MASTER THESIS The role of motivation in Human Resource ...

4.2 University of Gdansk students

The most important factor for students from Marketing and Management
Department at Gdansk University is Good wages. This factor was ranked first
by 33% of students. Another 42% placed it on the second or the third position.
Good wages were followed by Interesting work on the second place and Job
security on the third place. Interesting work was ranked one of the first three
positions by 60% of students. Almost 20% of them placed it on the first position.
Job security was seen as one of the three most important factors by 52% of
students, 16% of them ranked it as first in importance.

Figure 10: Mean ranks and the order of factors – UG students

Motivating factors

12
10,19

(13)

10 8,48 8,92
8 (11)
7,96 8,22 8,38 7,74 (12)
(8) (9) (10) (7)
6,9
6,73

(6) (5)

5,35

6 4,64 4,14 (4)
(3) (2)
3,36

4 (1)

2

0

As can be seen in Figure 10 three the most important factors – (1) Good wages,
(2) Interesting work and (3) Job security were followed by other factors in

47

presented order: (4) Promotion and growth in the organization, (5) Full
appreciation of work done, (6) Personal loyalty to employees from superiors, (7)
Freedom to plan and execute work independently, (8) Tactful discipline from
superiors, (9) Open communication, (10) Feeling of being well informed and
involved, (11) Good working conditions, (12) A good match between job
requirements and abilities and experience, (13) Participation in goal setting.
The least important factor – Participation in goal setting was ranked last by 33%
of respondents. Another 30% of respondents placed it on eleventh or twelfth
positions.

Table 3: Mean ranks and overall positions in the ranking of motivation
factors by gender (UG students)

Factors Male Female

Job security 4,95 (3) 4,40 (3)
Interesting work 4,25 (2) 4,05 (2)
Personal loyalty to employees from superiors 6,93 (6) 6,88 (6)
Good wages 3,20 (1) 3,48 (1)
Good working conditions 7,68 (8) 8,95 (11)
Promotion and growth in the organization 5,45 (4) 5,28 (4)
Tactful discipline from superiors 7,64 (7) 8,21 (13)
Full appreciation of work done 6,64 (5) 6,79 (5)
Open communication 8,14 (10) 8,28 (8)
Feeling of being well informed and involved 8,36 (11) 8,42 (10)
Freedom to plan and execute work independently 7,89 (9) 7,62 (7)
A good match between job requirements and 9,61 (12) 8,40 (9)
abilities and experience
Participation in goal setting 10,07 (13) 10,28 (12)

Table 3 presents comparison of mean ranks and overall positions of the factors
between males and females from Management and Marketing Department.
Those two subgroups were also similar to each other. The same as in ASB’s
sample U Mann-Whitney test did not confirm significant difference between
them (U=80, p=,817). Spearman’s rho test results showed a strong agreement
between genders in the way they ranked motivation factors (rho=,824, p=0,01).
When one looks into the overall ranks given to particular factors it can be seen
that the order of the first six motivation factors is exactly the same in both

48

groups. There are some differences in the order on further positions in the
rankings. Good working conditions and tactful discipline from superiors seem to
be more important for man than for women. A good match between job
requirements and abilities is more valued by women.

Table 4: Mean ranks and overall positions in the ranking of motivation
factors by possession of a job (UG students)

Factors Have a job Do not have a job

Job security 5,11 (4) 4,38 (3)
Interesting work 4,61 (2) 3,88 (2)
Personal loyalty to employees from superiors 7,53 (6) 6,56 (5)
Good wages 4,31 (1) 2,85 (1)
Good working conditions 8,61 (11) 8,41 (10)
Promotion and growth in the organization 4,75 (3) 5,68 (4)
Tactful discipline from superiors 8,08 (10) 7,89 (8)
Full appreciation of work done 6,47 (5) 6,86 (6)
Open communication 7,94 (9) 8,36 (9)
Feeling of being well informed and involved 7,72 (8) 8,74 (11)
Freedom to plan and execute work independently 7,58 (7) 7,82 (7)
A good match between job requirements and 8,89 (12) 8,94 (12)
abilities and experience
Participation in goal setting 9,39 (13) 10,62 (13)

The same as in the ASB students’ case responses of UG students were
compared according to possession of job (Table 4). No significant differences
were found between distributions of ranks by people who worked and those
who did not work (U= 82, p=,898). Spearman’s rho test also showed strong
agreement between those two groups (rho=,951, p<0,01).

In the question about factors that motivate other people Polish students chose
Good wages (96%), Job security (68%) and Interesting work (49%) as the
factors that are the most important. What is important is the fact that those
factors were also ranked three the highest places in the ranking of factors that
motivate students. The only difference is their order. Job security was placed in
the position number three in students’ “own” motivators ranking and Interesting
work was in the second place, while in the last question Job security was

49

chosen more frequently than Interesting work. It is worth to notice that
Promotion and growth in the organization was the forth the most often chosen
factor in the last question (30%) and it took the same position in the ranking of
motivating factors from the question about students’ own motivators. The
distribution of students’ answers is presented in Figure 11.

Figure 11: Factors that motivate other people by UG students

Motivating factors - other people

100% 96%
90%
80% 68% 30%
70% 49%
60% 10% 12%
50% 5% 6% 5% 5% 8% 6% 1%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

Not many polish students answered to the open-ended question about factors
that are not listed in previous question but are important for them. The
responses included:

• Good atmosphere/ good relations with co-workers
• Low stress level
• Prestige

50

• Fit of company values and personal values
• Fringe benefits

Each of these motivators was stated by one or more respondents.

4.3 Comparison

The last step of analyzing results is a comparison of the importance of factors
that motivate students from ASB and from University of Gdansk. The mean
ranks and overall positions of motivation factors are compared in Table 5.
Additionally, Table 5 presents overall rankings from Kovach’s research.

Table 5: Mean Ranks and overall positions in the ranking – comparison

Factors ASB students UG students Kovach’s Kovach’s
sample sample -
under 30

Job security 6,99 (7) 4,64 (3) (4) (2)
3,11 (1) 4,14 (2) (1) (4)
Interesting work 8,34 (12) 6,90 (6) (2) (5)

Personal loyalty to employees 5,49 (2) 3,36 (1) (5) (1)
from superiors 8,16 (10) 8,48 (11) (8) (8)
6,58 (5) 5,35 (4) (6) (3)
Good wages
9,76 (13) 7,96 (8) (9) (9)
Good working conditions 6,49 (4) 6,73 (5) (2) (5)
7,06 (8) 8,22 (9) x x
Promotion and growth in the 6,34 (3) 8,38 (10) (3) (6)
organization
6,88 (6) 7,74 (7) x x
Tactful discipline from superiors
7,49 (9) 8,92 (12) x x
Full appreciation of work done
8,32 (11) 10,19 (13) x x
Open communication

Feeling of being well informed
and involved

Freedom to plan and execute
work independently

A good match between job
requirements and abilities and
experience

Participation in goal setting

Mean ranks from ASB and UG students were compared to find if there are
significant differences between them. U Mann-Whitney test did not show any

51

reason to say there is a statistically significant difference between distribution of
ranks by two compared groups (U=77, p=,701). Spearman’s rho test showed
positive correlation between answers of ASB and UG students (rho=,599,
p<0,05). However, when we one looks at the ranking of factors it can be noticed
that some factors were ranked higher by one of the groups. Interesting work
was the factor that was given the first place by ASB students. UG students
placed it on the second position and they ranked first Good wages which were
ranked second by students from ASB. Comparing it with Kovach’s findings, one
can see that Interesting work was also in the first position in the ranking.
Although, Good wages were not so important in findings based on the whole
Kovach’s sample, they were given the first place among respondents under 30.
Students from Poland valued Job security which was placed on third position by
them. ASB students did not find it so important and ranked it seventh. Another
difference can be noticed between ranks of Feeling of being well informed and
involved. This factor was one of the most important for ASB students (the third
place) and one of the least important for UG students (the tenth place). The two
factors that were related to the behavior of superiors – Personal loyalty to
employees from superiors and Tactful discipline from superiors were more
important from students from UG (twelfth vs sixth, thirteenth vs sixth).

The comparison of the answers to the question about factors that motivate other
people showed that students from both groups chose the same three factors.
The most often chosen factor was Good wages. It was followed by Job security
and Interesting work. Job security was the second most often chosen factor in
UG students group and Interesting work the third. The order was conversed in
ASB group.

The open-ended question analysis showed that students from both groups
mentioned good relations with colleagues, fit of own values with company
values and fringe benefits as motivating for them.

52

5. Discussion

According to the results presented in a previous part of this paper Interesting
work and Good wages are two the most important motivation factors for
students from ASB as well as for students from Management and Marketing
Department at University of Gdansk. The same factors were found the most
important in Harpaz (1990) and Linder’s (1999) researches. Kovach (1995) in
his study also indicated Interesting work as the most important factor. Good
wages were not so important for his respondents when he analyzed the whole
group but it was the most important factor for the group under 30 years old.
Interesting work seems to be the factor that is indicated as one of the most
important in many researches in various settings and environments. Good
wages are seen as very important by some groups of respondents and not by
others. It can be assumed that there is something special about the groups that
find monetary rewards a crucial motivation factor.

Before we try to find out what characterize students that makes them value
good wages, we will look at other factors that were highly ranked by them. The
third the most important factor chosen by ASB students was Feeling of being
well informed and involved. This factor was not very important for Polish
students. They gave the third position to Job security, which conversely was not
valued so much by ASB students. The difference might be caused by some
cultural issues or a current situation in both countries. The results of research
by Fisher and Yuan (1998) that focused on differences between factors that
motivated employees from different countries showed that cultural differences
have an influence on chosen motivation factors. However, those authors
compared Chinese and American employees which are characterized by strong
differences in their cultures. The difference between Polish and Danish culture
is not so strong. Therefore, explanation for not exactly the same order of
motivation factors might be the situation in the country. In Poland students who
graduate from business schools have problems with finding jobs. It is quite easy
to find an unpaid traineeship but when it is completed companies usually do not
offer a proper job to the trainees. That causes the feeling of insecurity and might
be the reason why Polish students ranked highly job security.

53

What is also congruent to Kovach’s findings (1995) from the sample of
respondents under 30 years old is that respondents, both from ASB and UG,
agreed that Promotion and growth in the organization and Full appreciation of
work done were included in the top five factors according to their importance. In
other words, it can be said that recognition seems to be an important aspect of
motivation. Although, both groups of students wanted superiors to appreciate
and reward their effort only UG students thought also about relations with them.
It is worth to notice a difference between the way students ranked factors
related to superiors’ behavior: Tactful discipline from superiors and Personal
loyalty to employees from superiors. None of the groups placed them in the top
positions. However, UG students ranked them higher than students from ASB. It
might be also caused by cultural differences. Polish culture is rather formal and
hierarchical therefore relations with superiors are important aspect of work.

The most important factors chosen by students can be analyzed in the light of
Maslow’s theory of needs. Interesting work is related to self-actualizing need,
Good wages to physiological need, Job security to safety need, Feeling of being
well informed and involved to social need and finally Promotion and growth in
the organization and Full appreciation of work done to self-esteem need.
According to Maslow the higher needs occur when the lower needs are fulfilled.
This might explain why good wages are one of the most important factors for
students. Money is needed to satisfy all basic needs related to everyday
expenses. Before students start their work career, they are usually supported by
parents or the government. When they enter the workforce they want to be
independent and the first step to do this is to pay their bills on their own. It is
possible that after a couple of years of work the wages become less important
for them. McClelland (1968) suggested that needs change over life as they are
shaped by peoples’ experience. The empirical evidence for this comes from
Kovach’s (1995) study where the importance of wages was lower in groups of
older employees and employees higher in the hierarchy. In the present study
there were no significant difference between students who had a job and those
who did not. The possible explanation for that might be that time of students’
service as employees was too short to change their expectations about work.

54

Kovach (1995) not only indicated the difference between age groups but also
between genders. In the research presented in this paper this difference also
occurred. Similarly to Kovach’s findings it was not statistically significant.
However, because a similar group of factors was more important for women
than for men in both studies the difference is worth to mention. Kovach
suggested that perhaps female employees are more interested in interpersonal
relations and communication than male employees. That has been confirmed in
the study of students. The factor that was not included in Kovach’s research –
Open communication, was in fact more important for female students than for
male students. The explanation for women’s interest in those particular factors
might be related to their orientation to work as a life role (Harpaz, 1990).

The questionnaire designed for the purpose of the research contained
questions that were not included in researches that were used as an inspiration
for own research. The question about the factors that motivate other people was
used to see if students give the same answers as in the question about
themselves. As results showed students from Poland chose exactly the same
top three factors in both questions. Students from ASB answered differently. As
three the most important factors that motivate other people they indicated Good
wages, Interesting Work and Job security while the most important factors that
motivate them were Interesting work, Good wages and Feeling of being well
informed and involved. Possible reason for that difference might be the fact that
some people tend to describe themselves in a socially desired way. In some
environments being motivated mostly by money can seen as not appropriate.
On the other hand, need to be well informed and involved is usually a sign of
strong commitment at work. This difference between ASB students’ opinions
about their own motivation and motivation of other people is definitely
interesting and should be investigated in future researches. Also findings from
the open-ended question might be used in the future. Factors mentioned by
students such as Good relations with co-workers, Fringe benefits and Fit of
company and personal values could be added to the list of motivation factors in
the questionnaire to check how important they are comparing to other factors.
The questionnaire that was given to students contained some additional
motivation factors that were not included in Kovach research (1980,1987,1995).

55

Although, none of them were ranked as one of the top factors according to
importance, they are still worth to mention. Freedom to plan and execute work
independently seems to be quite important for students from both groups. UG
students ranked it sixth and ASB students ranked it seventh. Also Open
communication was seen as moderately important factor (eighth and ninth
place). A good match between job requirements and abilities and experience
and Participation in goal setting were not very important for both groups of
students. ASB students ranked those factors slightly higher (ninth and eleventh
place) than UG students (twelfth and thirteenth place). The decision to add new
factors to the questionnaire was justified by theories of motivation. Research on
the particular group of respondents showed that students value motivation
factors related to their independence and to the way they communicate at work.
Less important for them is participation in operational decisions and match
between their skills and job requirements. The reason for low importance of
those two factors might be related to students’ flexibility and can-do attitude.

The research presented in this paper brings several implications for managers
and HR professionals. However, the results might be interpreted in many ways
according to different motivation theories. It has been found which motivation
factors are the most important for students from ASB and UG. The question that
can be asked is if all of those factors will lead to increased motivation and better
performance of future employees. Many authors of theories tried to find the right
order of fulfilling employees’ needs. According to Herzberg (1968, 1974) work
factors can be divided into two groups: satisfiers and dissatisfiers. The most
important factors chosen by students come from both categories. Interesting
work, Promotion and growth in the organization and Feeling of being well
informed and involved would be categorized as satisfiers. Good wages and Job
security as dissatisfiers. Those last factors according to Herzberg’s two factor
theory may lead to dissatisfaction of employees but not necessarily to their
stronger motivation. Therefore, they should be fulfilled before other factors.
Different approach should be taken according to Adam’s theory. Managers or
HR professionals responsible for motivating employees should firstly focus on
those factors that may lead to the feeling of inequity. In other words, from the
most important factors chosen by students’ Good wages, Promotion and growth

56

and Full appreciation of work done should be satisfied first to make sure that
employees are not dis-motivated by the existing inequity. Following Vroom’s
theory the attempt to motivate employees should begin with rewarding them for
the effort put in achieving organizational goals (Lindner, 1998). When students
in their future job see a direct relation between their hard work to achieve
company’s objectives and rewards such as money or possibility to work on
interesting tasks, they will be more motivated to perform well.

The variety of possible options of motivating employees and a large number of
theories that are in some points opposite might lead to confusion. Motivation is
a very complex phenomenon which can be approached from many different
angles. However, disregarding which theory is followed there are some clues for
managers and HR professionals that come from the results of the research
conducted for the aim of this thesis. The most relevant finding is that students
from ASB and UG thought that Interesting work and Good wages would be the
most important motivation factors in their future job. A good salary is definitely
powerful motivator as it satisfies many needs, starting from basic needs ending
at high order needs. It is also much easier to pay someone more than to make
his job interesting. However, interesting work seems to be also very important
for future business persons, so without any doubts this need should be satisfied
as well. The possible options of making job more interesting are based on job
design techniques. By job enlargement a number and variety of task could be
increased and a job itself might be seen as more interesting. Job enrichment
seems to be also a good way of motivating employees. Increasing employees’
responsibility not only could make a job more interesting but also might affect
the level of pay (Lindner, 1998). Obviously, HR departments that prepare
campaigns to attract students as well as managers who deal with freshly
graduated employees should remember not only about wages and interesting
work but also about other important factors indicated in this research. Besides
good salary and interesting work students seem to value being engaged in
company’s life and being appreciated and recognized. Therefore, organizations
should create environment that fulfills the needs of participation and belonging
and provides a possibility to demonstrate an effort that can be noticed and
rewarded.

57

6. Conclusion and future research

The aim of this paper is to find out which motivation factors are considered as
the most important by future business persons. The theoretical part of the thesis
showed that a nature of motivation is very complex and there are no simple
answers to the question what motivate employees. The results of the research
conducted in order to find and analyze factors that motivate students from two
business schools demonstrated that both intrinsic and extrinsic motivators are in
the top of the list. Those findings suggest that managers and HR professionals
who deal with students or fresh graduates should not base only on money as a
primary motivation tool. On the other hand, although non-monetary motivators
are definitely powerful, they are not likely to lead to the optimal performance if
they are the only source of motivation. The results of this research suggest that
the most appropriate motivation and reward system should try to satisfy a
variety of needs from more than one category. The perfect job for future
business person should be interesting and well paid. Moreover, the work
environment should create the feeling of involvement, appreciation and safety.
Perhaps there should be also a great chance for promotion. The described job
definitely would motivate employees to perform very well. Although, it might be
hard to offer a position that satisfies all those needs, organizations should be
aware of their existence. Companies can meet the challenge of attracting,
motivating and retaining employees by being prepared for a variety of the
expectations they have. The information gained from this paper might be a good
starting point for creating motivation systems for freshly graduated employees
as well as for planning recruitment campaigns focused on students from the
business schools.

In further research it should be determined whether findings from this study
would be confirmed in other business schools in Poland and Denmark.
Research on larger sample size would allow generalizing the findings to the
whole population of business students in those countries. Future research could
also consider other factors that might be motivating for students, such as a
good atmosphere at work, fringe benefits, fit of personal values and company
values. Finally, a longitude study that compare pre-employment attitudes toward
motivation factors with actual attitudes of the same respondents after a few

58

years of employment would show how the expectations about own motivation
turn into a real behavior and evolve during a career.

59

7.Bibliography

Agrawal, S. (2010). Motivation and Executive Compensation. The IUP Journal
of CorporateGovernance , Vol. 9, Nov. 1 & 2, 27-46.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes , Vol. 50, 179-211.

Allender, H., & Allender, J. (1998). Identifying the right management job for you.
Industrial Management , Mar/Apr98, Vol. 40 Issue 2, 29-31.

Armstrong, M. (2007). Employee Reward Managemend and Practice. London
and Philadelphia: Kogan Page.

Armstrong, M., & Murlis, H. (2004). Reward management : a handbook of
remuneration strategy and practice. London: Kogan Page.

Bailey, J., & Clegg, S. (ed). (2008). International Encyclopedia of Organization
Studies. Sage Publications, Inc.

Bjorklund, C. (2001). Work Motivation - Studies of its Determinants and
Outcomes. Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics, EFI, The Economic
Research Institute.

Bu, N., & Mckeen, C. (2001). Work goals among male and female business
students in Canada and China: the effects of culture and gender. International
Journal of Human Resource Management , Mar2001, Vol. 12 Issue 2, 166-183.

Carrell, M., & Dittrich, J. (1978). Equity Theory: The Recent Literature,
Methodological Considerations, and New Directions. Academy of Management
Review , Apr78, Vol. 3 Issue 2, 202-210.

Condly, S., Clark, R., & Stolovitch, H. (2008). The Effect of Incentives on
Workplace Performance : A meta-analytic Review of Research Studies.
Performance Improvement Quaterly , Volume 16 Issue 3, 46 - 63.

Czaja, R., & Blair, J. (2005). Designing surveys : a guide to decisions and
procedures. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Pine Forge Press.

Deci, E., & Gagne, M. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation.
Journal of Organizational Behavior , Jun2005, Vol. 26 Issue 4, 331-362.

Dewhurst, M., Guthridge, M., & Mohr, E. (2009). Motivating people: Getting

beyond money. McKinsey Quarterly ,

http://www.mckinseyquarterly.com/Motivating_people_Getting_beyond_money_
2460, visited May 25th 2010

Fincham, R., & Rhodes, P. (2005). Principles of Organizational Behaviour. New
York: Oxford University Press Inc.

60

Frey, B., & Osterloch, M. (2002). Succesful Managment by Motivation -
Balancing Intrinsic and Extrinsic Incentives. Zurich: Springer.

Harpaz, I. (1990). The importance of work goals: an international perspective.
Journal of International Business Studies , Vol. 21 Issue 1, 75-93.

Herzberg, F. (1974). Motivation-Hygiene Profiles: Pinpointing what ails the
organization. Organizational Dynamics , Autumn, Vol. 3 Issue 2, 18-29.

Herzberg, F. (1968). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard
Business Review , Jan/Feb68, Vol. 46 Issue 1, 53-63.

Kinnear, L., & Sutherland, M. (2000). Determinants of organisational
commitment amongst knowledge workers. South African Journal of Business
Management , Sep2000, Vol. 31 Issue 3, 106-113.

Kovach, K. (1995). Employee motivation: Addressing a crucial factor in you
organization's performance. Employment Relations Today , Summer1995, Vol.
22 Issue 2, 93-107.

Kovach, K. (1987). What Motivates Employees? Workers and Supervisors Give
Different Answers. Business Horizons , Sep/Oct87, Vol. 30 Issue 5, 58-66.

Kovach, K. (1980). Why motivational theories don't work. Advanced
Management Journal , Spring80, Vol. 45 Issue 2, 54-60.

Latham, G., & Ernst, C. (2006). Keys to motivating tomorrow’s workforce.
Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 16 , 181-198.

Lawler, E. (1969). Job Design and Employees Motivation. Personnel
Psychology , Winter69, Vol. 22 Issue 4, 426-435.

Lim, V., Srivastava, A., & Si Sng, Q. (2008). Money motives, achievement
orientation, and motivation to work among youths. Journal of International
Business and Economics , Vol 8, No 3, 104-111.

Lindner, J. (1998). Understanding Employee Motivation. Journal of Extension ,
Jun98, Volume 36, Number 3 ,Research in Brief , www.joe.org, visited May 27th
2010.

Locke, E., & Latham, G. (2002). Building a Practically Useful Theory of Goal
Setting and Task Motivation. American Psychologist , Sep2002, Vol. 57 Issue 9,
705-717.

Locke, E., & Latham, G. (1979). Goal Setting - A Motivational Technique That
Works. Organizational Dynamics , Autumn79, Vol. 8 Issue 2, 68-80.

Locke, E., & Latham, G. (1990). Work Motivation and Satisfaction: Light at the
End of the Tunnel. Psychological Science , Jul90, Vol. 1 Issue 4, 240-246.

61

Lu, L. (1999). Work Motivation, Job Stress and Employees' Well-being. Journal
of Applied Management Studies , Jun99, Vol. 8 Issue 1, 61-63.

Luthans, F., & Stajkovic, A. (1999). Reinforce for performance: The need to go
beyond pay and even rewards. Academy of Management Executive; , May99,
Vol. 13 Issue 2, 49-57.

Luthans, F., & Stajkovic, A. (2000, April 1). The Impact of Recognition on
EmployeePerformance
http://www.sba.muohio.edu/management/MWAcademy/2000/, visited June 6th
2010.

Maritz Pool Survey. (2005). http://www.maritz.com/, visited June 19th 2010.

Mathauer, I., & Imhoff, I. (2006). Health worker motivation in Africa: the role of
non-financial incentives and human resource management tools. Human
Resources for Health , http://www.human-resources-health.com/content/4/1/24,
visited June 2nd 2010.

Mayfield, J. R., Mayfield, M. P., & Kopf, J. (1998). The Effects of Leader
Motivating Language on Subordinate Performance and Satisfaction. Human
Resource Management, , Fall/Winter98, Vol. 37 Issue 3/4, 235-244, visited 19th
May 2010.

Mc Clelland, D. (1990). Human Motivation. New Yotk: Press Syndicate of the
University of Cambridge.

Mc Clelland, D. (1968). Money as a motivator - Some research insights. The
McKinsey Quaterly , Feb68, Vol. 57 Issue 2, 23-28.

McCall, M., & Lawler, E. (1976). High School Students' Perceptions of Work.
Academy of Management Journal , Mar1976, Vol. 19 Issue 1, 17-24.

McClelland, D., & Burnham, D. (1976). Power is the great motivator. Harvard
Business Review , Mar/Apr76, Vol. 54 Issue 2, 100-110.

Miles, E. (1996). Job level as a systemic variable in predicting the relationship
between supervisory communication and job satisfaction. Journal of
Occupational & Organizational Psychology , Sep96, Vol. 69 Issue 3, 277-292,
16.

Miner, J. (2006). Organizational Behavior 1 : Essential Theories of Motivation
and Leadership. New York: M.E. Sharpe, Inc.

Oldham, G., & Hackman, R. (2010). Not what it was and not what it will be: The
future of job design research. Journal of Organizational Behavior , Feb2010,
Vol. 31 Issue 2/3, 463-479.

62

Pinder, C. (1998). Work Motivation in Organizational Behavior. New Jersey:
Prentice Hall.
Reif, W. (1975). Intrinsic versus extrinsic rewards: Resolving the controversy.
Human Resource Management , Summer75, Vol. 14, Issue 2, 2-10.
Roche, W., & MacKinnon, N. (1970). Motivating people with meaningful work.
Harvard Business Review , May/Jun70, Vol. 48 Issue 3, 97-110.
Rungtusanatham, M., & Anderson, J. (1996). A clarification on conceptual and
methodological issues related to the Job Characteristics Model. Journal of
Operations Management; , Nov96, Vol. 14 Issue 4, 357-367.
Rynes, S., Gerhart, B., & Minette, K. (2004). The importance of pay in employee
motivation: discrepancies in what people say and what they do. Human
Resource Management , Vol.43, No.4, 381-394.
Sagan, M., Tomkiewicz, J., Adeyemi-Bello, T., & Frankel, R. (2008). Importance
of Job Characteristics among Future Businesspersons: A Comparative Study of
Russian and Polish Students. International Journal of Management , Dec2008,
Vol. 25 Issue 4, 641-653.
Sonawane, P. (2008). Non-monetary Rewards: Employee Choices &
Organizational Practices. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations , Oct2008, Vol.
44 Issue 2, 256-271.
Tharenou, P. (1993). A test of reciprocal causality for absenteeism. Journal of
Organizational Behavior , May93, Vol. 14 Issue 3, 269-287.
Vroom, V. (1964). Work and Motivation. Malabar, Florida: Robert E. Krieger
Publishing Company.

63

8. Appendix

QUESTIONNAIRE IN ENGLISH

Dear fellow students
In the course of my Master Thesis project, I would like to ask you to fill a short questionnaire
about factors that will motivate you in your future job (or motivate you if you already have one).
Your answers are anonymous and confidential. It will take no more than 3 minutes to complete
the questionnaire.

1. Gender:
Male
Female

2. How old are you?

3. What is your nationality?

4. Do you already have a study related job?
Yes
No

5. Please rank the following factors in order of how each one will motivate you in
your future job or motivates you if you already have a study related job.
(Where 1 = Most, 13 = Least)
Job security
Interesting work
Personal loyalty to employees from your superiors
Good wages
Good working conditions (such as light, temperature, cleanliness, low noise level)
Promotion and growth in the organization
Tactful discipline from your superiors
Full appreciation of work done
Open communication
Feeling of being well informed and involved
Freedom to plan and execute work independently
A good match between your job requirements and your abilities and experience

Participation in goal setting

6. If there is any other factor that you find motivating at work please state it here:
……………………………………………………………………………………………………
……

7. What are three the most important factors that motivate other people?
(Please mark them using X)

Job security
Interesting work
Personal loyalty to employees from superiors
Good wages
Good working conditions (such as light, temperature, cleanliness, low noise level)
Promotion and growth in the organization
Tactful discipline from superiors
Full appreciation of work done
Open communication
Feeling of being well informed and involved
Freedom to plan and execute work independently
A good match between job requirements and abilities and experience
Participation in goal setting

Your help is very much appreciated. Thank you for your support.

QUESTIONNAIRE IN POLISH

Drogie koleżanki i koledzy!
W ramach badania bedącego elementem mojej pracy magisterskiej, chciałbym
poprosić Was o wypełnienie krótkiego kwestionariusza dotyczącego czynników, które
będą motywowały Was w pracy po studiach (lub już motywują, jeśli pracę posiadacie)
Wasze odpowiedzi są anonimowe. Wypełnienie kwestionariusza zajmie około 3 minut.

1. Płeć:
Mężczyzna
Kobieta

2. Wiek

3. Czy masz pracę związaną z kierunkiem twoich studiów?
Tak
Nie

4. Proszę poukładaj poniższe czynniki w kolejności od najbardziej
motywującego do najmniej motywującego.
(gdzie 1=Najbardziej motywujący……. 13=Najmniej motywujący)
Gwarancja stałego zatrudnienia
Ciekawa praca
Lojalność pracodawcy wobec pracownika
Dobre zarobki
Dobre warunki pracy (oświetlenie, czystość, temperatura, poziom hałasu)
Możliwość osobistego rozwoju i doskonalenia zawodowego
Życzliwość przełożonego
Docenianie osiągnięć przez pracodawcę
Otwarta komunikacja w firmie
Poczucie zaangażowania i pełnego uczestnictwa w działaniach firmy
Możliwość samodzielnego planowania i wykonywania pracy

Dobre dopasowanie stawianych wymagań do umiejętności i doświadczenia
Współudział w ustalaniu celów

5. Jeśli na powyższej liście nie znalazłeś czynnika, który uważasz za
motywujący podaj go tu:
……………………………………………………………………………………………
……………

6. Jakie 3 czynniki najczęściej motywują ludzi?
(Zaznacz X)

Gwarancja stałego zatrudnienia
Ciekawa praca
Lojalność pracodawcy wobec pracownika
Dobre zarobki
Dobre warunki pracy (oświetlenie, czystość, temperatura, poziom hałasu)
Możliwość osobistego rozwoju i doskonalenia zawodowego
Życzliwość przełożonego
Docenianie osiągnięć przez pracodawcę
Otwarta komunikacja w firmie
Poczucie zaangażowania i pełnego uczestnictwa w działaniach firmy
Możliwość samodzielnego planowania i wykonywania pracy
Dobre dopasowanie stawianych wymagań do umiejętności i doświadczenia
Współudział w ustalaniu celów

Dziękuję za pomoc!