A Strategy for Building Public Service Motivation Research Internationally

Author(s): Sangmook Kim and Wouter Vandenabeele

Source: Public Administration Review, Vol. 70, No. 5 (September|October 2010), pp. 701-709
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the American Society for Public Administration
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40802367
Accessed: 07-03-2017 07:44 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted
digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about
JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://about.jstor.org/terms

American Society for Public Administration, Wiley are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,
preserve and extend access to Public Administration Review

This content downloaded from 175.45.191.253 on Tue, 07 Mar 2017 07:44:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Sangmook Kim
Seoul National University of Technology
Wouter Vandenabeele

Utrecht University and Katholieke Universiteit Leuven

A Strategy for Building Public Service Motivation Research

Symposium on
Public Service
Internationally
Motivation
Research

As public service motivation research grows qualitatively
and quantitatively, some scholars question its
appropriateness for international applications. This
tions of those involved in delivering public services. Sangmook Kim s a professor of public
administration at Seoul National University
of Technology, Korea. His research interests
In the past two decades, scholars have built on this are public service motivation, organizational

essay sets out a strategy of convergence for international foundation, and PSM has been related to organiza- behavior, human resources management,

public management reform, and gender-

research and measurement approaches. Studies that tional attractiveness, performance, job satisfaction, related issues.
assess commonalities in public organizational commitment, E-mail: smook@snut.ac.kr
service motivation content
and whistle blowing, among
internationally are analyzed The research on [public service
other factors; thus, it is associ- Wouter Vandenabeele is an assistant
in order to develop a broader motivation (PSM)] can be ated with many organizationalprofessor of human resource management
at Utrecht University, the Netherlands, and
conceptual and more operational
summarized as pertaining processes
to (Perry and Hon- a Research Foundation-Flanders research

definition as well as consequently deghem

six main themes: the construct 2008a). The research fellow at Katholieke Universiteit Leuven,

a more universal public service on PSM can be summarized as Belgium. His research interests include the

motivation construct. Public and its measurement, incidence,

pertaining to six main themes:
motivation of public servants and public

service motivation, organizational behavior,

service motives, according to this antecedents, outcomes,the construct and its measure- and strategic human resource management.

organizational
review, are based on self-sacrifice ment, incidence, antecedents,
systems, and His work has been published in Public

Administration, Public Management Review,

and fall into three categories: outcomes,
interaction with other types of organizational International Public Management Journal,
instrumental, value-based, and motivation. systems, and interaction with and the International Review of Administra-

tive Sciences.
identification. The dimensions other types of motivation. The
E-mail: wouter.vandenabeeleOsoc.
of the public service motivation state of theory and research on kuleuven.be

construct are refined along the lines of attraction to publicPSM is well reviewed in the volume Motivation in
participation, commitment to public values, compassion, Public Management: The Call of Public Service (Perry
and self-sacrifice. Researchers are urged to include all of and Hondeghem 2008a), but research is still evolving
its dimensions within their empirical studies to advance and the number of studies is increasing.
contemporary public service motivation studies.
The initial research on PSM began in the United
term "public service motivation" (PSM) States (Perry and Wise 1990; Rainey 1982), but schol-
was first used in 1982 as a way to express the ars in many countries have found the construct useful
specific motivation associated with public ser- (Kim 2005, 2006; Leisink and Steijn 2009; Liu, Tang,
vice (Rainey 1982). It was not used again until 1990, and Zhu 2008; Ritz 2009; Taylor 2007; Vandena-
when Perry and Wise (1990) offered the first concep- beele 2008b, 2008c; Vandenabeele, Scheepers, and
tual definition and identified a typology of motives Hondeghem 2006). In addition to the search for an
associated with public service that included rational, alternative to rational choice theories of motivation,
norm-based, and affective motives. Perry (1996) sub- another reason for the broad international inter-
sequently developed a measurement scale that reduced est is long-standing beliefs about and interest in an
the typology of motives to four dimensions: attraction ethic of public service, which is prominent in many
to public policy making, commitment to the public countries (Horton 2008). The salience of this ethic
interest and civic duty, compassion, and self-sacrifice. has, in turn, led to international efforts by scholars
These early contributions were the start of a research to measure PSM in their respective countries, as an
stream on a type of motivation that was atypical in an operational approximation of the latter. However, one
era when public management strategies were limited result of the growth of international research is a need
to extrinsic motivators such as salary, status, workload, to elaborate the construct and measurement of PSM
tenure, and pension rights. The research signaled a (Perry and Hondeghem 2008b). In order to facilitate
return to a more balanced perspective on the motiva- international research, we need to develop a universal

A Strategy for Building Public Service Motivation Research Internationally 701

This content downloaded from 175.45.191.253 on Tue, 07 Mar 2017 07:44:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
construct that can be used globally and that is likely to generate cu-
mulative knowledge. After all, previous studies have employed mul-
tiple measures of PSM, and such diversity in operational definitions
of PSM suggests important differences in the appropriate meaning
or number of PSM dimensions, and therefore limits the ability to
replicate and build on previous findings (Wright 2008).
Despite the fact that the origins of the measurement model lie in
the United States, and initially most research on measurement was
performed there (Bright 2008; Coursey and Pandey 2007; Coursey
et al. 2008; Perry 1996), measurement studies outside the United
States have come up with results that support the general concept
but do not fully corroborate the specific measurement model and, in
particular, its constituent items (Kim 2009a, 2009b; Liu, Tang, and
Zhu 2008; Ritz 2009; Vandenabeele 2008b, 2008c). This finding
is a significant drawback, especially for international comparative
research, and thus necessitates that we search for a more universal
approach.
This article sets out a strategy for international convergence in
research and measurement approaches. It will review research to
assess commonalities in the content of PSM internationally and to
establish common metrics for PSM cross nationally. There are three
significant subjects that need to be analyzed in this study in order to
strengthen the PSM construct and its measurement. The first is to
sharpen the concept of PSM by refining the conceptual components
in Perry and Wise's 1990 study. This will involve discussing the defi-
nition, the international differences, and the theoretical foundation
of PSM. The next subject is to clarify the dimensions of PSM by
refining the four dimensions in Perry's 1996 scale. The third subject
is to suggest a measurement model for cross-national comparison by
specifying the relationship between PSM and its dimensions.
Sharpening the Construct of Public Service Motivation
PSM is about the motives that people have for behavior (Wise
2000). In general terms, PSM is thought of as "an individual's
orientation to delivering services to people with a purpose to do
good for others and society" (Perry and Hondgehem 2008a, vii).
However, many definitions of the construct are available. PSM was
first defined as "an individual's predisposition to respond to motives
grounded primarily or uniquely in public institutions and organi-
zations" (Perry and Wise 1990, 368). Later, Brewer and Seiden
described PSM as "the motivational force that induces individuals
to perform meaningful public service" (1998, 417). Rainey and
Steinbauer defined it as "a general altruistic motivation to serve
the interests of a community of people, a state, a nation or man-
kind" (1999, 23). Recently, in an effort to synthesize definitions,
Vandenabeele defined PSM as "the belief, values and attitudes that
go beyond self-interest or organizational interest, that concern the
interest of a larger political entity and that motivate individuals to
act accordingly whenever appropriate" (2007, 547). Although the
definitions of PSM vary among authors, there is a common focus
on motives and actions that are intended to do good for others and
shape the well-being of society (Perry and Hondeghem 2008a).
Most of the research on PSM emanates from the United States,
but there is increasing evidence from Europe and Asia (Perry and
Hondeghem 2008b). Furthermore, Hondeghem and Vandenabeele
(2005) showed that the PSM concept also appears under different
702 Public Administration Review September | October 2010
This content downloaded from 175.45.191.253 on Tue, 07 Mar 2017 07:44:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
names. In the United Kingdom, public administration scholars
have described the public service ethos (Horton 2006), which has
both an ethical and a motivational component. In Canada, public
administrators speak of "l'thique du bien commun," which, besides
the ethical dimension, has a significant influence on the motivation
of civil servants (Chanlat 2003). In the Netherlands and Germany,
public servants are motivated by public service values that are em-
bedded in the regime (Vandenabeele, Scheepers, and Hondeghem
2006). Hence, Hondeghem and Vandenabeele (2005) suggested
that the widespread and extensive emergence of PSM-like constructs
in different countries indicates the presence of a robust phenom-
enon that is entrenched in many cultures.
Although these concepts are not always framed in the same terms
as PSM, they substantially overlap with the concept of PSM. Every
public service regime has its own unique public values that reflect
the fundamental beliefs and ideals held by politicians, public serv-
ants, and the public about that regime. Vandenabeele and Van de
Walle (2008), using survey data from the International Social Sur-
vey Program, showed that PSM is a more or less universal concept,
but that its constituent dimensions are not necessarily universal.
Historical and institutional differences might explain the different
patterns of PSM in different countries.
PSM is a multidimensional construct with an overarching meaning
(Perry and Hondeghem 2008b). Building on the research of Knoke
and Wright-Isak (1982), Perry and Wise (1990) proposed that PSM
is associated with three types of motives: affective, norm-based,
and rational. These three types of motives are the foundation for
the distinct dimensions of PSM. An individual may have rational,
norm-based, and affective motives that contribute to a single behav-
ior (Brewer, Seiden, and Facer 2000).
These three categories provide a useful framework for understanding
PSM, but they also have limitations. First, some argue that rational
motives carry the possibility of being self-interested motives (Wise
2000; Wright and Pandey 2008). The underlying premise of rational
motives is that individual choice among a set of possible alternatives
is motivated by an assessment of the potential utility maximization
from each option. These motives relate to what March and Olsen
(1989) described as a "logic of consequence," or "calculated" behav-
ior based on the outcomes of behavior, rather than behavior based
on norms or affection. However, this does not necessarily mean that
such motives are always self-interested. Rational motives, therefore,
would include a desire to represent some special interest as well as
the desire for personal gain and personal need fulfillment (Wise
2000).
It has been suggested that individuals may participate in the process
of policy formulation as a way of maximizing their own need for
power and self-importance or to advocate a special interest that
would provide personal benefits. The opportunity to participate in
policy formulation or program implementation may be anchored
in the need for power, esteem from others, and self-esteem. While
the theory of PSM is based principally on altruistic motives that
lie beyond self-interest (Brewer 2002; Piliavin and Charng 1990),
rational motives can be understood as the motives for realizing
private interests, not public interests. Thus, rational, self-serving
motives are ambiguous in their relation to PSM.
Second, some argue that these three types of motives do not distin-
guish conceptually between normative and affective motives (Wright
and Pandey 2008). Normative orientations are based on social
values and norms of what is proper and appropriate, while motives
such as the patriotism of benevolence seem to be grounded in an
individual's emotional state (Perry and Wise 1990). The patriotism
of benevolence combines a love of regime values and a love of oth-
ers (Frederickson and Hart 1985), and it is closely connected with
enhancing social equity, fostering loyalty to duty and to the govern-
ment as a whole, and serving the public interest in the normative
motives. Also, both normative and affective motives overlap with the
concept of altruism, the deliberate pursuit of the interests or welfare
of others or the public interest (Batson and Shaw 1991; Dovidio
1984; Hoffman 1981; Piliavin and Charng 1990). Commitment to
a program because of a genuine conviction about its social impor-
tance in the affective motives is not clearly distinguished from the
desire to serve the public interest as a result of feeling a duty to one's
government and community (Wright and Pandey 2008). Thus,
rational motives are not appropriate for PSM, and there is consider-
able overlap between norm-based motives and affective motives.
Therefore, the PSM construct needs to be improved conceptually in
order to facilitate and cumulate international research.
Public service motives are at the root of the behaviors and actions
taken to achieve outcomes that serve the public interest (Wise
2000). The research of Knoke and Wright-Isak (1982) provides a
useful basis, but the three motivational components (Perry and Wise
1990) need to be refined to provide a more suitable understanding
of PSM. "Motivation" is the general term that covers all processes in
which realizing targeted behavior is the core element (Heckhausen
1991). Following this argument, motivation exists only in the
interaction of individual values and an actual situation that ena-
bles an individual to put those values into practice (Vandenabeele,
Scheepers, and Hondeghem 2006). Therefore, we propose that PSM
is associated with three types of motives: instrumental, value-based,
and identification.
tion and accomplishment when they contribute to realizing these
values. Public values may include public interest, social responsi-
bility, democracy, social equity, fairness, social justice, neutrality,
and accountability (Frederickson 1997; Moe and Gilmour 1995;
Rosenbloom 1996).
Although individual countries have created their own principles of
public service, a common understanding of the foundation of pub-
lic service characterizes Western countries (Raadschelders 2003). In
Asian countries, the mixture of Western liberalism and indigenous
cultural Confucianism can provide a fascinating new synthesis. The
Western ideas of constitutionalism, human rights, equity, rule of
law, democracy, and free markets resonate in Confucian cultures.
Non-Western civilizations have attempted to pursue modernization
with a combination of Western influence and their own preferred
culture (Yun 2006). Thus, basic public values may be commonly
pursued in the global system. The importance and priority of these
values may vary according to national and social conditions, but
individuals are likely to put these values before private values.
Identification motives concern people, groups, or objects that
individuals want to serve. Affective bonding with others is the
emotional basis of behavior for serving others (Knoke and Wright-
Isak 1982). Frederickson and Hart (1985) suggested that "a special
relationship" should exist between public servants and citizens, and,
along with the commitment to correct principles, public servants
must genuinely care for their fellow citizens. Individuals are likely
to identify themselves with others, such as vulnerable people, the
disadvantaged, the public, community, society, country, and so on.
The sense of oneness between themselves and those with whom they
identify brings a willingness to do good for and even sacrifice them-
selves for the identified objects. Following the definitions of Rainey
and Steinbauer (1999) and Vandenabeele (2007), we can conclude
that, when looking at affective motives directed to the "other," PSM
refers to members of a social category or political system with whom
individuals identify.

Instrumental motives concern the methods of perform meaningful
public service. Based principally on altruistic motives, instrumental
motives include working in the public sector, participating in the
policy process and community activities, participating in activities
for social development, and advocating for special public policies
and programs, in order to perform meaningful public service and
to do good for others and society. Individuals are likely to work
in the public sector because they think that public organizations
are more likely to provide them with an opportunity to engage in
public service. They are likely to pay attention to or participate in
These three refined motivational components are focused on value
(for what), attitude (for whom), and behavior (how): instrumental
motives are related to behavior, value-based motives to values and
ethics, and identification motives to attitude. They relate closely to
the original model of Perry and Wise (1990). Self-serving motives
are excluded from rational motives, which correspond to the instru-
mental motives; the conceptual overlap between norm-based and
affective motives is eliminated; and norm-based motives correspond
to value-based motives and affective motives to identification mo-
tives.

the policy process because they think this is an appropriate means

ror enhancing public interest. They are likely PSM is part of a behavioral process in which
to actively participate in community programs public service motives lead to behaviors that
and activities for performing community and
PSM is part of a behavioral benefit the public. In relation to the motivation
social service. process in which public service literature, Perry (2000) asserts the importance
motives lead to behaviors that of PSM as an alternative to rational and self-
Value-based motives concern the terminal interested theories of motivation, which tend
benefit the public.
public values (Bozeman 2007; Jorgensen to focus on pecuniary rewards. Public service
and Bozeman 2007) that individuals want to motives are founded on an ethic of serving the
achieve through their behaviors and actions. Individuals are likely public. Public service requires an individual's self-sacrifice - that is,
to internalize public values - that is, they are likely to regard public the willingness to substitute service to others for tangible personal
values as their own, and they are likely to have a feeling of satisfac- rewards (Perry 1996). To satisfy the instrumental, value-based, and

A Strategy for Building Public Service Motivation Research Internationally 703

This content downloaded from 175.45.191.253 on Tue, 07 Mar 2017 07:44:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 to the public interest/civic duty, compassion, and self-sacrifice.
Attraction to policy making is a public service motive that is based
i ! on the desire to satisfy personal needs while serving the public
o a 09 o ps interest. Compassion is a public service motive that entails love and
^' n> 5' CD 5' p
rt S off.
e p ^ co cai o
concern for others and a desire that others be protected. Commit-
ment to the public interest or civic duty is based on one's desire to
fulfill a societal obligation or standard, and thus it is categorized as
a norm-based motive. The self-sacrifice dimension was retained as
Self-Sacrifice
an independent dimension because of its historical connection with
the perception of the public service. The outcome of Perry's (1996)
study was the development of 24 items measuring the four subscales
Figure 1 The Conceptual Components of Public Service of PSM. Perry (1997) supported the distinctiveness of the different
Motivation
dimensions, finding that they often had different antecedents or the
same antecedents but different relationship directions.

identification motives of public service, individuals may be willing

Using the dimensions of Perry's (1996) scale, a significant number
to sacrifice some private interests and accept less monetary rewards,
of researchers have examined the antecedents and effects of PSM.
while giving more effort and commitment to public service. Thus,Previous studies have shown that the four dimensions of PSM have
self-sacrifice is a foundation of realizing public service motives
limitations (Castaing 2006; Coursey and Pandey 2007; DeHart-
(Batson and Shaw 1991; Piliavin and Charng 1990). Moreover, inDavis, Marlowe, and Pandey 2006; Moynihan and Pandey 2007a,
a review by Koehler and Rainey (2008), altruism and self-sacrificial
2007b; Vandenabeele 2008c; Wright and Pandey 2005, 2008). In
behavior are identified as the interdisciplinary foundations of PSM.
some cases, dimensions were left out of the analysis because they
The studies cited in this account, found in evolutionary psychology
were ill fitting, whereas in other cases, additional dimensions were
(Sober and Wilson 1998; Talbot 2003), organizational behavior created to cover the full extent of what PSM meant conceptually in
theory (Organ, Podsakoff, and MacKenzie 2006), and economics a given environment (Castaing 2006; Coursey and Pandey 2007;
(Frank 1998), provide compelling evidence that self-sacrifice is more
Moynihan and Pandey 2007a, 2007b; DeHart-Davis, Marlowe,
fundamental to a service orientation than other dimensions, and
and Pandey 2006; Vandenabeele 2008b; Wright and Pandey 2005,
therefore can be considered the footing on which PSM rests. 2008). Such diversity limits the ability to replicate and build on pre-
vious findings (Wright 2008). Thus, the dimensions of PSM need to
Based on self-sacrifice, individuals are likely to perform acts that are
be refined in order to better explain and predict public service-
intended to do good for others and shape the well-being of societyrelated behavior cross-nationally.
as a way of satisfying their personal needs. The greater the strength
of one's PSM, the more likely one is to engage in behaviors that First, the dimension of attraction to policy making needs to be rede-
benefit the public, even with the loss in tangible individual rewards
fined as attraction to public participation. The items of the original
(Wise 2000). The revised conceptual components of PSM are dimension are not appropriate for measuring personal attraction to
shown in figure 1 . public policy making because the items may tap dissatisfaction with
politicians more than the idea of interest in public policy mak-
Clarifying the Dimensions of Public Service Motivation ing (Coursey and Pandey 2007; Coursey et al. 2008); the original
A theory is useful if it can explain and predict. An explanation dimension has not fared as well as others in Maltese and Korean
establishes the substantive meaning of constructs, variables, and research (Camilleri 2006; Kim 2009b). This dimension of attraction
their linkages, while a prediction tests that substantive meaning by
to public participation needs to focus more on a disposition to work
comparing it to empirical evidence (Bacharach 1989). A constructin the public sector and to participate in the public policy proc-
is defined in terms of its measure, and thus measures of PSM should
ess and in activities for community and social development; it also
be designed to explain and predict public service-related behaviorneeds to develop the items with more face validity as indicators of
(Brewer 2002). In order to improve the cumulation of research andinstrumental motives (cf. Kim 2009a; Taylor 2007).
its application internationally, it is necessary to develop, next to a
shared conceptual definition, a common operational definition ofSecond, the dimension of commitment to public interest needs to
PSM that can enhance confidence in the findings and interpreta- be redefined as commitment to public values. This dimension needs
tion of studies conducted in different countries and cross-nationally.
to focus more on a personal disposition to pursue public values.
Therefore, the dimensions of PSM will be examined to develop a
Some of the original items need to be excluded because they overlap
more appropriate measure of PSM. with the dimension of self-sacrifice (Castaing 2006; Leisink and
Steijn 2009; Taylor 2007; Vandenabeele 2008c; Wright and Pandey
Perry (1996) developed a measurement scale for PSM. Forty survey 2008), and new items need to be developed to represent value-based
items were devised, corresponding to six dimensions of PSM: attrac-
motives. This refinement will help solve the problem of overlap
tion to public policy making, commitment to the public interest, with the dimension of self-sacrifice. Another possible supplement to
civic duty, social justice, compassion, and self-sacrifice. Using datathis dimension could be what Vandenabeele (2008b) has defined as
from a survey of 376 respondents from a variety of primarily public
"democratic governance,"1 which refers mainly to the public values
sector backgrounds, Perry identified four empirical components of
that are associated with the operations of government administra-
the PSM construct: attraction to public policy making, commitment
tion, such as equality or accountability.

704 Public Administration Review September! October 2010

This content downloaded from 175.45.191.253 on Tue, 07 Mar 2017 07:44:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Third, new and more appropriate items should be developed for the to preclude such case-specific flaws. This should result in a refined
dimension of compassion. The items of compassion do not repre- construct of PSM with operational dimensions that are more in
sent a unique and salient quality of affective motives, and previous tune with PSM around the world. This refinement will decrease the
studies report that this weakness in the compassion dimension diversity in the operational definitions of PSM and promote a com-
has been fairly robust across samples and estimation techniques mon operational definition for facilitating research and generating
(DeHart-Davis, Marlowe, and Pandey 2006; Moynihan and Pandey cumulative knowledge globally.
2007a; Wright 2008; Wright and Pandey 2005). It was unconfirmed
in China (Liu, Tang, and Zhu 2008). The original items of compas- Measurement Model of Public Service Motivation
sion need to be revised to better represent affective motives, and the The measurement model specifies the relationship between con-
new items need to be more focused on affective bonding with the structs and measures. The failure to correctly specify the measure-
identified objects, such as other members of a social category or of a ment model can lead to different conclusions about the empirical
political system. relationships between latent constructs, and measurement model
misspecification can have very serious consequences for the theo-
Fourth, with regard to the dimensions of PSM, the distinction retical conclusions drawn from that model (Jarvis, MacKenzie, and
between a three- and a four-dimension PSM construct needs to be Podsakoff 2003). 3 PSM is conceived as a multidimensional con-
addressed. Seeking to refine the concept of PSM, we propose that struct because it represents a general concept that consists of specific
public service motives are founded on self-sacrifice (Batson and dimensions: attraction to public participation, commitment to
Shaw 1991; Dividi 1984; Hoffman 1981; Piliavin and Charng public values, compassion, and self-sacrifice. This multidimensional
1990) and fall into three categories: instrumental, value-based, and construct should be properly operationalized.
identification motives. Self-sacrifice is fundamental to the construct
of PSM, and so it should be a component of the operational dimen- There are two different measurement models using multiple dimen-
sions. Each category of public service motives represents a unique sions of latent constructs: the reflective or principal factor model,
aspect of PSM, and thus needs to be independently included in the and the formative or composite latent variable model. Constructs
operational dimensions. Theoretically, this is a better fit than models are usually viewed as causes of dimensions, meaning that variation
in which, for example, self-sacrifice and public interest are collapsed in a construct leads to variation in its dimensions. Such dimensions
(Perry 1996; Vandenabeele 2008c), or in which self-sacrifice is left are termed "reflective" because they represent reflections, or mani-
out altogether (Coursey and Pandey 2007; Moynihan and Pandey festations, of a construct. In other situations, dimensions are viewed
2007a; Scott and Pandey 2005). Even though it is not essential to as causes of constructs. Such dimensions are termed "formative,"
develop a one-to-one correspondence between the conceptual com- meaning that the construct is formed or induced by its dimensions
ponents and the operational dimensions, and there is no mutually (Edwards and Bagozzi 2000). The choice between formative and
exclusive relationship,2 the four-dimension model is more suitable reflective specification should be based primarily on theoretical
than the three-dimension model, because each dimension captures considerations regarding the causal priority between the dimensions
a distinct and unique component of PSM, and the four-dimension and the latent construct involved (Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer
model is better for explaining and predicting the various aspects of 2001). It is, of course, necessary to analyze which model has more
public service- related behavior. desirable statistical properties because "when constructing a meas-
ure, one has to reconcile the theory-driven conceptualization of the
To summarize, the conceptual components need to be empirically measure with the desired statistical properties of the items compris-
estimated through operational definition, and operational dimen- ing the measure as revealed by empirical testing" (Diamantopoulos
sions need to be backed up by conceptual components. Dimensions and Siguaw 2006, 276).
and items should be based on supporting theory. We propose that
public service motives are based on self-sacrifice and fall into three Formative measures are commonly used for constructs that are
categories - instrumental, value-based, and identification motives - conceived of as composites of specific component variables (Bollen
and that the dimensions of the PSM construct are refined as attrac- 1989; Bollen and Lennox 1991; Edwards and Bagozzi 2000). 4 The
tion to public participation, commitment to public values, compas- important criteria for defining a construct as formative or reflec-
sion, and self-sacrifice. We also suggest that developing appropriate tive (Jarvis, MacKenzie, and Podsakoff 2003) are the interchange-
items is essential for the dimensions (cf. Kim 2009a; Taylor 2007; ability of dimensions pertaining to a construct and the expectation
Vandenabeele 2008b). that the dimensions are likely to be affected
by the same antecedents and have the same
Efforts to extend research on the PSM Efforts to extend research on
consequences. Whereas reflective dimensions
construct to Europe, Asia, and Australia havethe PSM construct to Europe,are essentially interchangeable, and adding
raised issues about the dimensions and opera-Asia, and Australia have raised
or removing dimensions does not change
issues about the dimensions andthe essential nature of a construct, forma-
tional measures for non-U.S. contexts (Perry
and Hondeghem 2008b). It is necessary to de- tive dimensions are not interchangeable, and
operational measures for non-
velop a more universal construct of PSM that omitting a dimension is omitting a part of the
can be used globally and that is more likely toU.S.
contexts. It is necessaryconstruct. A change in a formative dimension
generate cumulative knowledge, thus avoiding to develop a more universal leads to changes in the construct, without
construct
value-specific items and wordings that are case of PSM that can be necessarily affecting any of the construct's
specific. Therefore, cross-national testing of used globally . . . other dimensions (Bollen and Lennox 1991;
items and questionnaires can be a useful tool Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer 2001).

A Strategy for Building Public Service Motivation Research Internationally 70

This content downloaded from 175.45.191.253 on Tue, 07 Mar 2017 07:44:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
In PSM, first, the dimensions are not inter- when translating items, to evaluate items for
changeable. The dimensions represent differ- When doing international their cultural sensitivity, possibly by involving
ent aspects of PSM; each dimension captures research . . . cultural meaning local public administration experts in the eval-
a distinct and potentially unique form of and connotations can distort uation of the items. After all, as Vandenabeele
PSM (Perry 1996). By definition (Perry and and Van de Walle have contended, "we need
comparative findings. Therefore,
Wise 1990; Vandenabeele 2007), PSM refers to navigate, using van Deth's words, 'between
it is necessary, apart from the the Scylla of losing national and cultural
to multiple bases, both conceptually and
usual care that has to be taken
institutionally. Second, and because of this validity and the Charybdis of endangering
first point, the dimensions are not expected when translating items, to cross-cultural or cross-national comparabil-
to have the same antecedents and conse- evaluate items for their cultural ity'" (2008, 227).
quences. Perry (1997) found some significant sensitivity, possibly by involving
differences in the influence of independent Conclusion
variables on the four different dimensions of
local public administration
As scholarly research on PSM has grown
his PSM model. This was subsequently devel-
experts in the evaluation of the and the geographic scope of the research has
items.
oped in PSM theory (Perry 2000; Perry and expanded, some scholars have questioned
Vandenabeele 2008; Vandenabeele 2007), in whether the conceptual composition and
which multiple institutions are claimed to have an influence on dimensions
the of PSM are appropriate for explaining and predicting
public service-related behavior in different countries.
development of PSM. This claim has been empirically corroborated
by relating PSM to different sociodemographic and institutional an-
tecedents (Moynihan and Pandey 2007a; Pandey and Stazyk 2008;
Building on the research of Knoke and Wright-Isak (1982), Perry
and Wise (1990) proposed that PSM was associated with three
Vandenabeele 2008a). With regard to the differential influence on
outcome variables, different dimensions can be more or less salient
types of motives: affective, norm-based, and rational. These three
in particular situations, resulting differences in significance and categories provide a useful framework for understanding PSM, but
they also have limitations. Rational motives carry the possibility of
effect size (Taylor 2007; Vandenabeele 2009). Thus, the dimensions
may have different antecedents and consequences as well as different self-interested motives, and the typology does not distinguish
being
characteristics and theoretical backgrounds. between normative and affective motives. Thus, the PSM construct
needs to be improved conceptually. Therefore, we propose that
Therefore, PSM needs to be defined as a formative construct because
public service motives are based on self-sacrifice and fall into three
it is formed as a combination of specific dimensions.5 If any onecategories: instrumental, value-based, and identification motives.
of these dimensions increases, PSM would increase; conversely, ifInstrumental
a motives are related to behavior, value-based motives to
person's PSM increases, this would not necessarily be accompaniedvalues and ethics, and identification motives to attitudes.
by an increase in all dimensions. Dropping one dimension may alter
the meaning of PSM because each dimension provides a uniquePerry (1996) identified the four empirical dimensions of the PSM
construct
contribution to PSM. That is, an individual's PSM is determined by as attraction to public policy making, commitment to the
public interest/civic duty, compassion, and self-sacrifice. We propose
his or her attraction to public participation, commitment to public
values, compassion, and self-sacrifice (Wright 2008). Measuringthat the dimensions of the PSM construct be redefined along the
lines of attraction to public participation, commitment to public
only two or three dimensions may not be equivalent to measuring
values, compassion, and self-sacrifice. We also suggest that develop-
all of the dimensions of PSM, and when any two or three dimen-
ing more appropriate items for better discriminant validity of each
sions are included in a study, it may not be fully regarded as a study
dimension is essential for future research.
on PSM. Therefore, researchers should include all of the dimensions
that form PSM in the study.
The relationships between PSM and its dimensions show that it is
The diversity in operational definitions of PSM limits the scope more
of reasonable to define PSM as a formative construct. PSM has
formative dimensions, and each dimension has reflective items.
the findings and interpretation of any single study, as well as the
PSM is formed as a combination of attraction to public participa-
ability to replicate and build on previous findings (Wright 2008).
tion, commitment to public values, compassion, and self-sacrifice.
The consideration of the relationships between PSM and its dimen-
sions shows that it is more reasonable to define PSM as a formative
Each dimension provides a unique contribution to PSM, and so
construct. Thus, researchers should treat each dimension as an im-
omitting a dimension is omitting a part of PSM. Thus, researchers
portant component of PSM and include all dimensions in the studyshould include all of the dimensions that form PSM in the study.
for cross-national comparison. By defining PSM as a formative
measurement model, we can develop a common operational defini- In order to faciliate research internationally, the PSM construct
tion and measure of PSM that can reduce diversity and improveneeds
the to be improved conceptually and operationally. It is necessary
cumulativeness of research and its application internationally. to develop a more universal concept that can be used globally and
that is likely to generate cumulative knowledge. We have dealt here
Another element that needs to be taken into account when discuss-
with the conceptual composition and operational dimensions of
ing international research is language. When doing internationalPSM, as well as the measurement model of PSM. The revisions to
the construct and operationalizations of PSM will enhance cross-na-
research, even when similar wordings of an item are used, cultural
tional research and comparison and generate cumulative knowledge
meaning and connotations can distort comparative findings. There-
fore, it is necessary, apart from the usual care that must be taken internationally, in particular on the origins of PSM, such as the

706 Public Administration Review September | October 2010

This content downloaded from 175.45.191.253 on Tue, 07 Mar 2017 07:44:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
 Bollen, Kenneth, and Richard Lennox. 1991. Conventional Wisdom on Mea-
institutional socialization and organizational nurturing of PSM, and
also on particular instances in which PSM will or will not result in surement: A Structural Equation Perspective. Psychological Bulletin 110(2):
305-14.
certain outcomes, such as person-environment fit.
Bozeman, Barry. 2007. Public Values and Public Interest: Counterbalancing Economic

We hope that this article is a first step in developing future cross- Individualism. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

national research. Although it is nonempirical, we hope the article Brewer, Gene A. 2002. Public Service Motivation: Theory, Evidence, and Prospects

provides future researchers with some arguments and ideas about for Research. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political

how to handle issues in international comparative research on Science Association, August 29-September 1 , Boston.

PSM, and that this may result in a better and a more thoroughly Brewer, Gene A., and Sally Coleman Seiden. 1998. Whistle Blowers in the Federal

developed conceptual, theoretical, and practical understanding of Civil Service: New Evidence of the Public Service Ethic. Journal of Public Admin-

the concept, starting with development of an internationally robust istration Research and Theory 8(3): 413-39.
measurement scale. Brewer, Gene A., Sally Coleman Seiden, and Rex L. Facer II. 2000. Individual
Conceptions of Public Service Motivation. Public Administration Review 60(3):
254-64.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by a Korea Research Foundation Grant Bright, Leonard. 2008. Does Public Service Motivation Really Make a Difference

(KRF-2009-013-B00097). It was completed while Sangmook Kim on the Job Satisfaction and Turnover Intentions of Public Employees? American

was at Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium for the first semester Review of Public Administration 38(2): 149-66.

of the 2009-10 academic year. Special thanks to Professor Geert Camilleri, Emanuel. 2006. Towards Developing an Organizational Commitment -

Bouckaert and Professor Annie Hondeghem at the Public Man- Public Service Motivation Model for Maltese Public Service Employees. Public

agement Institute, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Belgium, and Policy and Administration 21(1): 63-83.

Professor Seung Hyun Kim and Professor Hyok-Joo Rhee in the Castaing, Sbastien. 2006. The Effects of Psychological Contract Fulfillment and

Department of Public Administration, Seoul National University of Public Service Motivation on Organizational Commitment in the French Civil

Technology, Korea, for their kind support and encouragement. Service. Public Policy and Administration 21(1): 84-98.
Chanlat, Jean-Franois. 2003. Le managrialisme et l'thique du bien commun: La
Notes gestionde la motivation au travaildans les services publics [Managerialism and

1 . Vandenabeele, Scheepers, and Hondeghem (2006) suggested additional ele- the public service ethos: Motivation management in the public sector] . In La

ments of PSM measurement scale such as equality, service delivery, technical Motivation au Travail dan les Service Publics, edited by Thibaut Duvillier, Jean-
Luc Genard, and Alexandre Pireaux, 51-64. Paris: L'Harmattan.
competence, and bureaucracy. Vandenabeele (2008b) included client orientation,
Coursey,
equality, and bureaucratic values in the PSM measurement scale. He also found a David H., and Sanjay K. Pandey. 2007. Public Service Motivation Measure-
ment: Testing an Abridged Version of Perry's Proposed Scale. Administration &
fifth dimension, labeled democratic governance, that includes accountability and
Society 39(5): 547-68.
traditional values of public service such as permanence of the civil service, equity,

neutrality, and adaptation to circumstances. Coursey, David H., James L. Perry, Jeffrey L. Brudney, and Laura Littlepage. 2008.
Psychometric Verification of Perry's Public Service Motivation Instrument:
2. James L. Perry suggested these points through personal communication (Decem-
ber 1, 2008). Results for Volunteer Exemplars. Review of Public Personnel Administration 28(1):
79-90.
3. Several of the most commonly researched constructs in behavioral and organiza-

tional research have formative measures that are incorrectly modeled as though DeHart-Davis, Leisha, Justin Marlowe, and Sanjay K. Pandey. 2006. Gender

they were reflective measures. "This is a problem, because . . . measurement Dimensions of Public Service Motivation. Public Administration Review 66(6):
873-87.
model misspecification can inflate unstandardized structural parameter estimates

by as much as 400% or deflate them by as much as 80% and lead to either Type Diamantopoulos, Adamantios, and Judy A. Siguaw. 2006. Formative versus Reflec-

I or Type II errors of inference, depending on whether the endogenous or the tive Indicators in Organizational Measure Development: A Comparison and

exogenous construct is misspecified" (MacKenzie, Podsakoff, and Jarvis 2005, Empirical Illustration. British Journal of Management 17(4): 263-82.

728). Diamantopoulos, Adamantios, and Heidi M. Winklhofer. 2001. Index Construc-

4. A typical example of the formative measurement model is socioeconomic status tion with Formative Indicators: An Alternative to Scale Development. Journal of

(SES), which is formed as a combination of education, income, occupation, Marketing Research 38(2): 269-77.

and residence. If any one of these indicators increases, SES would increase; con- Dovidio, John F. 1984. Helping Behavior and Altruism: An Empirical and Concep-

versely, if a persons SES increases, this would not necessarily be accompanied by tual Overview. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, vol. 17, ed. Leonard

an increase in all indicators (Diamantopoulos and Winklhofer 2001). Berkowitz, 361-427. New York: Academic Press.

5. Each dimension of PSM has reflective items. The items may be interchangeable Edwards, Jeffrey R, and Richard P. Bagozzi. 2000. On the Nature and Direction of

and may be affected by the same antecedents and have the same consequences. Relationships between Constructs and Measures. Psychological Methods 5(2):
Thus, PSM has formative dimensions; the dimensions themselves have reflective 155-74.

items. Frank, Robert H. 1988. Passions within Reason: The Strategic Role of Emotions. New
York: W. W. Norton.

References Frederickson, H. George. 1997. The Spirit of Public Administration. San Francisco:

Bacharach, Samuel B. 1989. Organizational Theories: Some Criteria for Evaluation. Jossey-Bass.

Academy of Management Review 14(4): 496-515. Frederickson, H. George, and David K. Hart. 1985. The Public Service and the
Batson, C. Daniel, and Laura L. Shaw. 1991. Evidence for Altruism: Toward a Plural- Patriotism of Benevolence. Public Administration Review 45(5): 547-53.

ism of Prosocial Motives. Psychological Inquiry 2(2): 107-22. Heckhausen, Heinz. 1991. Motivation and Action. Berlin: Springer- Verlag.

Bollen, Kenneth A. 1989. Structural Equations with Latent Variables. New York: Hoffman, Martin L. 1981. Is Altruism Part of Human Nature? Journal of Personality

Wiley. and Social Psychology 40(1): 121-137.

A Strategy for Building Public Service Motivation Research Internationally 707

This content downloaded from 175.45.191.253 on Tue, 07 Mar 2017 07:44:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Hondeghem, Annie, and Wouter Vandenabeele. 2005. Valeurs et motivation dans l'administration publique: Perspective comparative [Values and motivation in public admin-
istration: Comparative perspective]. Revue Franaise d'administration Publique 115: 463-80.
Horton, Sylvia. 2006. The Public Service Ethos in the British Civil Service: An Historical Institutional Analysis. Public Policy and Administration 21(1): 32-48.

ghem, 17-32. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Jarvis, Cheryl Burke, Scott B. MacKenzie, and Philip M. Podsakoff. 2003. A Critical Review of Construct Indicators a
and Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research 30(2): 199-218.
j0rgensen, Torben B., and Barry Bozeman. 2007. Public Values: An Inventory. Administration & Society 39(3): 354-81.
Kim, Sangmook. 2005. Individual-Level Factors and Organizational Performance in Government Organizations. Journal
245-61.

Koehler, Michael, and Hal G. Rainey. 2008. Interdisciplinary Foundations of Public Service Motivation. In Motivation in P
by James L. Perry and Annie Hondeghem, 33-55. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Knoke, David, and Christine Wright-Isak. 1982. Individual Motives and Organizational Incentive Systems. Research in the
Leisink, Peter, and Bram Steijn. 2009. Public Service Motivation and Job Performance of Public Sector Employees in the Neth
Sciences 75(1): 35-52.
Liu, Bangcheng, NingyuTang, and Xiaomei Zhu. 2008. Public Service Motivation and Job Satisfaction in China: An Inves
International Journal of Manpower 29(8): 684-99.
MacKenzie, Scott B., Philip M. Podsakoff, and Cheryl Burke Jarvis. 2005. The Problem of Measurement Model Misspecif
and Some Recommended Solutions. Journal of Applied Psychology 90(4): 710-30.
March, James G., and Johan P. Olsen. 1989. Rediscovering Institutions: The Organizational Basis of Politics. New York: Free P
Moe, Ronald C, and Robert S. Gilmour. 1995. Rediscovering Principles of Public Administration: The Neglected Foundat
55(2): 135-47.
Moynihan, Donald P., and Sanjay K. Pandey. 2007a. Finding Workable Levers over Work Motivation: Comparing Job Sat
Commitment. Administration & Society 39(7): 803-32.

Organ, Dennis. W, Philip M. Podsakoff, and Scott B. MacKenzie. 2006. Organizational Citizenship Behavior: Its Na
Sage Publications.
Pandey, Sanjay K., and Edmund C. Stazyk. 2008. Antecedents and Correlates of Public Service Motivation. In Moti
edited by James L. Perry and Annie Hondeghem, 80-98. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Pandey, Sanjay K., Bradley E. Wright, and Donald P. Moynihan. 2008. Public Service Motivation and Interpersona
Preliminary Model. International Public Management Journal 11(1): 89-108.
Perry, James L. 1996. Measuring Public Service Motivation: An Assessment of Construct Reliability and Validity. Jour
5-22.

Perry, James L., and Annie Hondeghem. 2008a. Motivation in Public Management: The Call of Public Service. Oxford: Oxford Univer

294-313. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Perry, James L., and Wouter Vandenabeele. 2008. Behavioral dynamics: Institutions, Identities and Self-Regulation. In Mot
Service, edited by James L. Perry and Annie Hondeghem, 56-79. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Perry, James L., and Lois Recascino Wise. 1990. The Motivational Bases of Public Service. Public Administration Review
Piliavin, Jane Allyn, and Hong-Wen Charng. 1990. Altruism: A Review of Recent Theory and Research. Annual Review of
Raadschelders, Jos C. N. 2003. Government: A Public Administration Perspective. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe.

Rainey, Hal G. 1982. Reward Preference among Public and Private Managers: In Search of the Service Ethic. American Re
Rainey, Hal G., and Paula Steinbauer. 1999. Galloping Elephants: Developing Elements of a Theory of Effective Governmen
Research and Theory %')' 1-32.
Ritz, Adrian. 2009. Public Service Motivation and Organizational Performance in Swiss Federal Government. Internationa
Rosenbloom, David H. 1996. Building a Legislative-Centered Public Administration. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Pre
Scott, Patrick G., and Sanjay K. Pandey. 2005. Red Tape and Public Service Motivation: Findings from a National Survey
Agencies. Review of Public Personnel Administration 25(2): 155-80.
Sober, Elliott, and David Sloan Wilson. 1998. Unto Others: The Evolution and Psychology of Unselfish Behavior. Cambridge, M

Steen, Trui. 2008. Not a Government Monopoly: The Private, Nonprofit, and Voluntary Sectors. In Motivation in Public Manag

James L. Perry and Annie Hondeghem, 203-22. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Talbot, Colin. 2003. How the Public Sector Got Its Contradictions: The Tale of the Paradoxal Primate. Integrating the Ide
sational Systems with Evolutionary Psychology. Human Nature Review 3: 183-95.

708 Public Administration Review September | October 2010

This content downloaded from 175.45.191.253 on Tue, 07 Mar 2017 07:44:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
Taylor, Jeannette. 2007. The Impact of Public Service Motives on Work Outcomes in Australia: A Comparative Multi-Dimensional Analysis. Public Administration 85(4):
931-59.

Vandenabeele, Wouter. 2007. Toward a Theory of Public Service Motivation: An Institutional Approach. Public Management Review 9(4): 545-56.

ment. Paper presented at the Public Values Seminar, May 29-31, Copenhagen.

agement Journal 11(1): 1 43-67.

Relationship. International Review of Administrative Sciences 75(1): 1 1-34.

Vandenabeele, Wouter, Sarah Scheepers, and Annie Hondeghem. 2006. Public Service Motivation in an International Comparat
Policy and Administration 21(1): 1 3-3 1 .
Vandenabeele, Wouter, and Steven Van de Walle. 2008. International Differences in Public Service Motivation: Comparing Re
Management: The Call of Public Service, edited by James L. Perry and Annie Hondeghem, 223-44. Oxford: Oxford Universi
Wise, Lois Recascino. 2000. The Public Service Culture. In Public Administration Concepts and Cases, 7th ed., edited by Richa
Mifflin.

Wright, Bradley E. 2008. Methodological Challenges Associated with Public Service Motivation Research. In Motivation in Public Managemen: The Call of Public Servicet,
edited by James L. Perry and Annie Hondeghem, 80-98. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wright, Bradley E., and Sanjay K. Pandey. 2005. Exploring the Nomological Map of the Public Service Motivation Concept. Paper presented at the 8th Public Management
Research Conference, September 29, Los Angeles.

40(5): 502-21.
Yun, Eun Gee. 2006. Administrative System and Culture in East Asia, Europe and the USA: A Transformation of the Adm
Cultures in Korea. International Review of Administrative Sciences 72(4): 493-516.

Be Among the First!

Early Bird Conference Registration is Open

for the 2011 ASPA Annual Conference

"Public Administration Without Borders''

March 11-15, 2011

Baltimore, Maryland

(See an additional Ad on page 755)

For more information, go to:

http://www.aspanet.org

A Strategy for Building Public Service Motivation Research Internationally 709

This content downloaded from 175.45.191.253 on Tue, 07 Mar 2017 07:44:31 UTC
All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms