleable) and self-evaluations based on comes in two ways. Strong contexts and situations, in which
past performance progress, whereas performance goal orientation individuals have little behavioral discretion, weaken the effects of
owes to entity beliefs (i.e., abilities are fixed) and evaluations individual differences by constraining variation in behavior. Con-
relative to others. These beliefs constrain the goals that people set textual variables, such as team efficacy, can also moderate the
and the strategies they use (DeShon & Gillespie, 2005). Perfor- influence of individual differences on motivational outcomes
mance goal orientation is further divided into performance-prove (Chen & Kanfer, 2006).
(i.e., to prove one’s competence for positive appraisals from
others) and performance-avoid (i.e., to avoid appearing incom-
From Extrinsic Rewards to Internal Motivation
petent and evade negative apprasials; VandeWalle, 1997). It is
typically found that learning goal orientation enhances perfor- During the early 20th century, interest in identifying the moti-
mance, whereas performance-prove goal orientation has weak vating features of work was driven largely by the desire to increase
effects and performance-avoid goal orientation has detrimental efficiency and productivity in industrial production. Researchers
effects (Payne, Youngcourt, & Beaubien, 2007). working within the scientific management paradigm (Taylor,
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

1911) emphasized the use of extrinsic rewards (e.g., money) to

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

enhance performance. Although extrinsic rewards can motivate

Summary of Content-Based Motivation
higher performance (Rynes, Gerhart, & Minette, 2004), by the
Although midcentury research findings failed to support basic mid-20th century this narrow, mechanistic approach to motivation
tenets of Maslow’s need fulfillment theory, the intuitive appeal of gave way to theories that emphasized the psychological pathways
the theory and the lack of alternative formulations contributed to by which specific features of the job enhance motivation and
its lingering popularity. Intrinsic motivation and justice theories performance. For example, Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman
have now filled the void. In contrast to Maslow, these theories (1959) proposed a theory that organized job characteristics into
focus exclusively on higher order needs (e.g., autonomy, justice), two major groupings: hygienes (e.g., pay) and motivators (e.g.,
and the effects that thwarting or satisfying these motives have on responsibility). Although empirical evidence does not provide
work motivation. strong support for this classification scheme (House & Wigdor,
Findings based on these theories are generally supportive, 1967), it was a pioneering attempt to identify those characteristics
though the conditions that thwart motive satisfaction and work related to internal work motivation.
motivation do not appear uniform across all individuals. In a
similar vein, the five factor model offers an appealing framework
Task and Job Characteristics
for identifying broad personality traits on which all people may be
characterized. Research findings in this area provide support for In the mid-1970s, Hackman and Oldham (1975, 1976) intro-
the importance of individual differences in conscientiousness to duced the job characteristics model. The impact of this theory was
work motivation and performance. immediate and long-lasting, stimulating hundreds of studies and
Recent theory and research on motivation orientations goes one serving for over 2 decades as the scientific foundation for job
step further to address how the way that an individual construes a redesign interventions to enhance work motivation. Building on
work goal (the reasons for action) affects motivation and perfor- Turner and Lawrence (1965), job characteristics theory specified
mance. In contrast to universal and personality trait approaches, five key features of a job (i.e., skill variety, task identity, task
motivation orientation is viewed as more variable, malleable and significance, autonomy, and feedback) and the psychological path-
proximal to motivational processing. Research findings across ways by which these features operate (i.e., meaningfulness of
different models indicate higher levels of motivation and perfor- work, experienced responsibility, and knowledge of results). De-
mance among individuals who construe the reasons for action as signing jobs that elicit these psychological states is posited to
appetitive (e.g., to learn, to attain) rather than preventive or pro- create a context in which “performance becomes its own reward,
tective. As Tett and Burnett (2003) suggested, it is important to a virtuous self-perpetuating cycle of positive work motivation
understand how outcomes of these orientations that occur over powered by self-generated rewards” (Hackman & Oldham, 1976,
time may shape the expression of motives and personality traits, p. 256). The theory also acknowledged the moderating role of
and so contribute to popular conceptions of occupation-or culture- individual differences (i.e., growth need strength) on context–
specific personalities and behaviors. motivation relations.
Accumulated evidence for the validity of Job Characteristics
Theory is largely supportive (Humphrey, Nahrgang, & Morgeson,
Context-Oriented Theories
2007), though issues related to the measurement of job character-
Context-oriented theories focus on features of the environment istics remains an important qualification of findings. Consistent
that affect motivation and performance via their provision of with theories of self-determination and prosocial motivation, Hum-
affordances and constraints for motive satisfaction. Broad contex- phrey et al. (2007) found task meaningfulness to be the most
tual variables (e.g., one’s occupation) affect the nature of work and important mediator of job characteristics effects on work motiva-
the environment in which work is performed. Work-specific con- tion. However, as Humphrey et al. (2007) and others have noted,
textual variables (e.g., supervisor support, coworker relations) the theory focuses on a limited number of contextual variables, and
reflect the proximal contextual determinants of work motivation does not directly address the role of social and work-level vari-
and behavior. Context theories often highlight the strength of ables, such as relational features of work roles (e.g., working in
various features of the work environment (Meyer, Dalal, & Her- teams and with customers). Research into the effects of these
mida, 2010). Contextual variables can influence motivational out- variables led Humphrey et al. (2007) to extend the theory and
 MOTIVATION RELATED TO WORK: A CENTURY OF PROGRESS 343

examine accumulated evidence on the relationship between other dynamics and emergent collective states, such as cohesion, trust,
motivational, social, and work condition variables on job attitudes team identification, and entrainment affect the goals and resource
and behavior. Their findings provide initial support for the role of allocation policies of individuals working in teams. Yet even these
additional contextual variables on job attitudes, and suggest the factors represent only part of the context in which individuals
need for integrative research approaches that take into account work. Research is sorely needed to understand the impact of
theories of job stress and group/team influences on motivation and sociocultural differences on employee strategies for goal accom-
behavior. plishment and the influence of occupational characteristics on
psychological states that may facilitate or diminish work motiva-
tion over time.
Group-and Team-Level Influences
A historically separate line of inquiry into the role of contextual
Process-Oriented Theories
variables on work motivation focuses on the broader sociostruc-
tural context in which work is performed. Findings from the Over the last half century process-oriented theories have
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Hawthorne studies conducted during the early 1930s provide a evolved to view motivation as comprised of two interdependent
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

vivid illustration for the role that social organization and group subsystems: a system governing goal selection and a system gov-
norms play in employee behavior. During the mid-20th century, erning goal enactment (e.g., Heckhausen & Kuhl, 1985; Lewin,
social psychologists began to systematically study group charac- Dembo, Festinger, & Sears, 1944). The Rubicon model (Heck-
teristics and processes that lead to reduced team member motiva- hausen, 1991) provides a vivid metaphorical description of the
tion (e.g., social loafing). As the use of teams increased toward the relationship and distinction between these subsystems. Before
end of the 20th century, organizational research on the effects of crossing the Rubicon river, which signified the border of Rome
social context on motivation and performance moved into high and point at which no further weapons were allowed, Caesar was
gear. Although many studies have focused on the effects of team- reported to have rationally considered a number of military options
level variables on team-level performance, evidence has also be- and plans for achieving victory in his war against the Roman
gun to accumulate on the cross-level and moderating effects of a Senate. His decision to proceed with his army into the river
range of organization-level (e.g., climate) and team-level variables cemented his commitment to move forward—the proverbial point
(e.g., cohesion, shared team identity) on team member motiva- of no return from deliberation (goal choice) to implementation
tional states (e.g., affective commitment, personal initiative) and (goal striving).
outcomes (e.g., performance, citizenship behavior, training trans- Early process-oriented theories focused on goal choice. Fueled
fer; Chen, Kirkman, Kanfer, Allen, & Rosen, 2007; Dietz, van by the midcentury rise of cognitive, information-processing psy-
Knippenberg, Hirst, & Restubog, 2015; see also Mathieu, Hollen- chology, work motivation theories described how beliefs and cog-
beck, van Knippenberg, & Ilgen, 2017). Nonetheless, more re- nitions (e.g., expectancies and instrumentalities) combine to yield
search is needed to investigate how team-level processes (e.g., behavioral intentions or motivational force. By the 1970s, how-
planning and coordination) influence an individual’s task goals, ever, researchers grew increasingly critical of choice theories that
how resources are allocated across team and individual goals, and were restricted to rational decision making processes before en-
the unique demands of team membership on different forms of tering the Rubicon. New theories of self-regulation (Bandura,
self-regulation. 1986; Kanfer, 1977), action control (Kuhl, 1984), and goal imple-
mentation (Gollwitzer, 1990) highlighted the importance of plan-
ning and the cognitive-affective processes involved in goal striv-
Summary of Context-Based Motivation
ing. As described subsequently, the last few decades witnessed the
Hackman and Oldham’s (1976) Job Characteristics theory development of new paradigms for the simultaneous study of goal
spawned a sizable research literature demonstrating how key fea- choice and goal striving.
tures of the job can affect internal work motivation through their Goal Choice. Goals are internal representations of desired
effects on experienced meaningfulness and felt responsibility for states that direct attention, organize action, and sustain effort
performance outcomes. Research in leadership also provides fur- aimed at achieving those states. Goals vary across a range of
ther evidence for the impact of supervisory relationships on mo- attributes (e.g., specific vs. vague, performance vs. learning) and
tivation and performance (see Lord, Day, Zaccaro, Avolio, & are arranged hierarchically, such that distal “ends” or “be” goals at
Eagly, 2017). Research in these areas complement content-based the top of the hierarchy (e.g., earn a PhD) are linked to proximal
approaches by showing work motivation is not just a matter of “means” or “do” goals at lower levels (e.g., pass comprehensive
autonomy, competence, and fairness, but also about performing exams). Establishing higher level goals constrains the goals that
meaningful work, having responsibility, and experiencing support- emerge at lower levels, and lack of progress on lower-level goals
ive supervision Recent changes in the organization of work (e.g., causes people to revise or even abandon higher level goals (John-
from individual work to working in teams and multiteam systems) son, Chang, & Lord, 2006). During the mid-20th century, moti-
and growing globalization underscore the importance of these vation studies in JAP frequently examined how person and envi-
findings for understanding an individual’s motivation in team and ronmental features influence the formation of proximal work goals
multiteam systems characterized by complex goal hierarchies and and intentions.
interdependencies. To date, research on individual motivation in Expectancy theory. Cognitive theories of goal choice posit a
teams has been relatively sparse and concentrated largely on the psychological calculus by which people rationally weigh the sub-
performance effects of team-level phenomena (e.g., social loaf- jective benefits and costs of different options prior to selecting a
ing). Additional research is needed to understand how social goal or desired outcome that can be expected to maximize pleasure
 344 KANFER, FRESE, AND JOHNSON

and minimize pain. A popular formulation is Vroom’s (1964) and Zapf’s (1994) action regulation theory, Heckhausen’s (1991)
Valence-Instrumentality-Expectancy (VIE) theory, which pro- Rubicon model, and Kanfer’s (1977) self-regulation model.
poses that goal choice is determined by subjective evaluations of Self-regulation. Theorizing by Bandura (1977), Carver and
(a) the level of satisfaction expected from achieving work out- Scheier (1981), and Kanfer (1977) describe the psychological
comes (valence), (b) the likelihood of achieving those outcomes by processes by which individuals strive for goal attainment. In these
attaining a particular level of performance (instrumentality), and models, self-regulation involves three interrelated sets of activities:
(c) the likelihood that one (with effort) will reach a certain level of self-monitoring, self-evaluation, and self-reactions. Self-monitoring re-
performance (expectancy). These evaluations interact to determine fers to the attention individuals give to events, behaviors, and
the motivational force of specific goals or courses of action. feedback related to the goal. Failures in self-monitoring preclude
Although empirical studies published in JAP and elsewhere during the opportunity to evaluate goal progress. Self-evaluation refers to
the 1950s through the early 1970s were generally supportive of the comparative evaluation of the goal state to the current state, or
expectancy models (e.g., Georgopoulos, Mahoney, & Jones, 1957; goal progress. Self-reactions are the natural consequence of self-
Mitchell & Nebeker, 1973), a number of conceptual and method- evaluations and encompass the affective and motivational re-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

ological problems were noted (e.g., decision making is not neces- sponses toward discrepancies between desired and goal states.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

sarily rational, within-person processes were tested using between- These self-reactions serve both an informational and motivational
person methods, lack of support for the multiplicative nature of the function in the self-regulation cycle.
theory’s components; Heneman & Schwab, 1972; Van Eerde & Bandura’s (1977) theory of self-efficacy further builds on and
Thierry, 1996). These criticisms paved the way for revised models expands the self-regulation framework by delineating the role of
and new formulations that emphasize the link between goal choice self-efficacy in goal choice and goal striving. For example, self-
and goal striving. efficacy moderates the impact of behavioral intentions on action.
Theory of planned behavior. Ajzen’s (1991) theory of
planned behavior extended expectancy theory by taking into ac-
Integrative Approaches
count the interpersonal context in which goals and intentions are
formed. Like expectancy models, this theory posits that the moti- Self-regulatory formulations of goal striving altered the direc-
vation to pursue a course of action is influenced by control beliefs tion of work motivation research, as reflected in the publication of
(i.e., expectancy of being able to perform a behavior) and by several hundred JAP articles over the last 35 years on different
attitudes (i.e., valence; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). The theory also aspects of goal choice and goal striving. During this period,
includes subjective norms, which refers to perceived social pres- integrative formulations by Locke and Latham (1990), Kanfer and
sure to pursue a course of action. According to the theory of Ackerman (1989), Gollwitzer (1990), Vancouver (2008), and oth-
planned behavior, behavioral intentions are jointly determined by ers began to focus specifically on the intersection of goal choice
perceived control, attitudes, and subjective norms. and goal striving.
The theory has been successfully applied to predict motivation Goal setting theory. From the early 1970s through the end of
to engage in a variety of work-related behaviors, such as job search the century, Locke and Latham’s (1990) goal setting theory was
(Wanberg, Glomb, Song, & Sorenson, 2005), volunteerism (Har- the leading theory of work motivation in I/O psychology. Goal
rison, 1995), and managers’ use of structured interviews (van der setting theory emphasizes the link between goal attributes and
Zee, Bakker, & Bakker, 2002). A meta-analysis by Armitage and action. Results from numerous lab studies and field experiments
Conner (2001) was largely supportive of several tenets of the indicate that performance is highest when goals are specific (vs.
theory, yet also brought to light some key issues as well (e.g., “do your best”), difficult (vs. easy; Mento, Steel, & Karren, 1987),
problems with the conceptualization and operationalization of be- assigned using a “sell” (vs. “tell”) approach (Latham, Erez, &
havioral control, questionable incremental validity of subjective Locke, 1988), and when they are coupled with performance feed-
norm). back (Erez, 1977) and high goal commitment (Klein, Wesson,
Hollenbeck, & Alge, 1999). Goals are posited to aid performance
because they direct attention to goal-relevant activities, mobilize
Goal Striving
and sustain effort, and promote the use of task-relevant knowledge
Theories of goal choice set the stage for action, but they do not (Locke, Shaw, Saari, & Latham, 1981).
explain how individuals realize their goal (Kanfer, 1990). When At work, goals are typically set by organizational representa-
goals are simple or well-learned (e.g., typing a letter), they can be tives such as a supervisor; however, under most circumstances,
accomplished quickly and without substantial effort. However, employees also hold self-developed goals. As a result, the goals
accomplishment of complex, protracted goals (e.g., obtaining a that direct actions are often an admixture of objectives held by the
PhD, landing a new job) typically require people to modulate the organization and by the employee. Goals that are set by the
direction and intensity of attentional effort, affect, and behavior supervisor and “assigned” to employees are considered external
over time and across component subgoals. These self-regulatory goals, and the extent to which employees adopt the goal as their
processes aid in maintaining goal intentions, evaluating goal prog- own reflects an internalization process (Frese & Zapf, 1994;
ress, and making decisions about whether to persist, revise, or Zacher & Frese, 2015). The redefinition of an assigned goal as
abandon the goal. Goal striving pertains to the activities that bridge one’s own goal depends in part on task characteristics (such as
the chasm between goals and performance. During the late 20th clarity) and the extent to which there are conflicts between the
century, several major theoretical formulations of goal striving individual’s goals and the assigned goal.
were proposed, including Bandura’s (1986) social– cognitive the- Task complexity is an important boundary condition on the
ory, Carver and Scheier’s (1981) cybernetic control theory, Frese positive effects of difficult, specific goals, such that effects on
 MOTIVATION RELATED TO WORK: A CENTURY OF PROGRESS 345

performance are weaker when complexity is high versus low associated higher levels of goal-directed effort. In contrast, cyber-
(Wood, Mento, & Locke, 1987). When tasks are complex and/or netic control theory findings highlight the importance of a discrep-
individuals have not developed the requisite skills to perform ancy between a desired set-point and a current state (e.g., if I
them, setting a difficult performance goal siphons critically needed expect to do well on the next exam, I do not need to exert as much
attentional effort away from learning how to master the task. For effort in preparation as if I expect to do badly in the upcoming
example, Kanfer and Ackerman (1989) found that performance exam).
suffered when lower-ability individuals were assigned perfor- Findings by Vancouver and colleagues (e.g., Vancouver &
mance goals in the early stages of learning a complex air traffic Kendall, 2006; Vancouver et al., 2001) using within-subject de-
simulation task, yet such goals had beneficial effects on perfor- signs show that high levels of self-efficacy are associated with
mance once they became sufficiently skilled. When tasks are subsequently lower levels of effort in a learning context. Vancou-
complex and/or individuals lack the required skills, it is better to ver, Weinhardt, and Schmidt (2010) have further argued that
assign a learning goal or a nonspecific “do your best” goal (Win- computational modeling is a good way to develop parsimonious
ters & Latham, 1996). explicit theories without any surplus meaning. From a nonmecha-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

The earliest investigation of self-regulatory processes in the nistic viewpoint, however, this relates to the general Turing prob-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

work domain occurred with the integration of goal setting theory lem of when a simulation is just a simulation or rather is built on
and social– cognitive theory (Locke, Frederick, Lee, & Bobko, true functional relationships (Miller, Galanter, & Pribram, 1960).
1984). Since then, researchers have used the integrated goal In short, we believe that agency and routine coexist (e.g.,
setting/self-regulation framework to examine a variety of motiva- Vancouver, More, & Yoder, 2008) and that the designs used in
tional phenomena, including the influence of self-efficacy on goal these theories provide different insights into motivational pro-
choice, the dynamics of self-regulation (e.g., Keith & Frese, 2005; cesses. For example, Schmidt and DeShon (2010) helped to rec-
Kozlowski & Bell, 2006), the impact of goal orientation on self- oncile these perspectives by showing that self-efficacy was nega-
regulatory activities (e.g., DeShon & Gillespie, 2005; VandeWalle, tively related to performance when task ambiguity was high (as
Brown, Cron, & Slocum, 1999), the process by which individuals suggested by control theory) but positively related to performance
suppress distracting and goal-irrelevant information during goal when task ambiguity was low (consistent with social– cognitive
striving (e.g., Johnson et al., 2006), and the self-regulatory strat- theory). Such work advances our understanding of when and how
egies by which individuals accomplish multiple goals (e.g., each perspective may be most useful in the context of motivation
Schmidt & DeShon, 2007; Sun & Frese, 2013). related to work.
Nonmechanistic versus mechanistic theories of motivation. Action regulation theory. Action regulation theory provides
Work on the self-efficacy–performance relationship during the last an integration of goal choice and goal striving that highlights the
15 years has rekindled a lively, long-standing debate on how to importance of plans as a means by which individuals bridge the
conceptualize motivation. For example, Hull (1943) argued that gap between having a goal and instigating activities to accomplish
nonmechanistic concepts are based on an infinite regress of ho- the goal. Plans are mental simulations of actions that determine
munculi (homunculus in the psyche of a person presented new how goals can be achieved and represent an important mediator in
goals, new ideas, or new approaches, but then each homunculus the goal setting–performance relation (Earley, Wojnaroski, &
has a psyche of its own and needs another one inside, leading to an Prest, 1987). Plans are necessary for all actions, although the time
infinite regress; cf. Verbruggen, McLaren, & Chambers, 2014). In between planning and action may vary from a few milliseconds to
contrast, nonmechanistic theorists (e.g., Tolman, 1949) argued years, and the time frame covered by plans may similarly vary
against the primacy of stimulus–response concepts embodied by from a few minutes (planning to order a meal in a restaurant) to
the use of technical analogues such as a switchboard or a thermo- many years (a career plan). Planning aids performance when it
stat, but rather for understanding action based on cognitive maps prompts deeper thinking about intended actions, leads people to
and the development of goal-oriented behaviors. develop alternative plans (“Plans B and C”), and in unstable
At the heart of this issue is the need to provide a perspective on situations (e.g., in unpredictable economic situations; Frese,
motivation and action that systematically accounts for both routine Krauss, et al., 2007).
and agency. Modern nonmechanistic theorists criticize mechanistic Resource allocation theories. Resource allocation theories
approaches as being unable to account for why individuals develop (Kanfer & Ackerman, 1989; Naylor, Pritchard, & Ilgen, 1980)
higher goals after they have mastered an action or skill. For view motivation as a process by which personal resources are
example, Bandura’s (1977) nonmechanistic, agentic theory of self- allocated across an array of possible actions (e.g., goals) in re-
efficacy emphasizes the positive causal influence of self-efficacy sponse to task demands, affect, incentives, and feedback. Building
on task performance across a variety of tasks and settings. There is on theories of human information processing and self-regulation,
strong empirical support for Bandura’s position that individuals Kanfer and Ackerman (1989) proposed a resource allocation
often increase their aspiration level once they have achieved a model that integrated cognitive abilities and motivational pro-
certain level of performance (Phillips, Hollenbeck, & Ilgen, 1996). cesses involved in goal choice and attentional resource allocation
Further, although there is broad evidence from studies using during complex skill acquisition. Findings from a series of studies
between-subjects designs to support the notion that very low levels showed the beneficial effects of such activities only when there
of self-efficacy adversely affect the voluntary initiation of action, were sufficient attentional resources available for self-regulation.
there is considerable controversy about the effects of high levels of Although DeShon, Brown, and Greenis (1996) found that self-
self-efficacy on subsequent effort. Goal setting and social– regulation did not necessarily require attentional resources when
cognitive formulations posit that high levels of self-efficacy exert performing a dual-task, concerns about the resource demands of
feed-forward effects that bolster the adoption of higher goals and self-regulation have continued to occupy attention.
 346 KANFER, FRESE, AND JOHNSON

To date, most integrative research has focused on the attainment effects of explicit difficult and specific goals on effort and perfor-
of a single goal, yet in the real-world individuals frequently dis- mance. Several studies also suggest that the effectiveness of such
tribute their effort across multiple goals (e.g., make $250,000 in goals also depends on alignment with nonconscious goals, task
sales and improve customer satisfaction). Such situations require demands/task complexity, and goal construal (e.g., learning vs.
people to shift their attention across different tasks over time. Early performance). Recent work has focused on the nexus of goal
research by Atkinson and Birch (1970) examined the conditions choice and goal striving and the dynamics of goal striving across
that prompted individuals to switch attention across two tasks, but single and multiple goals over time. The Rubicon metaphor high-
did not address the conditions that affect task-switching across lights the function of goal planning as providing a bridge between
multiple tasks across a defined period of time. Recent work by goal choice and striving, and suggests a new arena for motivational
Schmidt and colleagues (e.g.,Schmidt & DeShon, 2007) investi- research in planning and action control (Frese, Mumford, & Gib-
gating the impact of incentives and goal progress on resource son, 2015).
allocation across tasks and theorizing by Vancouver et al. (2010) The cumulative nature of theory and research in the process
and Steel and König (2006) are likely to further advance the field. tradition has led to a more nuanced view of work motivation as a
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Resource depletion. The question of whether self-regulatory goal-directed, resource allocation process that changes over time
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

activities deplete cognitive resources over repeated use lies at the as a consequence of the reciprocal interactions that occur between
heart of ego depletion theory (Baumeister, Bratslavsky, Muraven, the person and the context in which action takes place (Kanfer,
& Tice, 1998). This theory proposes that individuals have a finite 2012; Sonnentag & Frese, 2012). In contrast to early expectancy
amount of resources at their disposal for regulating behavior, theories that viewed effort as a “cold” or calculative process,
which are drained by sustained acts of self-control (e.g., complet- current formulations take into account the “hot” or affective pro-
ing complex tasks, suppressing off-task distractions). In the work- cesses that also influence how attention and effort are allocated
place, for example, it has been found that vigilantly monitoring for (Mitchell & Daniels, 2003). The evolving conception of motiva-
potential problems (Lin & Johnson, 2015), suppressing and faking tion as a resource allocation process highlights the importance of
emotional displays (Trougakos, Beal, Cheng, Hideg, & Zweig, a dynamic interactionist perspective for understanding the sources
2015), and acting consistent with procedural fairness rules (John- of variability in goal accomplishment. Whereas the valence of a
son et al., 2014) are resource depleting activities. Once depleted, goal had long been considered a function of static traits, goal
task, citizenship, and voice behaviors suffer (e.g., Lin & Johnson, orientation and regulatory focus studies have shown that relatively
2015; Trougakos et al., 2015) while deviant and unethical behav- simple manipulations can change how employees construe goals,
iors increase (e.g., Christian & Ellis, 2011; Lin, Ma, & Johnson, with significant downstream effects on planning and self-
2016). regulation. From a practical perspective, progress in this area has
To avoid the negative consequences of prolonged self-regulation, led to the development of management practices and feedback
researchers have explored ways that employees can counteract deple- interventions that support sustainable employee regulation of at-
tion and replenish resources. For example, positive social events tention and effort across work tasks over time.
(Bono, Glomb, Shen, Kim, & Koch, 2013), high autonomy (Son-
nentag & Zijlstra, 2006), and respites during the workday (Trougakos,
Research Trends and Future Research Directions
Beal, Green, & Weiss, 2008) aid in resource recovery.
Personal activities outside of the office can also replenish re- As our review attests, progress in work motivation has occurred
sources, such as nonjob mastery experiences (e.g., participating in in fits and starts, with different areas in the field waxing and
sports and hobbies; Sonnentag, Binnewies, & Mojza, 2008), pow- waning at different times. Nonetheless, we believe there has been
ering off work-related smartphones and computers (Lanaj et al., progress. There is also a growing demand for understanding mo-
2012), high quality sleep (Welsh, Ellis, Christian, & Mai, 2014), tivation in the context of new challenges related to modern work.
and vacations (Fritz & Sonnentag, 2006). Although ego depletion In this section, we discuss research trends in how we study work
theory has proven useful for predicting breakdowns in self- motivation, and provide a sampling of future research directions.
regulation at work, some basic tenets of the theory have been
recently criticized (e.g., Inzlicht & Schmeichel, 2012) and lab-
Better Matching of Theory to Methodology
based experiments of ego depletion in particular have been chal-
lenged (e.g., Carter, Kofler, Forster, & McCullough, 2015). Addi- The last century has witnessed increased concern about the corre-
tional research on self-control processes and associated changes in spondence between theory and research methodologies (Van Eerde &
regulatory resource availability is needed to explore alternative Thierry, 1996). During the 1970s, reviewers of expectancy-value
explanations for observed effects. research pointed out the inappropriateness of testing a within-person
theory with between-person designs (Mitchell, 1974). Although this
criticism was directed at expectancy-value research, the point is valid
Summary of Process-Based Motivation
for most theories that posit a change in motivation as a function of
During the last 50 years, JAP has published a large number of person—situation interactions that unfold over time. Certainly,
process-oriented work motivation articles. Findings show that between-person studies remain useful for determining the impact of a
adoption of organizationally desired work goals is most likely to specific factor at a specific time and place. However, the adoption of
occur when employees perceive ownership of assigned goals, they a dynamic, interactionist perspective has led more researchers to
believe that goal accomplishment is possible, and when goal examine motivation and performance trajectories using multilevel
achievement affords the receipt of intrinsic and/or extrinsic out- longitudinal studies that permit examination of changes and trajecto-
comes valued by employees. Many studies document the positive ries in motivational variables due to intraindividual processes, inter-
 MOTIVATION RELATED TO WORK: A CENTURY OF PROGRESS 347

individual differences, and context. The disconnect between theory Findings from within-person studies show substantial variability in
and methods has also lessened thanks to the development of mea- motivational variables over time.
surement techniques that are better positioned to capture motivational Over the last 20 years, interest in time-linked effects on work
phenomena that operate outside people’s awareness and control. motivation has developed in a variety of directions. Two areas of
Affect and motivation. There is broad agreement that moti- theoretical importance pertain to the effects that changing task
vation involves both cognition and affect. Yet most theories of demands have on resource availability over the course of practice
work motivation continue to accord cognition primacy and rele- (Kanfer & Ackerman, 1989) and understanding how individuals
gate affect to a supporting role. Over the last few decades, how- shift their allocation of resources across goals over time (Schmidt,
ever, progress in the study of emotions and affect has given rise to Dolis, & Tolli, 2009). In the context of a purposive goal, we know
theories of action that highlight the role of different affective that individuals invest different levels of effort toward goal ac-
processes during self-regulation (e.g., Carver & Scheier, 1990; complishment over time as a function of goal progress and dead-
Kuhl, 2000; Seo, Barrett, & Bartunek, 2004; Weiss & Cropanzano, line proximity (Wanberg, Zhu, & van Hooft, 2010). A different,
1996) and to studies that examine the relationship between affect but related theme pertains to what Roe (2014) referred to as the
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

and work-related behaviors, such as job effort (Foo, Uy, & Baron, “temporal footprint of work (p. 63).” Roe suggested that motiva-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

2009), engagement (Bledow, Schmitt, Frese, & Kuhnel, 2011), and tion is likely to be cyclical and to vary in part as a function of the
organizational citizenship behavior (Yang, Simon, Wang, & tasks and cycle time associated with different occupations. A third
Zheng, 2016). Additional research on the role of affective pro- direction in understanding the temporal dimension in motivation is
cesses in goal revision and goal pursuit offer exciting new possi- to consider the meaning of time and the way that subjective time
bilities for extending current integrative work motivation theories perspectives (past, present, and future) connect individuals to their
and developing new practices to manage motivation following work. Recent studies on occupational future time perspective (e.g.,
affective events, such as downsizing. Zacher & Frese, 2009) and concepts of future work self (Strauss,
Interplay of implicit and explicit motivation systems. Moti- Griffin, & Parker, 2012) suggest that goal choice and striving
vation researchers have long wrestled with the idea that some motives, depends not only on current conditions and motives, but on antic-
traits, and orientations may exist and operate outside awareness. ipatory forethought about one’s future work situation and career.
Investigations into the way that individuals construe goals and
McClelland (1985), an early advocate of the implicit motive system,
events through the lens of time, the role that work experiences and
found that implicit motives explained unique variance in job perfor-
organizational culture plays in these processes, and the pathways
mance incremental to explicit motives. Nevertheless, I/O psycholo-
by which they affect motivation and work behaviors represent
gists have mostly focused on explicit motives. Recent advances in
interesting new directions for research.
measurement make the exploration of implicit content and processes
Motivational resources. The conceptualization of motivation
far more tractable than in the past (Uhlmann et al., 2012). For
as a resource allocation process has gained traction over the last
example, conditional reasoning tests capture implicit motives via
few decades as a useful means by which to map motivational
responses to inductive reasoning problems (James, 1998) and have
dynamics, yet several questions remain. One fundamental issue
been successfully used to measure implicit aggression and achievement
pertains to what resources are. Kanfer and Ackerman (1989)
motives (e.g., Frost, Ko, & James, 2007). Popular, noninterpretation-
defined resources as attentional effort in terms of cognitive re-
based techniques, such as word fragment completion tasks, capture the sources of limited availability. However, recent work on self-
accessibility of implicit content in memory (e.g., Johnson, Tolentino, control often uses a subjective assessment of the employees’
Rodopman, & Cho, 2010). phenomenological experience of depletion rather than tracking
Accumulated evidence over the last 2 decades using new mea- actual changes in resources, and findings are mixed regarding the
surement techniques supports the existence of a nonconscious physiological basis of resources (Molden et al., 2012). Yet other
motivation system related to preconscious attentional processes in resource models define resources more broadly in terms of the
sensory systems, learning, and performance. The initial wave of individual’s access to and possession of social-psychological and
research in this area focused on evaluating the variance explained material assets that may be influenced by factors beyond the
in work attitudes and behaviors by implicit versus explicit goals individual’s control. A second issue is to delineate when depletion-
and motives (e.g., Johnson & Saboe, 2011; Stajkovic, Locke, & based effects are likely to occur, because not all self-regulation
Blair, 2006). We expect the next wave will examine the ways in activities appear to require resources. For example, Johnson et al.
which implicit and explicit phenomena interface, converge, and (2015) found that abiding by procedural justice rules was deplet-
change over time to affect work outcomes. For example, Bing, ing, whereas interpersonal justice rules were not, suggesting that
LeBreton, Davison, Migetz, and James (2007) found that employ- effortful self-regulatory resource demands may be substantially
ees with strong implicit and explicit achievement motives take on less for performance of culturally entrained behaviors. Resource-
demanding tasks, whereas those with strong explicit but weak based theories of work motivation would benefit from further work
implicit achievement motives seek out tasks that they can deflect concerning the nature of self-regulatory resources and the bound-
responsibility for failure. Future research is needed to further tease aries of depletion. A final issue is to rule out alternative explana-
apart the intersection of implicit and explicit goals and motives, tions for reduced performance following activities requiring high
especially possible mediated relations, and to delineate how im- levels of attention and self-control. For example, reductions in
plicit content and processes change over time. performance may owe to conscious shifts from self-constraint to
Temporal dynamics. Our review indicates a growing concern cues for rewards when people expect to be recognized for their
for understanding motivation over time and for the role that earlier efforts (Inzlicht & Schmeichel, 2012), to implicit beliefs
time-linked variables play in motivation and action (Kanfer, 2012). about willpower being finite (Job, Dweck, & Walton, 2010), or to
 348 KANFER, FRESE, AND JOHNSON

psychological licensing (Lin, Ma, & Johnson, 2016). These alter- port) needed for proactive engagement, and the consequences of
native explanations must be accounted for when examining such engagement for employee well-being (e.g., burnout, work-
depletion-based effects. family conflict). A nascent body of work suggests an important
The self. One of the most striking developments in the JAP link may exist between proactive work engagement and well-being
over the last century pertains to the increasing focus on the self. during later adulthood (Schooler, Mulatu, & Oates, 2004). Inves-
One line of research has examined the impact of individual dif- tigation of proactive engagement also requires reconsidering the
ferences in self-representations (personality traits) and implicit relations between affect and motivation (Bindl, Parker, Totterdell,
self-theories on goals and motivational processes and outcomes. & Hagger-Johnson, 2012: Sonnentag & Starzyk, 2015).
Another productive stream of research looks at the effects of an Although most theories of work motivation accord affect a
individual’s beliefs about their self-determination on work engage- service role in motivation, there is a growing literature using
ment and performance. A third line of inquiry derived from social– blended approaches to the study of motives (e.g., personal initia-
cognitive theorizing highlights people’s ability to direct and con- tive) and affective states (e.g., flow). Given the importance of
trol their behavior through self-regulatory processes. discretionary and proactive work behavior for personal and orga-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Despite the plethora of studies investigating trait and state nizational success, there is value in further understanding the
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

differences in self-related variables, researchers have yet to fully motivational processes underlying proactivity and personal initia-
integrate the self in theories of work motivation. For example, tive (Frese & Fay, 2001).
theorizing and research on the autobiographical self (McAdams, Motivation across the life span. Until recently, motivation
2013), possible future selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986), and other theories had little to say about the effects of age-related changes on
reflective self-construals (Markus & Kitayama, 1991) may be work motivation and behavior. However, growing age diversity in
fruitfully applied to understanding how individuals construe work the workforce requires more attention to identifying age-related
events (Fujita & Carnevale, 2012) and relationships. An important differences in motivational processing and key motivational levers
insight is that the self is socially constructed and multifaceted at different points in the lifecycle (Kanfer & Ackerman, 2004).
(Markus & Wurf, 1987). For example, employees can define Research findings show complex age-related differences in work
themselves based on personal characteristics that distinguish them motives (Kooij, deLange, Jansen, Kanfer, & Dikkers, 2011), reg-
from others, based on ties to specific relational partners (e.g., a ulation of negative emotions (Scheibe, Sheppes, & Staudinger,
supervisor), or based on membership in salient groups (e.g., a work 2015), and feedback orientation (Wang, Burlacu, Truxillo, James,
team or company; Brewer & Gardner, 1996). Accounting for these & Yao, 2015). Additional research is needed to understand the
different personal, relational, and collective selves is essential nature of potential age-related differences in other motivational
because the motives and values that drive behavior shift depending variables and processes, such as planning and self-regulatory strat-
on what aspect of self is currently salient. Future research is egies for work goal attainment.
needed to identify the unique antecedents and consequences of Developmental perspectives also highlight the importance of un-
employees’ different self-definitions, and steps that organizations derstanding work motivation at different points across the individual’s
and managers can take to ensure that these self-definitions are lifetime. The lion’s share of theory and research over the last century
appropriately aligned with task and company goals. The role of the has focused on motivation during work rather than the motivation to
self and identity in work motivation represents a promising new work (Kanfer, Beier, & Ackerman, 2013). Over a lifetime of employ-
direction for future research. ability that may last 50 years or more, individuals are likely to
Proactive engagement. The nature of motivation theories of- experience multiple periods of unemployment across their career.
ten reflect the impact of major changes in economics, technology, Although individuals are encouraged to take greater control over their
and organizational structures (e.g., contrast the difference between careers, there is a need to better understand how communities and
individual work processes in the early part of the 20th century and human resource management practices (e.g., recruitment, leadership)
team-oriented work that has dominated the literature since the affect an individual’s motivation to seek new employment, engage in
1980s). Recent changes in the nature of work emphasize the need professional development, and to continue working. Studies that focus
to be proactively engaged because many jobs (e.g., service jobs) on motivation to work at different points in the life course (e.g.,
cannot be formalized in detail and because accelerated technolog- school-to-work; following job loss and/or injury; nearing retirement)
ical changes imply that people have to preemptively prepare them- holds promise for informing public policymakers concerned with
selves for future changes, which has implications for job design maintaining high levels of workforce employment in all age segments
and active changes of jobs in the sense of job crafting (Frese, and for organizations that face increasing competition for a growing
Garst, & Fay, 2007; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001) and active nontraditional workforce.
career development (Hall, 1996). This has created a need for Contextual influences on motivation. Person-centric ap-
research on the intersection of proactivity and engagement, which proaches to work motivation have substantially broadened the
are interrelated (Hakanen Perhoniemi, & Toppinen-Tanner, 2008; meaning of context to include the effects of culture, sociobehav-
Salanova & Schaufeli, 2008). ioral norms associated with occupations, organizations, and work
We define proactive engagement as a dynamic, self-directed units, and nonwork demands on behavior and job performance. For
syndrome of cognitive, affective, and motivational states charac- example, findings by Mitchell, Holtom, Lee, Sablynski, and Erez
terized by high levels of vigor, dedication, and absorption that (2001) on job embeddedness suggest that an individual’s commu-
propel and sustain goal-directed activities (Grant & Parker, 2009; nity involvement represents an important determinant of motiva-
Parker, Williams, & Turner, 2006; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2010; tion for remaining at a job. Findings from the teams literature
Tornau & Frese, 2013). Investigation of proactive engagement further suggests that team social dynamics play an important role
requires identifying the job resources (e.g., autonomy, social sup- in resource allocations. As the use of teams becomes ever more
 MOTIVATION RELATED TO WORK: A CENTURY OF PROGRESS 349

common and workforce diversity increases, multilevel research is motivation as an active process in which people take personal
needed to understand how the culture and relational context in initiative, exert voice, and take charge of their motivation.
which work is performed affects different aspects of work moti- Findings in JAP and elsewhere document the critical role that
vation, and the role of these factors in entraining distinct work various aspects of goal choice and goal striving play in motivation
motivation strategies over time. and the myriad ways in which person and contextual factors
Opportunities. Advances in basic science and changes in the influence motivational processing. Goals form the nexus through
way work is performed continue to create a wide-range of new which the “why” of action (variously defined as needs, motives,
opportunities and challenges. Along this line, we suggest two desires, or interests) connect with the “how” of purposive action.
recent developments likely to have increasing influence on future Some theories seek to explain and predict why different goals are
work motivation research and practice. On the scientific front, adopted and the forces that bind an individual to a particular
findings in the neurosciences (cognitive and affective) suggest that direction of action. Other theories focus on how goals and inten-
motivation researchers will need to revisit the way we think about tions are formed and modified. Newer integrative formulations
cognitive processes, affect, and choice during goal pursuit (Reeve seek to bridge the why and the how and to account for the active
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

& Lee, 2012). Embodied cognition research, for example, provides role of the self, plans and strategies, affect, and both the explicit
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

evidence for brain-cognition linkages between low-level physical and implicit content and processes that underlie work motivation.
states and higher order social– cognitive processes, and recent Although this review has focused primarily on progress in work
findings suggest that mind– body interactions influence goal acti- motivation theory, we would be remiss if we did not acknowledge
vation and behavior during goal pursuit (Zhang & Risen, 2014). the importance of research that demonstrates how scientific knowl-
Such findings underscore the importance of sociality and all forms edge can be used to benefit individuals, organizations, and society.
of context in work motivation. Over the long run, we expect Field experiments that document the impact of various theory-
advances in these areas will play a major role in the transformation based interventions, such as goal setting (Latham & Yukl, 1975),
of current cognitive models of work motivation (based largely on work redesign (Grant, 2008b), expectancy training (Eden & Shani,
20th century cognitive psychology). A second development with 1982), self-management training (Frayne & Geringer, 2000), and
practical implications pertains to the integration of multiple tech- goal orientation training (van Hooft & Noordzij, 2009) can be
nologies into the work experience, and the growing implementa- highly influential in the uptake of new approaches in organiza-
tion of complex technological systems in diverse industry sectors, tions, We encourage more of these studies as a means of reaffirm-
such as health care, homeland security, transportation manage- ing the value of motivation theory in the psychology of work and
ment, and the military. Theory and research in human system organizations and building a stronger foundation for constructive
integration provides a useful framework for understanding the transformation of the field.
multiple pathways by which person-technology interactions con-
tribute to motivation and performance. Because many of the jobs
References
in these systems are considered high-stakes, strategies to mitigate
motivational deficits in these systems that are often associated with Adams, J. S. (1965). Inequity in social exchange. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.),
boredom, cognitive fatigue and job stress represent a critical chal- Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 267–299). New
lenge for the field. York, NY: Academic Press.
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior
and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179 –211. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
Summary and Final Thoughts 0749-5978(91)90020-T
Alderfer, C. P. (1969). An empirical test of a new theory of human needs.
Our review of work motivation theory and research suggest a Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4, 143–175. http://
maturing field in the early stage of major transformation. In dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(69)90004-X
contrast to earlier decades, I/O researchers currently think less Armitage, C. J., & Conner, M. (2001). Efficacy of the theory of planned
about work motivation as an “on– off” phenomenon in which behavior: A meta-analytic review. British Journal of Social Psychology,
people respond in a constant manner to a motivational interven- 40, 471– 499. http://dx.doi.org/10.1348/014466601164939
Atkinson, J. W. (1958). Towards experimental analysis of human motiva-
tion, but rather as a dynamic, goal-directed, resource allocation
tion in terms of motives, expectancies, and incentives. In J. W. Atkinson
process that unfolds over the related variables of time, experience, (Ed.), Motives in fantasy, action and society (pp. 288 –305). New York,
and place. Contemporary models of motivation as a dynamic NY: Van Nostrand.
resource allocation process over time underscore the importance of Atkinson, J. W., & Birch, D. (1970). The dynamics of action. New York,
studying motivation over meaningful cycles of time and in con- NY: Wiley.
nection with events that have affective significance. These models Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral
are well-suited for integration with advances in affect and neuro- change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.
science for investigating the reciprocal relations between personal Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social
attributes, experiences, and the environment and for their relations cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Barrick, M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The big five personality dimen-
to resource allocation patterns across activities over time, with
sions and job performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 44,
potential negative (resource depletion) and positive (resource ac- 1–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x
cumulation) consequences to the self and performance. Three Barrick, M. R., Stewart, G. L., & Piotrowski, M. (2002). Personality and
features distinguish this contemporary perspective from older job performance: Test of the mediating effects of motivation among
views, such as the (1) primacy of goals, (2) emphasis on goal sales representatives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 43–51. http://
pursuit and associated affective processes, and (3) conception of dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.1.43
 350 KANFER, FRESE, AND JOHNSON

Baumeister, R. F., Bratslavsky, E., Muraven, M., & Tice, D. M. (1998). Colquitt, J. A., Conlon, D. E., Wesson, M. J., Porter, C. O. L. H., & Ng,
Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource? Journal of Person- K. Y. (2001). Justice at the millennium: A meta-analytic review of 25
ality and Social Psychology, 74, 1252–1265. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ years of organizational justice research. Journal of Applied Psychology,
0022-3514.74.5.1252 86, 425– 445. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.3.425
Bies, R. J. (2001). International (in)justice: The sacred and the profane. In Colquitt, J. A., Rodell, J. B., Zapata, C. P., Wesson, M. J., Scott, B. A.,
J. Greenberg & R. Cropanzano (Eds.), Advances in organizational Long, D. M., & Conlon, D. E. (2013). Justice at the millennium, a
justice (pp. 89 –118). Palo Alto, CA: Stanford University Press. decade later: A meta-analytic test of social exchange and affect-based
Bindl, U. K., Parker, S. K., Totterdell, P., & Hagger-Johnson, G. (2012). perspectives. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 199 –236.
Fuel of the self-starter: How mood relates to proactive goal regulation. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow. The psychology of optimal experience.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 134 –150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ New York, NY: Harper & Row.
a0024368 Daniel, T. L., & Esser, J. K. (1980). Intrinsic motivation as influenced by
Bing, M. N., LeBreton, J. M., Davison, H. K., Migetz, D. Z., & James, rewards, task interest, and task structure. Journal of Applied Psychology,
L. R. (2007). Integrating implicit and explicit social cognitions for 65, 566 –573. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.65.5.566
enhanced personality assessment: A general framework for choosing Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York, NY: Plenum Press.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

measurement and statistical methods. Organizational Research Meth- http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-4446-9

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

ods, 10, 346 –389. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1094428107301148 Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Self-determination in a
Bledow, R., Schmitt, A., Frese, M., & Kühnel, J. (2011). The affective shift work organization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 580 –590. http://
model of work engagement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 1246 – dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.74.4.580
1257. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0024532 Deci, E. L., Koestner, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1999). A meta-analytic review
Bono, J. E., Glomb, T. M., Shen, W., Kim, E., & Koch, A. J. (2013). of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic
Building positive resources: Effects of positive events and positive motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 627– 668. http://dx.doi.org/10
reflection on work-stress and health. Academy of Management Journal, .1037/0033-2909.125.6.627
56, 1601–1626. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/amj.2011.0272 Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-
Brewer, M. B., & Gardner, W. (1996). Who is this “we”? Levels of determination in human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum Press. http://
collective identity and self-representations. Journal of Personality and dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7
Social Psychology, 71, 83–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71 DeShon, R. P., Brown, K. G., & Greenis, J. L. (1996). Does self-regulation
.1.83 require cognitive resources? Evaluation of resource allocation models of
Cameron, J., & Pierce, W. D. (1994). Reinforcement, reward, and intrinsic goal setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 595– 608. http://dx.doi
motivation: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 64, 363– .org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.5.595
423. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543064003363 DeShon, R. P., & Gillespie, J. Z. (2005). A motivated action theory account
Campbell, J. P., & Pritchard, R. D. (1976). Motivation theory in industrial of goal orientation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1096 –1127.
and organizational psychology. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1096
industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 63–130). Chicago, IL: Diefendorff, J. M., Hall, R. J., Lord, R. G., & Strean, M. L. (2000).
Rand McNally. Action-state orientation: Construct validity of a revised measure and its
Carter, E. C., Kofler, L. M., Forster, D. E., & McCullough, M. E. (2015). relationship to work-related variables. Journal of Applied Psychology,
A series of meta-analytic tests of the depletion effect: Self-control does 85, 250 –263. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.85.2.250
not seem to rely on a limited resource. Journal of Experimental Psy- Dietz, B., van Knippenberg, D., Hirst, G., & Restubog, S. L. D. (2015).
chology: General, 144, 796 – 815. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000083 Outperforming whom? A multilevel study of performance-prove goal
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1981). Attention and self-regulation: A orientation, performance, and the moderating role of shared team iden-
control-theory approach to human behavior. New York, NY: Springer- tification. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 1811–1824. http://dx.doi
Verlag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-5887-2 .org/10.1037/a0038888
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1990). Origins and functions of positive Dulebohn, J. H., Davison, R. B., Lee, S. A., Conlon, D. E., McNamara, G.,
and negative affect: A control-process view. Psychological Review, 97, & Sarinopoulos, I. C. (2015). Gender differences in justice evaluations:
19 –35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.97.1.19 Evidence from fMRI. Journal of Applied Psychology. Advance online
Cerasoli, C. P., Nicklin, J. M., & Ford, M. T. (2014). Intrinsic motivation publication.
and extrinsic incentives jointly predict performance: A 40-year meta- Dweck, C. S. (1986). Motivational processes affecting learning. American
analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140, 980 –1008. http://dx.doi.org/10 Psychologist, 41, 1040 –1048. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.41
.1037/a0035661 .10.1040
Chang, C.-H., Ferris, D. L., Johnson, R. E., Rosen, C. C., & Tan, J. A. Earley, P. C., Wojnaroski, P., & Prest, W. (1987). Task planning and
(2012). Core self-evaluations: A review and evaluation of the literature. energy expended: Exploration of how goals influence performance.
Journal of Management, 38, 81–128. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 107–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
0149206311419661 0021-9010.72.1.107
Chen, G., & Kanfer, R. (2006). Toward a systems theory of motivated Eden, D., & Shani, A. B. (1982). Pygmalion goes to boot camp: Expec-
behavior in work teams. Research in Organizational Behavior, 27, tancy, leadership, and trainee performance. Journal of Applied Psychol-
223–267. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-3085(06)27006-0 ogy, 67, 194 –199.
Chen, G., Kirkman, B. L., Kanfer, R., Allen, D., & Rosen, B. (2007). A Eisenberger, R., Pierce, W. D., & Cameron, J. (1999). Effects of reward on
multilevel study of leadership, empowerment, and performance in teams. intrinsic motivation—Negative, neutral and positive: Comment on Deci,
Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 331–346. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ Koestner, and Ryan (1999). Psychological Bulletin, 125, 677– 691.
0021-9010.92.2.331 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.6.677
Christian, M. S., & Ellis, A. P. (2011). Examining the effects of sleep Elliot, A. J., & Thrash, T. M. (2002). Approach-avoidance motivation in
deprivation on workplace deviance: A self-regulatory perspective. Acad- personality: Approach and avoidance temperaments and goals. Journal
emy of Management Journal, 54, 913–934. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/ of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 804 – 818. http://dx.doi.org/
amj.2010.0179 10.1037/0022-3514.82.5.804
 MOTIVATION RELATED TO WORK: A CENTURY OF PROGRESS 351

Erez, M. (1977). Feedback: A necessary condition for the goal setting- Grant, A. M. (2008a). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire?
performance relationship. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62, 624 – 627. Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and pro-
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.62.5.624 ductivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 48 –58. http://dx.doi.org/
Ferris, D. L., Johnson, R. E., Rosen, C. C., Djurdjevic, E., Chang, C.-H., 10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.48
& Tan, J. A. (2013). When is success not satisfying? A moderated Grant, A. M. (2008b). The significance of task significance: Job perfor-
mediation model of the relation between core self-evaluation and job mance effects, relational mechanisms, and boundary conditions. Journal
satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 98, 342–353. http://dx.doi of Applied Psychology, 93, 108 –124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-
.org/10.1037/a0029776 9010.93.1.108
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: Grant, A. M., & Parker, S. K. (2009). Redesigning work design theories:
An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley. The rise of relational and proactive perspectives. The Academy of Man-
Foo, M.-D., Uy, M. A., & Baron, R. A. (2009). How do feelings influence agement Annals, 3, 317–375. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19416520
effort? An empirical study of entrepreneurs’ affect and venture effort. 903047327
Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1086 –1094. http://dx.doi.org/10 Greenberg, J. (1988). Equity and workplace status: A field experiment.
.1037/a0015599 Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 606 – 613. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Frayne, C. A., & Geringer, J. M. (2000). Self-management training for 0021-9010.73.4.606

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

improving job performance: A field experiment involving salespeople. Greguras, G. J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009). Different fits satisfy different
Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 361–372. needs: Linking person-environment fit to employee commitment and
Frese, M., & Fay, D. (2001). Personal initiative: An active performance performance using self-determination theory. Journal of Applied Psy-
concept for work in the 21st century. Research in Organizational Be- chology, 94, 465– 477. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0014068
havior, 23, 133–187. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0191-3085(01)23005-6 Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diag-
Frese, M., Garst, H., & Fay, D. (2007). Making things happen: Reciprocal nostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 159 –170. http://dx
relationships between work characteristics and personal initiative in a .doi.org/10.1037/h0076546
four-wave longitudinal structural equation model. Journal of Applied Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of
Psychology, 92, 1084 –1102. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4 work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Perfor-
.1084 mance, 16, 250 –279. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7
Frese, M., Krauss, S. I., Keith, N., Escher, S., Grabarkiewicz, R., Luneng, Hakanen, J. J., Perhoniemi, R., & Toppinen-Tanner, S. (2008). Positive
S. T., . . . Friedrich, C. (2007). Business owners’ action planning and its gain spirals at work: From job resources to work engagement, personal
relationship to business success in three African countries. Journal of initiative and work-unit innovativeness. Journal of Vocational Behavior,
Applied Psychology, 92, 1481–1498. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021- 73, 78 –91. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2008.01.003
9010.92.6.1481 Hall, D. T. (1996). Protean careers of the 21st century. The Academy of
Frese, M., Mumford, M. D., & Gibson, C. (Eds.). (2015). The psychology Management Executive, 10, 8 –16.
of planning in organizations. New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Harrison, D. A. (1995). Volunteer motivation and attendance decisions:
Francis Group. Competitive theory testing in multiple samples from a homeless shelter.
Frese, M., & Zapf, D. (1994). Action as the core of work psychology: A Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 371–385. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
German approach. In H. C. Triandis, M. D. Dunnettee, & L. M. Hough 0021-9010.80.3.371
(Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed., Heckhausen, H., & Kuhl, J. (1985). From wishes to action: The dead ends
Vol. 4, pp. 271–340). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. and short cuts on the long way to action. In M. Frese & J. Sabini (Eds.),
Freud, S. (1913). The interpretation of dreams (A. A. Brill, Trans.). New Goal directed behavior: The concept of action in psychology (pp. 134–
York, NY: Macmillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/10561-000 159). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Fritz, C., & Sonnentag, S. (2006). Recovery, well-being, and performance- Heckhausen, J. (1991). Motivation and action. Berlin, Germany: Springer-
related outcomes: The role of workload and vacation experiences. Jour- Verlag. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-75961-1
nal of Applied Psychology, 91, 936 –945. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ Heneman, H. G., III, & Schwab, D. P. (1972). Evaluation of research on
0021-9010.91.4.936 expectancy theory predictions of employee performance. Psychological
Frost, B. C., Ko, C. H., & James, L. R. (2007). Implicit and explicit Bulletin, 78, 1–9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0033093
personality: A test of a channeling hypothesis for aggressive behavior. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to
Test, 92, 1299 –1319. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1299 work (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.
Fujita, K., & Carnevale, J. J. (2012). Transcending temptation through Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist,
abstraction: The role of construal level in self-control. Current Direc- 52, 1280 –1300. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280
tions in Psychological Science, 21, 248 –252. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ House, R. J., & Wigdor, L. A. (1967). Herzberg’s dual-factor theory of job
0963721412449169 satisfaction and motivation: A review of the evidence and a criticism.
Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work Personnel Psychology, 20, 369 –389. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-
motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 331–362. http://dx 6570.1967.tb02440.x
.doi.org/10.1002/job.322 Hull, C. L. (1943). Principles of behavior: An introduction to behavior
Georgopoulos, B. S., Mahoney, G. M., & Jones, N. W., Jr. (1957). A theory. New York, NY: Appleton-Century.
path-goal approach to productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 41, Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Integrating
345–353. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0048473 motivational, social, and contextual work design features: A meta-
Gollwitzer, P. M. (1990). Action phases and mind-sets. In E. T. Higgins & analytic summary and theoretical extension of the work design literature.
R. M. Sorrentino (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition: Foun- Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1332–1356. http://dx.doi.org/10
dations of social behavior (Vol. 2, pp. 53–92). New York, NY: Guilford .1037/0021-9010.92.5.1332
Press. Inzlicht, M., & Schmeichel, B. J. (2012). What is ego depletion? Toward
Grant, A. M. (2007). Relational job design and the motivation to make a a mechanistic revision of the resource model of self-control. Perspec-
prosocial difference. Academy of Management Review, 32, 393– 417. tives on Psychological Science, 7, 450 – 463. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/
http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2007.24351328 1745691612454134
 352 KANFER, FRESE, AND JOHNSON

James, L. R. (1998). Measurement of personality via conditional reasoning. motivation: Content, context, and change. In R. Kanfer, G. Chen, &
Organizational Research Methods, 1, 131–163. http://dx.doi.org/10 R. D. Pritchard (Eds.), Work motivation: Past, present, and future (pp.
.1177/109442819812001 1–16). New York, NY: Routledge.
James, W. (1890). The principles of psychology. New York, NY: Henry Kanfer, R., & Heggestad, E. D. (1997). Motivation traits and skills: A
Holt. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/11059-000 person-centered approach to work motivation. Research in Organiza-
Job, V., Dweck, C. S., & Walton, G. M. (2010). Ego depletion—Is it all in tional Behavior, 19, 1–56.
your head? implicit theories about willpower affect self-regulation. Keith, N., & Frese, M. (2005). Self-regulation in error management train-
Psychological Science, 21, 1686 –1693. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ ing: Emotion control and metacognition as mediators of performance
0956797610384745 effects. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 677– 691. http://dx.doi.org/
Johns, G. (2006). The essential impact of context on organizational behav- 10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.677
ior. Academy of Management Review, 31, 386 – 408. http://dx.doi.org/ Klein, H. J., Wesson, M. J., Hollenbeck, J. R., & Alge, B. J. (1999). Goal
10.5465/AMR.2006.20208687 commitment and the goal-setting process: Conceptual clarification and
Johnson, R. E., Chang, C.-H., & Lord, R. G. (2006). Moving from cogni- empirical synthesis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 885– 896. http://
tion to behavior: What the research says. Psychological Bulletin, 132, dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.6.885
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

381– 415. Kooij, D. T. A. M., de Lange, A. H., Jansen, P. G. W., Kanfer, R., &
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Johnson, R. E., Lanaj, K., & Barnes, C. M. (2014). The good and bad of Dikkers, J. S. E. (2011). Age and work-related motives: Results of a
being fair: Effects of procedural and interpersonal justice behaviors on meta-analysis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 32, 197–225. http://
regulatory resources. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, 635– 650. dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.665
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0035647 Kozlowski, S. W. J., & Bell, B. S. (2006). Disentangling achievement
Johnson, R. E., & Lord, R. G. (2010). Implicit effects of justice on orientation and goal setting: Effects on self-regulatory processes. Jour-
self-identity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 681– 695. http://dx.doi nal of Applied Psychology, 91, 900 –916. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
.org/10.1037/a0019298 0021-9010.91.4.900
Johnson, R. E., Rosen, C. C., Chang, C.-H., & Lin, S.-H. (2015). Getting Kuhl, J. (1984). Volitional aspects of achievement motivation and learned
to the core of locus of control: Is it an evaluation of the self or the helplessness: Toward a comprehensive theory of action control. In B. A.
environment? Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 1568 –1578. http:// Maher (Ed.), Progress in experimental personality research (Vol. 13,
dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000011 pp. 99 –171). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Johnson, R. E., & Saboe, K. (2011). Measuring implicit traits in organi- Kuhl, J. (1994). A theory of action and state orientation. In J. Kuhl & J.
zational research: Development of an indirect measure of employee Beckmann (Eds.), Volition and personality: Action versus state orien-
implicit self-concept. Organizational Research Methods, 14, 530 –547. tation (pp. 9 – 46). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1094428110363617 Kuhl, J. (2000). A functional-design approach to motivation and self-
Johnson, R. E., Tolentino, A. L., Rodopman, O. B., & Cho, E. (2010). We regulation: The dynamics of personality systems and interactions. In M.
(sometimes) know not how we feel: Predicting work behaviors with an Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-
implicit measure of trait affectivity. Personnel Psychology, 63, 197–219. regulation (pp. 111–169). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. http://dx.doi
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2009.01166.x .org/10.1016/B978-012109890-2/50034-2
Judge, T. A., & Ilies, R. (2002). Relationship of personality to performance Lanaj, K., Chang, C.-H., & Johnson, R. E. (2012). Regulatory focus and
motivation: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, work-related outcomes: A review and meta-analysis. Psychological Bul-
797– 807. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.797 letin, 138, 998 –1034. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0027723
Judge, T. A., Locke, E. A., & Durham, C. C. (1997). The dispositional Latham, G. P., Erez, M., & Locke, E. A. (1988). Resolving scientific
causes of job satisfaction: A core evaluations approach. Research in disputes by the joint design of crucial experiments by the antagonists:
Organizational Behavior, 19, 151–188. Application to the Erez-Latham dispute regarding participation in goal
Kanfer, F. (1977). The many faces of self-control, or behavior modification setting. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73, 753–772. http://dx.doi.org/
changes its focus. In R. B. Stuart (Ed.), Behavioral self-management: 10.1037/0021-9010.73.4.753
Strategies, techniques and outcomes (pp. 1– 48). New York, NY: Brun- Latham, G. P., & Yukl, G. A. (1975). Assigned versus participative goal
ner/Mazel. setting with educated and uneducated woods workers. Journal of Ap-
Kanfer, R. (1990). Motivation theory and industrial and organizational plied Psychology, 60, 299 –302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0076753
psychology. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of Lewin, K., Dembo, T., Festinger, L., & Sears, P. S. (1944). Level of
industrial and organizational psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 75–170). aspiration. In J. McV. Hunt (Ed.), Personality and the behavior disor-
Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. ders (Vol. 1, pp. 33–38). New York, NY: Roland Press.
Kanfer, R. (2012). Work motivation: Theory, practice, and future direc- Lin, S.-H., & Johnson, R. E. (2015). A suggestion to improve a day keeps
tions. In S. W. J. Kozlowski (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of industrial your depletion away: Examining promotive and prohibitive voice be-
and organizational psychology (pp. 455– 495). Oxford, UK: Blackwell. haviors within a regulatory focus and ego depletion framework. Journal
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199928309.013.0014 of Applied Psychology, 100, 1381–1397. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (1989). Motivation and cognitive abilities: apl0000018
An integrative/aptitude-treatment interaction approach to skill acquisi- Lin, S.-H., Ma, J., & Johnson, R. E. (2016). When ethical leader behavior
tion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 657– 690. http://dx.doi.org/10 breaks bad: How ethical leader behavior can turn abusive via ego
.1037/0021-9010.74.4.657 depletion and moral licensing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101,
Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P. L. (2004). Aging, adult development, and 815– 830. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000098
work motivation. Academy of Management Review, 29, 440 – 458. Liu, D., Chen, X.-P., & Yao, X. (2011). From autonomy to creativity: A
Kanfer, R., Beier, M. E., & Ackerman, P. L. (2013). Goals and motivation multilevel investigation of the mediating role of harmonious passion.
related to work in later adulthood: An organizing framework. European Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 294 –309. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 22, 253–264. http:// a0021294
dx.doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2012.734298 Liu, D., Zhang, S., Wang, L., & Lee, T. W. (2011). The effects of
Kanfer, R., Chen, G., & Pritchard, R. D. (2008). The three Cs of work autonomy and empowerment on employee turnover: Test of a multilevel
 MOTIVATION RELATED TO WORK: A CENTURY OF PROGRESS 353

model in teams. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 1305–1316. http:// appraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 81, 1053–1077. http://dx.doi.org/10
dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0024518 .1037/h0037495
Locke, E. A. (1966). The relationship of intentions to level of performance. Mitchell, T. R. (1979). Organizational behavior. Annual Review of Psy-
Journal of Applied Psychology, 50, 60 – 66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ chology, 30, 243–281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.30.020179
h0022937 .001331
Locke, E. A., Frederick, E., Lee, C., & Bobko, P. (1984). Effect of Mitchell, T. R., & Daniels, D. (2003). Motivation. In W. C. Borman, D. R.
self-effiacy, goals, and task strategies on task performance. Journal of Ilgen, & R. J. Klimoski (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Vol. 12.
Applied Psychology, 69, 241–251. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010 Industrial psychology (pp. 225–254). New York, NY: Wiley.
.69.2.241 Mitchell, T. R., Holtom, B. C., Lee, T. W., Sablynski, C. J., & Erez, M.
Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting and task (2001). Why people stay: Using job embeddedness to predict voluntary
performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. turnover. Academy of Management Journal, 44, 1102–1121.
Locke, E. A., Shaw, K. N., Saari, L. M., & Latham, G. P. (1981). Goal Mitchell, T. R., & Nebeker, D. M. (1973). Expectancy theory predictions
setting and task performance: 1969 –1980. Psychological Bulletin, 90,
of academic effort and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57,
125–152. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.90.1.125
61– 67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0034181
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

Loi, R., Yang, J., & Diefendorff, J. M. (2009). Four-factor justice and daily
Molden, D. C., Hui, C. M., Scholer, A. A., Meier, B. P., Noreen, E. E.,
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

job satisfaction: A multilevel investigation. Journal of Applied Psychol-

D’Agostino, P. R., & Martin, V. (2012). Motivational versus metabolic
ogy, 94, 770 –781. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0015714
effects of carbohydrates on self-control. Psychological Science, 23,
Lord, R. G., Day, D. V., Zaccaro, S. J., Avolio, B. J., & Eagly, A. H.
1137–1144. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797612439069
(2017). Leadership in Applied Psychology: Three waves of theory and
Murray, H. A. (1938). Explorations in personality. New York, NY: Oxford
research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102, 434 – 451. http://dx.doi
.org/10.1037/apl0000089 University Press.
Markus, H. R., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psycholo- Naylor, J. C., Pritchard, R. D., & Ilgen, D. R. (1980). A theory of behavior
gist, 41, 954 –969. in organizations. New York, NY: Academic Press.
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications Nicholls, J. G. (1984). Conceptions of ability and achievement motivation.
for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224 – In R. Ames & C. Ames (Eds.), Research on motivation in education
253. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224 (Vol. 1, pp. 39 –73). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Markus, H., & Wurf, E. (1987). The dynamic self-concept: A social Parker, S. K., Williams, H. M., & Turner, N. (2006). Modeling the
psychological perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 299 –337. antecedents of proactive behavior at work. Journal of Applied Psychol-
http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ps.38.020187.001503 ogy, 91, 636 – 652. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.3.636
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Payne, S. C., Youngcourt, S. S., & Beaubien, J. M. (2007). A meta-analytic
Review, 50, 370 –396. examination of the goal orientation nomological net. Journal of Applied
Mathieu, J. E., Hollenbeck, J. R., Van Knippenberg, D., & Ilgen, D. R. Psychology, 92, 128 –150. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1
(2017). A Century of work teams in the Journal of Applied Psychology. .128
Journal of Applied Psychology, 102, 452– 467. http://dx.doi.org/10 Phillips, J. M., & Gully, S. M. (1997). Role of goal orientation, ability,
.1037/apl0000128 need for achievement, and locus of control in the self-efficacy and
McAdams, D. P. (2013). The psychological self as actor, agent, and author. goal-setting process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 792– 802.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 272–295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.82.5.792
McClelland, D. C. (1961). The achieving society. Princeton, NJ: Van Phillips, J. M., Hollenbeck, J. R., & Ilgen, D. R. (1996). Prevalence and
Nostrand Reinhold. prediction of positive discrepancy creation: Examining a discrepancy
McClelland, D. C. (1965). Achievement and entrepreneurship: A longitu- between two self-regulation theories. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81,
dinal study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1, 389 –392. 498 –511. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.5.498
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0021956 Phillips, J. S., & Lord, R. G. (1980). Determinants of intrinsic motivation:
McClelland, D. C. (1985). Human motivation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Locus of control and competence information as components of Deci’s
University Press. cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65, 211–
McClelland, D. C., & Boyatzis, R. E. (1982). Leadership motive pattern
218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.65.2.211
and long-term success in management. Journal of Applied Psychology,
Pinder, C. C. (1976). Additivity versus nonadditivity of intrinsic and
67, 737–743. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.67.6.737
extrinsic incentives: Implications for work motivation, performance, and
McGraw, K. O., & McCullers, J. C. (1979). Evidence of a detrimental
attitudes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61, 693–700. http://dx.doi.org/
effect of extrinsic incentives on breaking a mental set. Journal of
10.1037/0021-9010.61.6.693
Experimental Social Psychology, 15, 285–294. http://dx.doi.org/10
Pritchard, R. D., Campbell, K. M., & Campbell, D. J. (1977). Effects of
.1016/0022-1031(79)90039-8
extrinsic financial rewards on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Applied
Mento, A. J., Steel, R. P., & Karren, R. J. (1987). A meta-analytic study of
the effects of goal setting on task performance: 1966 –1984. Organiza- Psychology, 62, 9 –15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.62.1.9
tional Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39, 52– 83. http://dx Rauch, A., & Frese, M. (2007). Let’s put the person back into entrepre-
.doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(87)90045-8 neurship research: A meta-analysis on the relationship between business
Meyer, R. D., Dalal, R. S., & Hermida, R. (2010). A review and synthesis owners’ personality traits, business creation, and success. European
of situational strength in the organizational sciences. Journal of Man- Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 16, 353–385. http://
agement, 36, 121–140. dx.doi.org/10.1080/13594320701595438
Miller, G. A., Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960). Plans and the Reeve, J., & Lee, W. (2012). Neuroscience and human motivation. In R. M.
structure of behavior. New York, NY: Henry Holt & Co. http://dx.doi Ryan (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of human motivation (pp. 365–380).
.org/10.1037/10039-000 New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Mischel, W. (1968). Personality and assessment. New York, NY: Wiley. Robbins, J. M., Ford, M. T., & Tetrick, L. E. (2012). Perceived unfairness
Mitchell, T. R. (1974). Expectancy models of job satisfaction, occupational and employee health: A meta-analytic integration. Journal of Applied
preference, and effort: A theoretical, methodological, and empirical Psychology, 97, 235–272. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025408
 354 KANFER, FRESE, AND JOHNSON

Roe, R. A. (2014). Time, performance and motivation. In A. Shipp & Y. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 330 –350. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
Fried (Eds.), Time and work: How time impacts individuals (Vol. 1, pp. 0021-9010.91.2.330
63–110). New York, NY: Psychology Press. Stajkovic, A. D., Locke, E. A., & Blair, E. S. (2006). A first examination
Ronen, S. (1994). An underlying structure of motivational need taxono- of the relationships between primed subconscious goals, assigned con-
mies: A cross-cultural confirmation. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough scious goals, and task performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91,
(Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 4, 1172–1180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.5.1172
pp. 241–269). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press. Steel, P., & König, C. J. (2006). Integrating theories of motivation. Acad-
Rynes, S. L., Gerhart, B., & Minette, K. A. (2004). The importance of pay emy of Management Review, 31, 889 –913. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/
in employee motivation: Discrepancies between what people say and AMR.2006.22527462
what they do. Human Resource Management, 43, 381–394. http://dx.doi Strauss, K., Griffin, M. A., & Parker, S. K. (2012). Future work selves:
.org/10.1002/hrm.20031 How salient hoped-for identities motivate proactive career behaviors.
Salanova, M., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2008). Job resources, engagement and Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 580 –598. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
proactive behavior: A cross-national study. International Journal of a0026423
Human Resource Management, 19, 116 –131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ Sun, S. H., & Frese, M. (2013). Multiple goal pursuit. In E. A. Locke &
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

09585190701763982 G. P. Latham (Eds.), New developments in goal setting and task perfor-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Defining and measuring work mance (pp. 177–194). New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor & Francis
engagement: Bringing clarity to the concept. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Group.
Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and Taylor, F. W. (1911). The principles of scientific management. New York,
research (pp. 10 –24). New York, NY: Psychology Press. NY: Harper & Row.
Scheibe, S., Sheppes, G., & Staudinger, U. M. (2015). Distract or reap- Tett, R. P., & Burnett, D. D. (2003). A personality trait-based interactionist
praise? Age-related differences in emotion-regulation choice. Emotion, model of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 500 –517.
15, 677– 681. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0039246 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.3.500
Schmidt, A. M., & DeShon, R. P. (2007). What to do? The effects of Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological
discrepancies, incentives, and time on dynamic goal prioritization. Jour- analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
nal of Applied Psychology, 92, 928 –941. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
Tolman, E. C. (1949). Purposive behavior in animals and men. Berkeley,
0021-9010.92.4.928
CA: University of California Press.
Schmidt, A. M., & DeShon, R. P. (2010). The moderating effects of
Tornau, K., & Frese, M. (2013). Construct clean-up in proactivity research:
performance ambiguity on the relationship between self-efficacy and
A meta-analysis on the nomological net of work-related proactivity
performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 572–581. http://dx.doi
concepts and their incremental validities. Applied Psychology, 62, 44 –
.org/10.1037/a0018289
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2012.00514.x
Schmidt, A. M., Dolis, C. M., & Tolli, A. P. (2009). A matter of time:
Trougakos, J. P., Beal, D. J., Cheng, B. H., Hideg, I., & Zweig, D. (2015).
Individual differences, contextual dynamics, and goal progress effects
Too drained to help: A resource depletion perspective on daily interper-
on multiple-goal self-regulation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94,
sonal citizenship behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 227–
692–709. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0015012
236. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0038082
Schooler, C., Mulatu, M. S., & Oates, G. (2004). Occupational self-
Trougakos, J. P., Beal, D. J., Green, S. G., & Weiss, H. M. (2008). Making
direction, intellectual functioning, and self-directed orientation in older
the break count: An episodic examination of recovery activities, emo-
workers: Findings and implications for individuals and societies. Amer-
tional experiences, and positive affective displays. Academy of Manage-
ican Journal of Sociology, 110, 161–197. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/
ment Journal, 51, 131–146. http://dx.doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2008
385430
Scott, B. A., Colquitt, J. A., & Paddock, E. L. (2009). An actor-focused .30764063
model of justice rule adherence and violation: The role of managerial Turner, A. N., & Lawrence, P. R. (1965). Industrial jobs and the worker.
motives and discretion. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 756 –769. Boston, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0015712 Uhlmann, E. L., Leavitt, K., Menges, J. I., Koopman, J., Howe, M. D., &
Scott, B. A., Colquitt, J. A., & Zapata-Phelan, C. P. (2007). Justice as a Johnson, R. E. (2012). Getting explicit about the implicit: A taxonomy
dependent variable: Subordinate charisma as a predictor of interpersonal of implicit measures and guide for their use in organizational research.
and informational justice perceptions. Journal of Applied Psychology, Organizational Research Methods, 15, 553– 601. http://dx.doi.org/10
92, 1597–1609. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1597 .1177/1094428112442750
Seo, M.-G., Barrett, L. F., & Bartunek, J. M. (2004). The role of affective Vancouver, J. B. (2008). Integrating self-regulation theories of work mo-
experience in work motivation. Academy of Management Review, 29, tivation into a dynamic process theory. Human Resource Management
423– 439. Review, 18, 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2008.02.001
Sonnentag, S., Binnewies, C., & Mojza, E. J. (2008). “Did you have a nice Vancouver, J. B., & Kendall, L. N. (2006). When self-efficacy negatively
evening?” A day-level study on recovery experiences, sleep, and affect. relates to motivation and performance in a learning context. Journal of
Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 674 – 684. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ Applied Psychology, 91, 1146 –1153. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-
0021-9010.93.3.674 9010.91.5.1146
Sonnentag, S., & Frese, M. (2012). Dynamic performance. In S. W. J. Vancouver, J. B., More, K. M., & Yoder, R. J. (2008). Self-efficacy and
Kozlowski (Ed.), Oxford handbook of industrial and organizational resource allocation: Support for a nonmonotonic, discontinuous model.
psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 548 –575). Cambridge, MA: Oxford University Journal of Applied Psychology, 93, 35– 47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
Press. 0021-9010.93.1.35
Sonnentag, S., & Starzyk, A. (2015). Perceived prosocial impact, perceived Vancouver, J. B., Thompson, C. M., & Williams, A. A. (2001). The
situational constraints, and proactive work behavior: Looking at two changing signs in the relationships among self-efficacy, personal goals,
distinct affective pathways. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 36, and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 605– 620. http://
806 – 824. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/job.2005 dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.86.4.605
Sonnentag, S., & Zijlstra, F. R. H. (2006). Job characteristics and off-job Vancouver, J. B., Weinhardt, J. M., & Schmidt, A. M. (2010). A formal,
activities as predictors of need for recovery, well-being, and fatigue. computational theory of multiple-goal pursuit: Integrating goal-choice
 MOTIVATION RELATED TO WORK: A CENTURY OF PROGRESS 355

and goal-striving processes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 985– orientation on social awareness and utility. Journal of Applied Psychol-
1008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0020628 ogy, 100, 1296 –1308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0038334
van der Zee, K. I., Bakker, A. B., & Bakker, P. (2002). Why are structured Weiss, H. M., & Cropanzano, R. (1996). An affective events approach to
interviews so rarely used in personnel selection? Journal of Applied job satisfaction. In B. M. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in
Psychology, 87, 176 –184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.1 organizational behavior (Vol. 18, pp. 1–74). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
.176 Weiss, H. M., Suckow, K., & Cropanzano, R. (1999). Effects of justice
VandeWalle, D. (1997). Development and validation of a work domain conditions on discrete emotions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84,
goal orientation instrument. Educational and Psychological Measure- 786 –794. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.5.786
ment, 57, 995–1015. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164497057006009 Welsh, D. T., Ellis, A. P. J., Christian, M. S., & Mai, K. M. (2014).
VandeWalle, D., Brown, S. P., Cron, W., & Slocum, J. W. J. (1999). The Building a self-regulatory model of sleep deprivation and deception: The
influence of goal orientation and self-regulation tactics on sales perfor- role of caffeine and social influence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99,
mance: A longitudinal field test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 1268 –1277. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0036202
249 –259. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.84.2.249 Winters, D., & Latham, G. P. (1996). The effect of learning versus outcome
Van Eerde, W., & Thierry, H. (1996). Vroom’s expectancy models and goals on a simple versus a complex task. Group & Organization Man-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

work-related criteria: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, agement, 21, 236 –250. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1059601196212007
Wood, R. E., Mento, A. J., & Locke, E. A. (1987). Task complexity as a
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

81, 575–586. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.81.5.575

van Hooft, E. A. J., & Noordzij, G. (2009). The effects of goal orientation moderator of goal effects: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychol-
on job search and reemployment: A field experiment among unem- ogy, 72, 416 – 425. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.72.3.416
ployed job seekers. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 1581–1590. Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017592 employees as active crafters of their work. Academy of Management
Verbruggen, F., McLaren, I. P. L., & Chambers, C. D. (2014). Banishing Review, 26, 179 –201.
the control homunculi in studies of action control and behavior change. Yang, L. Q., Bauer, J., Johnson, R. E., Groer, M. W., & Salomon, K.
Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 497–524. http://dx.doi.org/10 (2014). Physiological mechanisms that underlie the effects of interac-
.1177/1745691614526414 tional unfairness on deviant behavior: The role of cortisol activity.
Viteles, M. S. (1953). Motivation and morale in industry. New York, NY: Journal of Applied Psychology, 99, 310 –321. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/
Norton. a0034413
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York, NY: Wiley. Yang, L.-Q., Simon, L. S., Wang, L., & Zheng, X. (2016). To branch out
Wahba, M. A., & Bridwell, L. G. (1976). Maslow reconsidered: A review or stay focused? Affective shifts differentially predict organizational
of research on the need hierarchy theory. Organizational Behavior and citizenship behavior and task performance. Journal of Applied Psychol-
Human Performance, 15, 212–240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030- ogy, 101, 831– 845. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/apl0000088
5073(76)90038-6 Zacher, H., & Frese, M. (2009). Remaining time and opportunities at work:
Wainer, H. A., & Rubin, I. M. (1969). Motivation of research and devel- Relationships between age, work characteristics, and occupational future
opment entrepreneurs: Determinants of company success. Journal of time perspective. Psychology and Aging, 24, 487– 493. http://dx.doi.org/
Applied Psychology, 53, 178 –184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0027414 10.1037/a0015425
Wallace, C., & Chen, G. (2006). A multilevel integration of personality, Zacher, H., & Frese, M. (2015). Action regulation theory: Foundations,
climate, self-regulation, and performance. Personnel Psychology, 59, current knowledge, and future directions. In D. S. Ones, N. Anderson,
529 –557. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2006.00046.x H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of
Wanberg, C. R., Glomb, T. M., Song, Z., & Sorenson, S. (2005). Job- industrial, work, & organizational psychology (2nd ed., Vol.2). New
search persistence during unemployment: A 10-wave longitudinal study. York, NY: SAGE.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 411– 430. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ Zhang, Y., & Risen, J. L. (2014). Embodied motivation: Using a goal
0021-9010.90.3.411 systems framework to understand the preference for social and physical
Wanberg, C. R., Zhu, J., & Van Hooft, E. A. J. (2010). The job search warmth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 965–977.
grind: Perceived progress, self-reactions, and self-regulation of search http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0038153
effort. Academy of Management Journal, 53, 788 – 807. http://dx.doi
.org/10.5465/AMJ.2010.52814599 Received September 21, 2015
Wang, M., Burlacu, G., Truxillo, D., James, K., & Yao, X. (2015). Age Revision received May 4, 2016
differences in feedback reactions: The roles of employee feedback Accepted May 9, 2016 䡲