Article Review 2

Name and Surname: Sorush SAEEDI

Student Number: 801191027
Instructor Name: Dr. Idil Vedia Evcimen
Motivation purity bias: Expression of extrinsic motivation undermines perceived
intrinsic motivation and engenders bias in selection decisions
Question: How does extrinsic motivation of candidate affect selection outcomes of hiring managers by
influencing on intrinsic motivation?

In this article which conducted by the authors they have found strong evidence that hiring managers are
biased against job candidates who reveal interest in things like pay and benefits, on the other hand, they
have the thought on being motivated by both intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation, is not only
common but is actually better for both employers and individuals. Both motivations enhance performance
– it’s actually irrational for an organization to not hire someone because they are motivated by things
other than the work itself,”. “Both motivations can and should be high, and there is robust evidence from
previous research to suggest that together they strengthen each other and increase productivity.”
Unfortunately, she says, organizations don’t see it that way when hiring. And because of this bias, they
are passing over many potentially great candidates.

The authors of this article conducted studies to test hiring managers’ biases and we in this article review
would like to answer our question based on the result of their studies.

In study 1, they had students write fake cover letters to answer an ad for their dream job.
In study 2 there were another group who participated through an online crowdsourcing platform in
which they read and code them objectively for either extrinsic or intrinsic motivation cues, without making
any hiring decision.
In Study 3A, acted as hiring managers, providing their perceptions of both intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation, and then indicating whether they would hire a candidate based on their letter.

The results out of these studies highlighted that those who expressed high levels of motivation from
salary, benefits, etc. were seen as having lower motivation for the work itself (controlling for actual coded
intrinsic motivation) and the hiring managers were 20% less likely to hire them as a result.

In the last study, Study 3B, the procedure was identical to that used in Study 3a, except that, instead of
watching a video, participants read a transcript of the interview (after reading the candidate’s resume)
the researchers recorded a professional actor in different job interview scenarios, talking more or less
about the salary and benefits in addition to talking about the interest in the work itself. Then they had
real hiring managers watch a version of the videos, and those who watched the video that expressed
higher levels of extrinsic motivation, even when also expressing higher levels of intrinsic motivation, rated
the candidate as lower on intrinsic motivation, leading to a 23% lower likelihood to make a hiring
recommendation.

Please find the summarized conducted studies below:

Study 1 The Argument discussed deeply in this article is about to explain that “the results of four
studies are consistent with our arguments that decision makers perceive intrinsic motivation to be
more important than extrinsic motivation when making selection decisions.”

Perceived intrinsic motivation predicted selection likelihood (b=1.17, SE= 0.12, p<.001), while perceived
extrinsic motivation did not (b<- 0.01, SE= 0.11, p=.967). The same was observed for the continuous
measure of candidate’s rating, such that intrinsic motivation perception was related to higher ratings
(b=9.78, SE= 0.67, p<.001), while extrinsic motivation was not (b= 0.85, SE=0.72, p<.240). Extrinsic
motivation had a negative indirect effect via reduced perceptions of intrinsic motivation on
both binary selection decision (b=20.21; SE=0.06; CI95%: -.33, -.09) and the continuous
candidate ratings (b= 1.73; SE=0.54; CI95%: -.2.8, -.68).

Study2 Perceived intrinsic motivation predicted selection likelihood (b=1.58, SE=0.13, p<.001).
Perceived extrinsic motivation negatively predicted selection likelihood (b=- 0.72, SE= 0.12, p<.001),
though the positive effect of perceived intrinsic motivation on selection likelihood was significantly
stronger (x2=36.96, p< .001). For the continuous measure of candidate’s ratings, intrinsic motivation
perception was related to higher ratings (b 5 14.26, SE 5 0.67, p, .001), while extrinsic motivation was not
(b= -0.04, SE= 0.74, p=.960). Extrinsic motivation had a negative indirect effect via reduced
perceptions of intrinsic motivation on both binary selection decision (b= -0.47; SE=0.09;
CI95%: -0.64, -0.32) as well as the continuous candidate ratings (b= -4.26; SE=0.73; CI95%: -
5.74, -2.95).

Study 3A

They have found that perceived intrinsic motivation predicted selection likelihood (b=1.18, SE=0.23, p
<.001). Perceived extrinsic motivation was not related to selection likelihood (b= 0.32, SE= 0.24, p< .176).
Perceived intrinsic motivation was positively related to higher continuous candidate ratings (b= 7.32, SE=
1.56, p=.001), and so was perceived extrinsic motivation (b= 4.21, SE= 1.70, p= .014), though the effect of
intrinsic motivation was significantly stronger (x2= 42.78, p< .001). Extrinsic motivation expression
had a negative indirect effect via reduced perceptions of intrinsic motivation on both binary
selection decision (b=-0.26; SE= 0.13; CI95%: -0.61, -0.002) as well as the continuous
candidate ratings (b= -1.61; SE= 0.92; CI95%: -3.75, -0.09)

Study 3B:

They have found that perceived intrinsic motivation predicted selection likelihood (b= 1.60, SE= 0.32, p<
.001). Perceived extrinsic motivation was not related to selection likelihood (b= 20.28, SE= 0.32, p< .376).
Results for the continuous measure of candidates’ ratings exhibited a similar pattern, such that perceived
intrinsic motivation was positively related to higher ratings (b= 8.01, SE=1.20, p< .001), while perceived
extrinsic motivation was not (b= -2.02, SE= 1.26, p= .112). Extrinsic motivation had a negative
indirect effect via reduced perceptions of intrinsic motivation on both binary selection
decision (b= 20.35; SE= 0.22; CI95%: -0.87, -0.006) and the continuous candidate ratings (b=
-1.74; SE= 0.89; CI95%: -3.71, -0.25).

As we can see from the result of the conducted four studies, extrinsic motivation affected on the selection
outcomes by reducing perceived intrinsic motivation. Author convey this implication to the Individuals to
be careful what they ask about or show interest in during an interview and don’t talk about salary while
interviewing, unless they have been offered a financial situation and afterward, they would better to deal
with that important part. She doesn’t believe that it is a fault from the employees to declare their financial
conditions in the interview but she thinks that until the employers have this point of view that extrinsic
motivation must not be the factor for the individuals to choose a job, they would better not express
themselves during the interview.
The Call of the Wild: Zookeepers, Callings, and the Double-edged Sword of Deeply
Meaningful Work
Question: What is the impact of sense of calling on the “job satisfaction feeling”?

This paper aims to find out and reach the point to give validity to this topic that how zookeepers are
absorbed in their job’s nature, and even choose to perform such a job without much potential for
economic benefit.

Based in the fact which has been pointed out in this paper, the first reason of Zookeepers to choose their
job is not pay and they are mostly select their job because of their job’s environment and features. To
highlight this proof, by having a glance on the list of employees in USA in 2004, they were 4,680 people
and 82% of them they have passed college degree, their annual income is around 24,640 USD; and some
of their daily responsibilities comprising cleaning the cages, feeding and bathing the animals, and behavior
observation. It easily implies that they are not choosing this job because of this low income and their
difficult job tasks but rather the passion of the work itself.

Many of the zookeepers segmented this idea explicitly:

Zookeepers can communicate and relate better to animals when compared to people. I'm better suited
to working with animals than I am with people. I wanted to stay here, of course, because I have a gift.
The mentioned quotes explain explicitly the feeling of zookeepers in respect to their choice of profession
which this feeling includes their identification regarding their job which sounds they have a conviction
that their profession has an impact on society. Wildlife ideology concludes the social impact comprising
conservation, prevention of the extinction of species, and the ability to educate people on animal
behavior. They believe that their calling is also a moral duty whereby they are subjected to share their
gifts with others who may require it. Because zookeepers’ duties are revolving strictly around the
animals, zookeepers are willing to neglect all the negative aspects of their job.
In addition to holding themselves to such a high standard, zookeepers tend to project the sense of moral
duty and the judgment on their organization and managers. They also feel that their organization also has
a moral duty to do so. Do the organization's decisions reflect the needs of the animals or are they a
business interest? Is my manager's decisions for the welfare of the animals or are they geared towards
the customers' entertainment? Those are some questions that zookeepers, as guardians, always ask in
order to secure the wellbeing of their animals and fulfill their moral duty towards them.

This paper study discloses this belief is not true that zookeepers leave their job because of the animal
mistreatment within the zoo and conversely, even the mistreatment of the animal is a greater reason to
continue working there. The sense of a calling and moral duty has enabled zookeepers to sacrifice for
their profession.

Another point deserving attention is that, as morally rewarding and satisfying as Zookeeping is, it comes
at a heavy price. Most of the zookeepers cannot afford their life expenses and weak possibility to earn
more money in the future seems to be a big hurdle for zookeepers. They are mostly subjected to find a
second or even a third job just to make ends meet. The environment is also tough, could be treacherous,
and potentially fatal. Animal cages can be dirty from a night of animal activities and it is the zookeepers’
responsibility to maintain a clean environment. In addition to the environment, the responsibilities are
also challenging and can spill over and affect the staffs' personal lives. Zookeepers are essentially on call
24 hours a day, 7 days a week. If there is a problem with one of the animals from their area, the
zookeeper is expected to be there regardless of the time.

The author of this paper has made a clear connection between the sense of a calling for zookeepers and
their choice to become one. The conclusions were based on qualitative and quantitative data from 982
zookeepers from 157 different zoos.

The data validated the theories that zookeepers felt a calling and a moral duty when choosing their job,
placed the same expectations on their managers and organization, and were also willing to make
significant sacrifices for their profession.

A positive and significant relationship was found between “calling” and both “occupational
identification” (r=.38) and “moral duty” (r=.47). The correlation between “moral duty” and “perceived
organizational duty” was very high (r = .75). Positive and significant relationships between “calling” and
each dependent variable- “work meaningfulness”, “occupational importance”, “a willingness to sacrifice”
and “perceived organizational duty”.

The data confirmed the concept from the interviews that zookeepers do not pursue their vocation out of
love for the tasks, but out of the idea that their gift must be shared with society and the animals. They
did not simply choose to become zookeepers. Their careers were predetermined by their "wiring" and
obvious by the circumstances of their lives. The article was concerned with exploring the concept of
personal vocation. They also examined the profession of animal care as one that employs people with
such a sense of calling. To validate their hypotheses, the study used survey and interview data to explain
what makes a person choose this profession and what exactly are their motivators. It provides a good
analysis and summary of the concept of a perceived personal calling.
Work itself has highest correlation with job satisfaction (around 0.7). we have studied in this article how
positive and significant relationship exists between “calling’ and “work meaningfulness”, “occupational
importance”, “a willingness to sacrifice” and “perceived organizational duty”. As a result, calling has high
correlation with work itself, hence it proves high impacts of sense of calling on job satisfaction.
Trust That Binds: The Impact of Collective Felt Trust on Organizational Performance

Question: What is the role of “Responsibility Norms” between collective felt trust and organizational
performance?

In this study named as “Trust that Binds: The Impact of Collective Felt Trust on Organizational Performance,”
Authors of this paper have proved that employees who feel trusted by their organization become more
willing to accept responsibility for their organization’s performance. In this study it showed that collective
felt trust between the employees caused the improvement of high responsibility norms, and that the
employees’ willingness taking to account for their organization performance oriented directly to better
result in customer service and sale. In the past researches in the field of trust, a link had established among
employee trust in managements and organizational performance, meanwhile this research sought to the
implications for an organization in the condition that employees feel they are trusted by management. In
order to realize the impact of collective felt trust on the performance of an organization, a research had
been conducted in which a large national retail chain with 88 independently operated locations entire
Canada. The data for the study was obtained from 2 employee surveys and from the company’s own
organizational performance document record. This survey included of trust-related question mutually
developed by the organization and this paper authors. They have outlined this research to examine whether
collective felt trust and higher responsibility norms were the reason for improved organizational
performance.
In this research, authors measure “Collective felt trust”, “Responsibility norms”, “Organizational
performance” and “Customer service performance”, also the variables including “Location size”, “Part-time
employees”, “Commission”, “Employee age” and “Trust in management” to conduct their research
scientifically.

To clarify, I have defined key terms in below:

Trust – The willingness to be vulnerable based upon positive expectations of the intentions or behavior of
the other party.
Collective Felt Trust – Employees working together at the same organization come to a shared belief about
the extent to which they are trusted by management.
Responsibility Norm – Employees’ shared beliefs regarding the importance of accepting responsibility for
organizational outcomes.
High-Involvement Management – High involvement organizations are employee centered and allow
employees to make important decisions about their jobs by giving them key information about
organizational strategy

They have implemented several sets of hierarchical regression analyses to test the hypotheses declared in
the paper. Hypothesis number one of this paper (Collective felt trust will be positively related to the
responsibility norms in the organization) predicted that collective felt trust would be positively related to
responsibility norms. In order to begin the commence, they have regressed responsibility norms on the
control variables. The next step that they have taken is to add the collective felt trust. Predictably, collective
felt trust was significantly related to responsibility norms (β= .54, p< .001, ϪR2= .16). The second hypothesis
of this study, predicted that responsibility norms would mediate the relationship between collective felt
trust and organizational performance. Four conditions must be met to demonstrate mediation First, the
independent variable (in this case, collective felt trust) must be significantly related to the dependent
variable (sales and customer service performance). This relationship will be shown in the next step under
“sales” and “customer service” in Table 3. The more employees believed they were trusted initially, the
greater the sales performance (β= .24, p< .05, ϪR2= .03) and customer service performance (β= .26, p< .01,
ϪR2= .04). The second condition is that the independent variable (collective felt trust) must be significantly
related to the proposed mediator (responsibility norms). The preceding regression analysis for the first
Hypothesis supports this condition. The third and fourth conditions are that when the proposed mediator
is added to the equation in which the dependent variable is regressed on the independent variable, the
mediator is significant (third condition) and the beta coefficient for the independent variable becomes
statistically weaker or not significant (fourth condition). To test these conditions, we conducted two sets of
regression analyses, one for sales performance and one for customer service performance. It has been
shown in the discussion part that, when both collective felt trust and responsibility norms were regressed
on sales performance, responsibility norms were significant (β .26, p <.05, ϪR2= .05). Moreover, collective
felt trust became nonsignificant (β= .10, ns). Thus, responsibility norms fully mediate the relationship
between collective felt trust and sales performance. A Sobel test confirmed this mediating effect (Z= 1.96,
p< .05). When both collective felt trust and responsibility norms were regressed on customer service, and
responsibility norms were added responsibility norms were not significant (β= .13, ns). Thus, responsibility
norms did not mediate this relationship. collectively, these results provide partial support for the role of
responsibility norms as mediating between collective felt result and organizational performance.

To conclude, authors were eager to realize the impact of employees' collective perception that they trust
management on the performance of organization. They have found that employees' perceptions of being
trustworthy actually influence the accountability norms developed in organizations, as well as the sales and
customer service performance of sites. Their findings outlined the importance of examining the trusted
party, a perspective that has been largely overlooked in previous research on trust. The findings also suggest
that managers would be well advised to foster employees' perceptions of trust, as these perceptions can
significantly influence important organizational outcomes.
Drawing up the derived of this article, authors have found that responsibility norms mediated the
relationship between collective felt trust and store performance in terms of sales and customer service (in
their analysis, they have focused on groups). However, if they concentrate on individuals, instead of groups,
the result shall imply different mediating mechanisms between employee performance and collective felt
trust.