一个警世故事:关于在实践中采用自我决定理论的原则

IF 7 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS Journal of Management Studies Pub Date : 2024-05-29 DOI:10.1111/joms.13112
Jason D. Shaw
{"title":"一个警世故事:关于在实践中采用自我决定理论的原则","authors":"Jason D. Shaw","doi":"10.1111/joms.13112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Self‐determination theory (SDT) continues to be among the most popular need‐based theories of motivation in psychology and the organizational sciences. In their interesting and wide‐ranging work, Gagné and Hewett (2024, this issue) contrast the assumptions and presumed mechanisms of SDT with the restrictive assumptions of agency theory. They also offer several suggestions for implementing SDT principles in practice, business school curricula, and public policy. In this counterpoint, I highlight areas of agreement with the authors, but also offer thoughts on SDT limitations and blind spots. My conclusion is a large‐scale adoption of SDT – to the exclusion or minimization of other views – would not be advisable. I base this conclusion on the logic that needs vary in importance across individuals and needs are broader than those encompassed by SDT. Moreover, scholars and practitioners should embrace the notion that factors beyond the needs in SDT (e.g., values, fairness, quasi‐rational calculations, and rewards) also play important roles in determining motivation.","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Cautionary Tale: On the Adoption of Self‐Determination Theory Principles for Practice\",\"authors\":\"Jason D. Shaw\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/joms.13112\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Self‐determination theory (SDT) continues to be among the most popular need‐based theories of motivation in psychology and the organizational sciences. In their interesting and wide‐ranging work, Gagné and Hewett (2024, this issue) contrast the assumptions and presumed mechanisms of SDT with the restrictive assumptions of agency theory. They also offer several suggestions for implementing SDT principles in practice, business school curricula, and public policy. In this counterpoint, I highlight areas of agreement with the authors, but also offer thoughts on SDT limitations and blind spots. My conclusion is a large‐scale adoption of SDT – to the exclusion or minimization of other views – would not be advisable. I base this conclusion on the logic that needs vary in importance across individuals and needs are broader than those encompassed by SDT. Moreover, scholars and practitioners should embrace the notion that factors beyond the needs in SDT (e.g., values, fairness, quasi‐rational calculations, and rewards) also play important roles in determining motivation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48445,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Management Studies\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Management Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13112\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Management Studies","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13112","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自我决定理论(SDT)仍然是心理学和组织科学中最流行的以需求为基础的动机理论之一。Gagné 和 Hewett(2024 年,本期)在其有趣而广泛的著作中,将 SDT 的假设和假定机制与代理理论的限制性假设进行了对比。他们还为在实践中、商学院课程和公共政策中实施 SDT 原则提出了若干建议。在这篇反驳文章中,我强调了与作者观点一致的地方,同时也对 SDT 的局限性和盲点提出了自己的看法。我的结论是,大规模采用 SDT--排斥或尽量减少其他观点--是不可取的。我之所以得出这样的结论,是因为不同个体的需求在重要性上存在差异,而且需求的范围比 SDT 所涵盖的范围更广。此外,学者和从业人员应该接受这样一种观念,即除 SDT 中的需求之外,其他因素(如价值观、公平、准理性计算和奖励)也在决定动机方面发挥着重要作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Cautionary Tale: On the Adoption of Self‐Determination Theory Principles for Practice
Self‐determination theory (SDT) continues to be among the most popular need‐based theories of motivation in psychology and the organizational sciences. In their interesting and wide‐ranging work, Gagné and Hewett (2024, this issue) contrast the assumptions and presumed mechanisms of SDT with the restrictive assumptions of agency theory. They also offer several suggestions for implementing SDT principles in practice, business school curricula, and public policy. In this counterpoint, I highlight areas of agreement with the authors, but also offer thoughts on SDT limitations and blind spots. My conclusion is a large‐scale adoption of SDT – to the exclusion or minimization of other views – would not be advisable. I base this conclusion on the logic that needs vary in importance across individuals and needs are broader than those encompassed by SDT. Moreover, scholars and practitioners should embrace the notion that factors beyond the needs in SDT (e.g., values, fairness, quasi‐rational calculations, and rewards) also play important roles in determining motivation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.40
自引率
5.70%
发文量
99
期刊介绍: The Journal of Management Studies is a prestigious publication that specializes in multidisciplinary research in the field of business and management. With a rich history of excellence, we are dedicated to publishing innovative articles that contribute to the advancement of management and organization studies. Our journal welcomes empirical and conceptual contributions that are relevant to various areas including organization theory, organizational behavior, human resource management, strategy, international business, entrepreneurship, innovation, and critical management studies. We embrace diversity and are open to a wide range of methodological approaches and philosophical perspectives.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information - Notes for Contributors Issue Information Issue Information - Notes for Contributors Business, Conflict, and Peace: A Systematic Literature Review and Conceptual Framework
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1