PUBLIC SERVICE MOTIVATION

PUBLIC SERVICE MOTIVATION

Motivation can be defined as a concept used to describe the factors within an individual, which arouse, maintain and channel behavior toward a goal which is a goal-directed behavior. Motivation is defined as some kind of internal drive which pushes someone to do things in order to achieve something (Harmer, 2001).It is also the psychological feature that arouses an organism to act toward a desired goal.

Generally it can of two types; Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. Intrinsic motivation is linked with the inner intangible things like self development and extrinsic motivation basically deals with outer tangible things like money, providing sophisticated technologies etc (Brown 1994). Whereas Mann, 2006 started classifying it in regards with various components like as achievement, affiliation, competence, power, and attitude.

Motivation have many factors like money, security, comfort and good working environment to serve the public in better ways as it is determined within different personalities and various thoughts. Some people are motivated with high salary whereas other prefers liberty in the organization (Mann, 2006). In the workplace, motivation is defined by the actions that employees take to improve the company goals as well as their aspirations for career advancement (Ritz, 2009).

A number of motivation theories have evolved in the last fifty years or so. Such theories have unearthed a number of findings on human behaviors and on the principles and approaches to motivate people. However, universal application of such theories is still questionable since human behavior varies and is very much shaped by social, cultural, political and economical factors. (Rabten & Tshewang, 2007).

PSM according to Perry and Lois, 1990 (as cited in Mann, 2006) is defined as individual’s predisposition to respond to motives grounded primarily or uniquely in public institutions and organization. PSM is the characteristics commonly attributed to a service ethic to make a difference, an ability to have an impact on public affairs, a sense of responsibility and a reliance on intrinsic rewards as opposed to salary and job security. PSM is generally understood as an employee’s desire to work for the public interest, a desire to do well for others and shape the well-being of society.

Rainey and Steinbaver (1999) defines PSM as a general, altruistic motivation to serve the interest of a community of people, a state, a nation or human kind and Brewer and Selden(1998) defines it as the motivational force that induces individuals to perform meaningful public, community and social service.

PSM is positively linked with individual characteristics that are helpful to organizational performance particularly job satisfaction but also organizational commitment. PSM enhances work unit and organizational performance. Though, PSM is an individual level of concept and it affects the performance of the organization as a whole. It consistently affects the efficiency, effectiveness and equity of the results produced by the organization.

According to Perry and Wise (1990), they suggested eight types of Public Service Motivation. They argued that, people motivated by PSM were likely to apply for jobs in the public sector and these public service motives would be positively related to performance in public organizations. They also argued that organizations with employee having high degree of PSM would be less dependent on useful incentives to manage individual performance effectively. PSM pays greater attention to pro-social behavior and such type of motivation has the potential to help both public and non-profit sectors to manage human resources. It is something not only identifiable but also quantifiable that attracts certain individual to the public service.

The concept and importance of public servant and motivating public servants has been in lime light for ages. It can be traced back to the time Aristotle and Plato and other historic writers who have dealt with it in their works (Horton, 2008). As motivation is directly affiliated with psychology, it has significant effect on the performance of an individual or a group of individuals and it is a key component of the development function in human resource management.

Finding most effective means to motivate an employees is one of the most challenging and important job of manager regardless of the sector. Human resource managers also face the challenging task of recognizing and potentially influencing the public service ethic in order to positively affect the motivation levels of workers. Motivation is essential to be successful in any endeavor you undertake. It is very important in workplaces as it plays a key role in the effective performance of employees. (Ritz, 2009).

Right attitude employees can make a great difference to the organization. This is because right attitude employees get more motivated by motivation plans of the organization. This right attitude of the employees can help the organizations to increase their productivity. But it is very difficult to estimate what makes the employees to have right attitude towards its employer in general and to the organization in particular. So, it is the managers who should make sure everyone understands what the company needs and how the company can get it. In doing this, managers should make sure how to get people to work for the organization and not against organization.

Usually motivated public servants have the interest, curiosity, or a desire to achieve something and try to put in all the effort to bring about high performance in an organization. However arousing interest is not enough to be motivated. This interest should be sustained. In addition to this, time and energy should be invested. (Ryan and Deci, 2005)

A number of antecedents of PSM were included in the quantitative analysis and Perry (1997) was the first to analyze antecedents. By choosing 295 American respondents from a variety of primarily public service backgrounds, he measured PSM on five dimensions namely attraction to policy making, commitment to the public interest, compassion, self-sacrifice and finally a composite measure of the former four. Antecedents of PSM where measured by the following indicators: Church involvement, closeness to god, religious worldview, parental modeling, parental relations, professional identification, liberalism/conservatism, education, age, income and gender.

Again, the antecedents were broadly classified by Camilleri, 2007 in five categories that are: personal attributes, role states, employee perception of the organization, employee-leader relations and job characteristics which includes skill variety, task autonomy, task identity, task feedback, friendship opportunities, dealing with others and task significance. Camilleri found that the PSM of public employees is mainly the result of the organizational environment surrounding them. The motivational context variables particularly those related to the organizational setting were the most dominant predictors of the PSM in his study.

Another analysis focusing on organizational antecedents for PSM was carried out by Moynihan and Pandey, 2007 by using a sample of 274 American top-level public information and communication program administrators; they analyzed variations in the Public Service Motivation. In their regression analysis they include measures of the following organizational antecedents: hierarchical authority, red- tape, reform orientation, hierarchical culture, developmental culture, group culture and rational culture. Besides the organizational variables they include measures of professional identification, personal income, length of organizational membership, age, education level and gender in the regression analysis. Every measure of PSM was found to be significantly related to their measures of education, professional identification, red-tape, reform orientation, hierarchical orientation, length of organizational membership and gender.

In one of the earliest theoretical frameworks for understanding PSM, Perry and Wise separated motives for public service into three categories: rational, norm-based, and affective. Rational motives are grounded in enlightened self-interest, and are present in individuals who believe that their interests coincide with those of the larger community; as a result of their personal identification with these organizations, these individuals express a commitment to public policy or special interest advocacy. While this framework was a valuable starting point for research into PSM, the categories are lacking in both specificity and objectivity, and can be ascertained by surveying for attitudes as opposed to observing the peculiar behaviors of a person. (Mann, 2006)

Building on his earlier research, Perry translated the theory into a 24 –item measurement scale and identified four factors for PSM: public policy-making, public interest, compassion, and self-sacrifice. Three of these factors clearly correspond to the original theory, while the fourth (self-sacrifice) represents a common factor in the PSM literature. Further studies by Perry used the measurement scale to investigate the correlation between PSM and five antecedents: parental socialization, religious socialization, professional identification, political ideology, and individual demographic characteristics. (Ibid)

Working with Perry’s original 40-item list (representing six dimensions of PSM) Brewer, Seldon, and Facet used Q-methodology to examine comprehensive attitudes and motives associated with public service.

This research identified four distinctive conceptions of PSM: Samaritans, communitarians, patriots and humanitarians. In a more recent attempt to explain the variability of PSM and its conflicting research findings, Brewer attempted to reframe the public service concept as pro social behavior to allow for both selfish and altruistic motives. With the concept of the public service motivation (PSM), the managers are faced with a lot of challenges about how to motivate the public servants and retain them in the service.

The public sector has to focus on the main antecedent of the PSM and try to find out suitable reward that can motivate the public servants. Through the research conducted by Perry and others we came to know about the negative relationship between the PSM and the extrinsic rewards like money etc. The managers are faced with a challenge to know about the different intrinsic rewards that keep motivating the employees.

The organizations have to involve all the employees in specific policy making and the policy of the organization has to be up to the expectations of the employees. The public servants are motivated towards their job in order to make a difference in the society and to serve the interest of the public as a whole. Hence the PSM have an implication on the organization’s strategy to change its motto towards providing an equal opportunity to all the employees to contribute their own ideas and the organization have to focus its goal towards serving the public interest.

References

Camilleri, E. (2007). Antecedents of Public Service Motivation, retrieved from http://www.emeraldinsight.com on 12^th November, 2009.

Crewson, P E. (1997). Public service motivation: Building empirical evidence of incidence and effect. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 4, 499-518;

Horton, S. (2008). History and persistence of an idea and an ideal. In J.L. Perry & A.

Mann, G. (2006), Public Personal Management, retrieved from www.enterepreneur.com on 10^th October, 2009.

Pandey, S.K., Wright, B.E., and Moynihan, D.P (2008). Public service motivation and interpersonal citizenship behavior in public organizations: testing a preliminary model. International Public Msanagement Journal, 11(1):89-108.

Perry, J. L. (1996) Measuring public service motivation: An assessment of construct reliability and validity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6(1), 5-22.

Perry, J., & Wise, L. (1990). The motivational basis of public service. Public Administration Review, 50, 367-373.

Rainey, H.G. and Steinbauer, P. (1999) Galloping elephants: developing elements of a theory of effective government organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9 (1), 1-32.

Ryan, R.M. and Deci, E.L (2000). Self determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well being. American Psychologist, 55,

68-78.

Tshewang, R. and Rabten, J. (2007), Differences in the source of motivation between Employees in Government and private sector. Royal Institute of Management, Thimphu.