CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 113Public Policy and Administration ResearchJob Satisfaction and Organizational BehaviorEmployee Performance and Management

Only When the Societal Impact Potential Is High? A Panel Study of the Relationship Between Public Service Motivation and Perceived Performance

Open access
van Loon, Nina, Kjeldsen, Anne Mette, Andersen, Lotte Bøgh, Vandenabeele, Wouter, Leisink, Peter·2018·Review of Public Personnel Administration
DOI 10.1177/0734371x16639111PMC PMC5946672
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Many studies find positive associations between public service motivation (PSM) and performance, but much of this literature is based on cross-sectional data prone to endogeneity and common method bias. Moreover, we know little about potential moderators. In this study, we test the moderating role of societal impact potential (SIP)—the degree to which the job is perceived to provide opportunities to contribute to society. We use cross-sectional data from 13,967 employees in 2010 and 2012 aggregated to construct longitudinal data for 42 organizations. As expected, the association between PSM and individual perceived performance is positive when SIP is high. However, when SIP is low, PSM is only weakly or not at all related to performance. This is an important insight for organizations that try to enhance performance through PSM. Our findings suggest that this can only be done when the employees think that their jobs allow them to contribute to society.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0734371x16639111

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • It is important to perceive that you can give a societal contribution in your job.

    “This quote also suggests that it is important to perceive that you can give a societal contribution in your job ('you feel that you can contribute'), and this actually substantiates quantitative findings in the literature concerning the importance of perceived societal impact (e.g. van Loon et al. 2016).”

    From Leadership and motivation: a qualitative study of transformational leadership and public service motivation (2018) · cites this paper as van Loon et al. 2016

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 88 · Cited by 113

Research works printed but not linked: 66

  1. Alonso P. Lewis G. B. (2001). Public service motivation and job performance: Evidence from the federal sector. American Review of Public Administration, 31, 363- 380.
  2. Andersen L. B. Heinesen E. Pedersen L. H. (2014). How does public service motivation among teachers affect student performance in schools? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24, 651- 671.
  3. Andersen L. B. Pallesen T. Pedersen L. H. (2011). Does ownership matter? Public service motivation among physiotherapists in the private and public sectors in Denmark. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 31, 10- 27.
  4. Andrews R. Boyne G. A. Walker R. M. (2006). Subjective and objective measures of organizational performance: An empirical exploration. In Boyne A. Meier K. J. O’Toole L. J. Walker R. M. (Eds.), Public service performance (pp. 14- 34). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Andrews R. Boyne G. A. Walker R. M. (2011). The impact of management on administrative and survey measures of organizational performance. Public Management Review, 13, 227- 255.
  6. Behn R. D. (2003). Why measure performance? Different purposes require different measures. Public Administration Review, 63, 586- 606.
  7. Bell S. T. (2007). Deep-level composition variables as predictors of team performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 595- 615. 17484544
  8. Bellé N. (2013). Experimental evidence on the relationship between public service motivation and job performance. Public Administration Review, 73, 143- 153.
  9. Bellé N. (2014). Leading to make a difference: A field experiment on the performance effects of transformational leadership, perceived social impact, and public service motivation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 24, 109- 136.
  10. Bellé N. Ongaro E. (2014). NPM, administrative reforms and public service motivation: Improving the dialogue between research agendas. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 80, 382- 400.
  11. Brænder M. Andersen L. B. (2013). Does deployment to war affect public service motivation? A panel study of soldiers before and after their service in Afghanistan. Public Administration Review, 73, 466- 477.
  12. Brewer G. A. (2006). All measures of performance are subjective: More evidence on US federal agencies. In Boyne G. A. Meier K. J. O’Toole L. J. Walker R. M. (Eds.), Public service performance (pp. 35- 54). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  13. Brewer G. A. (2008). Employee and organizational performance. In Perry J. L. Hondeghem A. (Eds.), Motivation in public management: The call of public service (pp. 136- 156). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
  14. Brewer G. A. Brewer G. A. Jr. (2011). Parsing public/private differences in work motivation and performance: An experimental study. Journal of Public Administration Research and Practice, 21, i347- i362.
  15. Brewer G. A. Selden S. C. (2000). Why elephants gallop: Assessing and predicting organizational performance in federal agencies. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10, 685- 711.
  16. Bright L. (2007). Does person-organization fit mediate the relationship between public service motivation and the job performance of public employees? Review of Public Personnel Administration, 27, 361- 379.
  17. Bright L. (2008). Does public service motivation really make a difference on the job satisfaction and turnover intentions of public employees? The American Review of Public Administration, 38, 149- 166.
  18. Byrne B. M. (2012). Structural equation modeling with Mplus. New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
  19. Cameron A. C. Trivedi P. K. (2009). Microeconometrics using Stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
  20. Chan D. (1998). Functional relations among constructs in the same content domain at different levels of analysis: A typology of composition models. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 234- 246.
  21. Christensen R. K. Wright B. E. (2011). The effects of public service motivation on job choice decisions: Disentangling the contributions of person-organization fit and person-job fit. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21, 723- 743.
  22. Deci E. L. Ryan R. M. (Eds.). (2004). Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.
  23. DiIulio J. D. (1994). Principles agents: The cultural bases of behavior in a federal government bureaucracy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 4, 277- 318.
  24. Edwards J. R. Shipp A. J. (2007). The relationship between person-environment fit and outcomes: An integrative theoretical framework. In Ostroff C. Judge T. A. (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational fit (pp. 209- 258). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  25. Favero N. Bullock J. B. (2014). How (not) to solve the problem: An evaluation of scholarly responses to common source bias. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25, 285- 308.
  26. Giauque D. Anderfuhren-Biget S. Varone F. (2013). Stress perception in public organisations: Expanding the job demands-job resources model by including public service motivation. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 33, 58- 83.
  27. Gould-Williams J. S. Mostafa A. M. S. Bottomley P. (2015). Public service motivation and employee outcomes in the Egyptian public sector: Testing the mediating effect of person-organization fit. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25, 597- 622.
  28. Grant A. M. (2008). Employees without a cause: The motivational effects of prosocial impact in public service. International Public Management Journal, 11, 48- 66.
  29. Houston D. J. (2011). Implications of occupational locus and focus for public service motivation: Attitudes toward work motives across nations. Public Administration Review, 71, 761- 771.
  30. Hu L. Bentler P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1- 55.
  31. Jacobsen C. B. Hvitved J. Andersen L. B. (2014). Command and motivation: How the perception of external interventions relates to intrinsic motivation and public service motivation. Public Administration, 92, 790- 806. doi: 10.1111/padm12024 · DOI
  32. Jakobsen M. L. Kjeldsen A. M. Pallesen T. (2017). Loyal agents or saboteurs? Performance increasing policies and public service motivation among hospital workers in Denmark. In Meier K. J. Rutherford A. Avellaneda C. (Eds.), Comparative public management: Why context matters in public administration (pp. 130- 153). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
  33. Kim S. (2005). Individual-level factors and organizational performance in government organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, 245- 261.
  34. Kim S. (2006). Public service motivation and organizational citizenship behavior in Korea. International Journal of Manpower, 27, 722- 740.
  35. Kim S. (2012). Does person-organization fit matter in the public sector? Testing the mediating effect of person-organization fit in the relationship between public service motivation and work attitudes. Public Administration Review, 72, 830- 840.
  36. Kjeldsen A. M. Jacobsen C. B. (2012). Public service motivation and employment sector: Attraction or socialization? Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23, 899- 926.
  37. Kline R. B. (2010). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  38. Lazear E. P. Gibbs M. (2009). Personnel economics in practice (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
  39. Leisink P. L. M. Steijn B. (2009). Public service motivation and job performance of public sector employees in the Netherlands. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75, 35- 52.
  40. March J. G. Olsen J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions. New York, NY: Free Press.
  41. Meier K. J. O’Toole L. J. (2013). Subjective organizational performance and measurement error: Common source bias and spurious relationships. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 23, 429- 456. doi: 10.1093/jopart/mus057 · DOI
  42. Meyer B. Schermuly C. C. (2012). When beliefs are not enough: Examining the interaction of diversity faultlines, task motivation, and diversity beliefs on team performance. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 21, 456- 487.
  43. Moynihan D. P. Pandey S. K. (2007). The role of organizations in fostering public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 67, 40- 53.
  44. Perry J. L. (1996). Measuring public service motivation: An assessment of construct reliability and validity. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 6, 5- 22.
  45. Perry J. L. (2000). Bringing society in: Toward a theory of public-service motivation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 10, 471- 488.
  46. Perry J. L. Mesch D. Paarlberg L. (2006). Motivating employees in a new governance era: The performance paradigm revisited. Public Administration Review, 66, 505- 514.
  47. Perry J. L. Vandenabeele W. V. (2008). Behavioral dynamics: Institutions, identities and self-regulation. In Perry J. L. Hondeghem A. (Eds.), Motivation in public management (pp. 56- 79). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  48. Perry J. L. Wise L. R. (1990). The motivational bases of public service. Public Administration Review, 75, 53- 78.
  49. Podsakoff P. M. Ahearne M. MacKenzie S. B. (1997). Organizational citizenship behavior and the quantity and quality of work group performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 262- 270. 9109284
  50. Rabe-Hesketh S. Skrondal A. (2008). Multilevel and longitudinal modeling using Stata (2nd ed.). College Station, TX: Stata Press.
  51. Rainey H. G. (2003). Understanding and managing public organizations (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  52. Ritz A. (2009). Public service motivation and organizational performance in Swiss federal government. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75, 53- 78.
  53. Smith C. A. Organ D. W. Near J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behavior: Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 653- 663.
  54. Stritch J. M. Christensen R. K. (2014). Looking at a job’s social impact through PSM-tinted lenses: Probing the motivation-perception relationship. Public Administration, 92, 826- 842. doi: 10.1111/padm.12043. · DOI
  55. Taylor J. (2008). Organizational influences, public service motivation and work outcomes: An Australian study. International Public Management Journal, 11, 67- 88.
  56. Taylor J. (2014). Public service motivation, relational job design, and job satisfaction in local government. Public Administration, 92, 902- 918. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9299.2012.02108.x · DOI
  57. Vandenabeele W. (2007). Toward a public administration theory of public service motivation. Public Management Review, 9, 545- 556.
  58. Vandenabeele W. (2008). Development of a public service motivation measurement scale: Corroborating and extending Perry’s measurement instrument. International Public Management Journal, 11, 143- 167.
  59. Vandenabeele W. (2009). The mediating effect of job satisfaction and organizational commitment on self-reported performance: More robust evidence of the PSM-performance relationship. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 75, 11- 34.
  60. Vandenabeele W. (2013, 11 14-16). Further integration of public service motivation theory and self-determination theory: Concepts and antecedents. IIAS conference “One Step Beyond—Refining Public Service Motivation Theory and Research Methods,” Utrecht University, the Netherlands.
  61. Verbeek M. (2008). A guide to modern econometrics (3rd ed.). West Sussex, UK: John Wiley.
  62. Walker R. M. Andrews R. (2015). Local government management and performance: A review of evidence. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25, 101- 133.
  63. Warren D. C. Chen L. (2013). The relationship between public service motivation and performance. In Ringquist E. J. (Ed.), Meta-analysis for public management and policy (pp. 442- 474). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  64. Williams L. J. Anderson S. E. (1991). Job satisfaction and organizational commitment as predictors of organizational citizenship and in-role behaviors. Journal of Management, 17, 601- 617.
  65. Wooldridge J. M. (2013). Introductory econometrics: A modern approach (5th international ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.
  66. Wright B. E. Grant A. M. (2010). Unanswered questions about public service motivation: Designing research to address key issues of emergence and effects. Public Administration Review, 70, 691- 700.

Authors
van Loon, N., Kjeldsen, A. M., Andersen, L. B., Vandenabeele, W., & Leisink, P.
Affiliations
  • Utrecht University, The Netherlands
  • Aarhus University (DK)
  • Utrecht University (NL)
ORCID
Venue
Review of Public Personnel Administration
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2016-04-06
Volume
38
Issue
2
Pages
139-166
ISSN
  • 0734-371X (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-759X
DOI
10.1177/0734371x16639111
PMC
PMC5946672
OpenAlex
W2335300848
Cited by
113
References
88
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 1
FWCI
24.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Review of Public Personnel Administration (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (40410092)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Public Administration › Public Policy and Administration Research
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Job Satisfaction and Organizational Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Employee Performance and Management
Keywords
public service motivation, perceived performance, moderating effect, employee performance, public sector employees, job meaning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review