A profile approach to self-determination theory motivations at work

Studies inspired by Self-Determination Theory have typically identified three to five profile groups.

“In general, and regardless of the field of study (i.e., psychology applied to sports, education, or job relations), studies inspired by the SDT have typically identified three to five profile groups”

Among the most commonly identified motivation profile groups are a profile with high extrinsic and low intrinsic motivation, one with low extrinsic and low intrinsic motivation, one with high extrinsic and high intrinsic motivation, and another with low extrinsic and high intrinsic motivation.

“Among the most commonly identified groups are a profile with high extrinsic and low intrinsic motivation, one with low extrinsic and low intrinsic motivation, one with high extrinsic and high intrinsic motivation, and another with low extrinsic and high intrinsic motivation.”

Profiles with high intrinsic motivations had more favorable results than those with high extrinsic motivations.

“According to their findings, profiles with high intrinsic motivations had more favorable results than those with high extrinsic motivations.”

The self-determined cluster and the motivated cluster had more favorable results than the low autonomy cluster, which presented the worst scores.

“Findings showed that the self-determined cluster and the motivated cluster had more favorable results than the low autonomy cluster, which presented the worst scores.”

Moran and colleagues arrived at a five-profile solution that presented differences regarding individuals' needs for satisfaction, job performance, and work environment perceptions.

“Moran and colleagues [39] arrived at a five-profile solution that presented differences regarding the individuals’ needs for satisfaction, job performance, and work environment perceptions.”

Some studies identify a moderate or medium motivation profile representing individuals who scored moderately on all types of motivation.

“Some studies also identify a moderate or medium motivation profile [31,39], which represents individuals that scored moderately on all types of motivation”

Intrinsic motivations seem to have a buffering effect on extrinsic motivation: the negative effect of extrinsic motivation diminishes in the presence of more intrinsic motivations.

“In the end, intrinsic motivations seem to have a buffering effect on the extrinsic motivation: the negative effect of this motivation diminishes in the presence of more intrinsic ones.”

If a worker identifies with his/her work and/or really enjoys performing it, the motivation coming from earnings may be secondary.

“If a worker identifies himself/herself with his/her work and/or really enjoys performing it, the motivation coming from the earnings may be secondary [39].”

The five profile groups identified do not present the same characteristics as those found in earlier profile studies.

“However, the five profile groups identified in the present sample do not present the same characteristics as those found in earlier profile studies [31,32,33,39].”

The study found a buffering effect, meaning the presence of intrinsic motivations can attenuate the negative effect of extrinsic motivations on the individual's self-determination.

“As in the outcomes and construction of work motivation profiles of Moran and colleagues [39], Van den Broeck and colleagues [38], and Sobral and colleagues [42], we also found a buffering effect, meaning that the presence of intrinsic motivations can attenuate the negative effect of the extrinsic motivations on the individual’s self-determination.”

Person-centered studies have shown that controlled forms of motivation may sometimes be associated with positive outcomes, but only when accompanied by high levels of autonomous motivation.

“Even more precisely, person-centered studies have shown that controlled forms of motivation may sometimes be associated with positive outcomes, but only when accompanied by high levels of autonomous motivation (e.g., Gillet, Becker et al., 2017;Moran et al., 2012), underscoring the importance of studying behavioral regulations in combination.”

Some of these studies have also supported the importance of differentiating among more specific types of regulation by identifying profiles characterized by differentiated levels of introjected and external regulations.

“Some of these studies (Gillet, Becker et al., 2017;Moran et al., 2012) have also supported the importance of differentiating among more specific types of regulation by the identification of profiles characterized by differentiated levels of introjected and external regulations.”

Previous studies have shown that profiles characterized by high autonomous motivation but low controlled motivation and amotivation tended to be associated with the most positive work outcomes, whereas profiles characterized by low autonomous motivation coupled with higher controlled motivation and amotivation tended to be associated with the worst outcomes.

“Consistent with these SDT predictions (Deci & Ryan, 2000;Ryan & Deci, 2017), previous studies (Moran et al., 2012;Van den Broeck et al., 2013) have shown that profiles characterized by high levels of autonomous motivation but low levels of controlled motivation and amotivation tended to be associated with the most positive work outcomes, whereas profiles characterized by low levels of autonomous”

The Value-Reward Self-Driven profile shares similarities with the Moderate Autonomous/Introjected/External profile identified by Gillet et al. (2018), with the Moderate profile identified by Gillet, Becker et al. (2017) and Moran et al. (2012), and with the Moderately Motivated profile identified by Jansen in de Wal et al. (2014).

“The Value-Reward Self-Driven profile was found to share similarities with the Moderate Autonomous/Introjected/External profile identified by Gillet et al. (2018), with the Moderate profile identified by Gillet, Becker et al. (2017) and Moran et al. (2012), and with the Moderately Motivated profile identified by Jansen in de Wal et al. (2014).”

The Externally Driven profile shares similarities with the Externally Regulated profile identified by Jansen in de Wal et al. (2014), with the Low Autonomy profile identified by Moran et al. (2012), and with the Poorly Motivated profile identified by Fernet et al. (2020).

“the last profile displayed a less desirable, Externally Driven, configuration, and shared similarities with the Externally Regulated profile identified by Jansen in de Wal et al. (2014), with the Low Autonomy profile identified by Moran et al. (2012), and with the Poorly Motivated profile identified by Fernet et al. (2020).”