Volume 9, Issue 4 (12-2021)
Jorjani Biomed J 2021, 9(4): 55-61 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Roohi G, Mahmoodi-Shan G R. Job Motivation and the Influential Factors in Hospital Staff of Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Iran (2016). Jorjani Biomed J 2021; 9 (4) :55-61
URL: http://goums.ac.ir/jorjanijournal/article-1-855-en.html
URL: http://goums.ac.ir/jorjanijournal/article-1-855-en.html
1- Assistant Professor, Nursing Research Center, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran
2- Assistant Professor, Nursing Research Center, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran , mahmudish@goums.ac.ir
2- Assistant Professor, Nursing Research Center, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran , mahmudish@goums.ac.ir
Full-Text [PDF 519 kb]
(996 Downloads)
| Abstract (HTML) (4522 Views)
Discussion
According to the results of the present study, job motivation had no significant correlation with the priorities of the hospital staff in most cases, while job motivation was significantly correlated with the motivational factor of management's understanding and friendly attention to employees' problems. In this regard, the study conducted by Franco et al. indicated that honesty in management was the most important motivational factor in the viewpoint of healthcare providers (11). Moreover, Leonteva et al. and Van Borg evaluated healthcare providers regarding the same subject and reported a feeling of kinship was an important motivational factor in the viewpoint of the staff (20). However, their findings are inconsistent with the present study as the mentioned three motivational priorities of the employees were reported to be adequate salaries and benefits, proper work conditions, and job security (13). This discrepancy could be due to cultural and social differences. In addition, the aforementioned studies were mainly focused on managers, while we focused on hospital employees regarding their motivational factors.
According to the current research, factors such as interest in the job, discipline, and serious and respectful order in the workplace were the motivational priorities of the hospital employees. This is consistent with the results obtained by Balut, which indicated the main motivational factors to be job performance, development and promotion, related professional status, internal success, mental and intellectual factors, and the perception and response of individual toward their job (21). In another study conducted by Raisi et al., the first three motivational priorities were reported to be adequate salary and job benefits, proper work conditions, and job security. In the opinion of the managers and employees in the mentioned study, interest in the job was the only factor with a significant difference, and no significant difference was reported in the other factors (13). This is inconsistent with the results of the present study possibly due to interpersonal differences between the subjects.
In the current research, the factors of management's understanding and friendly attention to employees' problems, a sense of participation and belonging in task performance, and adequate salaries and job benefits had the lowest priority. According to Lambero et al., success factors and communication with colleagues had no significant correlations with job satisfaction in physicians (9). On the other hand, Farnham et al. reported that intrinsic motivation and overall motivation had a significant, positive correlation with job satisfaction (22), which is inconsistent with our findings. Although it may seem that salary and job benefits are an important motivational priority, this factor was overshadowed by the other priorities of the hospital staff in the current research.
Conclusion
According to the results, the main motivational priorities of the hospital staff were interest in the job, serious and respectful order in the work environment, and job security, followed by salary and job benefits. Furthermore, a significant correlation was denoted between the motivational factors and mutual understanding, which highlights the importance of various motivational factors.
Acknowledgments
The study protocol was approved by the officials of Golestan University of Medical Sciences (ethics code: 191390081540 IR.GOUMS.REC). Hereby, we extend our gratitude to the Vice Chancellor for Research and Technology of the university and the participants for assisting us in this research project.
How to cite:
Roohi Gh, Mahmoodi-shan Gh.R. Job Motivation and the Influential Factors in Hospital Staff of Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Iran (2016); Jorjani Biomedicine Journal. 2021; 9(4):55-61.
Full-Text: (619 Views)
Highlights
Provision of quality services is an important policy of health service organizations (1). Statistics suggest that although the quality of most products has improved in recent decades, the quality index of medical services remains unchanged (2). Motivation is a significant influential factor in the quality of human resource services (3, 4), as well as a determinant of the performance improvement of employees. The current level of individual motivation could act as a regulatory factor to optimize employees’ performance (5-7). Motivation and its application are of great importance in health services (8).
In various studies, motivation has been evaluated along with satisfaction and motivation to achieve goals, which could arise from internal or external factors (9). Hospitals are a primary health service organization with a particular structure and complexity, and manpower is considered the main source of service provision in hospitals. Therefore, recognizing and analyzing the motivational factors of hospital employees are paramount (10).
Several studies confirm the relationship between job motivation, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction. For instance, Franco et al. consider the most important motivational factors to be effectiveness, honesty in management, and job security (11). Furthermore, Timmerck identified factors such as a sense of accomplishment, recognition, a sense of responsibility, and promotion as the most important motivational priorities (12). In another study, Raisi and Mohebifar also reported factors such as adequate salary/job benefits, favorable working conditions, and job security to be the first three priorities in this regard (13).
Hospital jobs impose physical and psychological pressures on employees (14), and measuring motivation is a critical concept in this area (15), which provides theoretical and practical insights into the reasons behind different behaviors (16).
The present study aimed to evaluate the correlation between job motivation and the motivational priorities of the employees working in the hospitals affiliated to Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Iran.
Materials and Methods
This cross-sectional study was conducted on 367 hospital staff of Golestan University of Medical Sciences in 2016 during nine months. The participants were selected via stratified sampling based on the number of the staff per each hospital, followed by a simple randomized self-report, which was performed for the staff of the administrative and financial departments. The nursing and paraclinical employees with minimum work experience of six months who were willing to participate were enrolled in the study.
Data were collected using questionnaires, which were distributed by pre-trained individuals among the eligible samples. Research tools included a demographic questionnaire (age, gender, work experience, ethnicity, marital status, position, workplace, and work shifts) and the standard situational motivation scale (SIMS). The SIMS contains 16 phrases that are scored based on a seven-point likert scale (completely incorrect=1, completely correct=7) within the score range of 16-112; the higher scores in this scale indicate higher job motivation.
The internal reliability of the SIMS has been measured using the Cronbach's alpha for the subscales of internal motivation (0.86), known regulators (0.65), external motivation (0.73), and lack of motivation (0.62) (17). In Iran, Abedanzadeh et al. have also measured the Cronbach's alpha of the scale for the subscales of internal motivation (0.80), known regulators (0.88), external motivation (0.81), and lack of motivation (0.84; total: 0.82) (18). In the present study, a test version of the SIMS was completed by 30 hospital staff, and the Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the entire instrument was calculated to be 0.86. The questionnaire of Lawrence Lindal was also used for data collection in the present study, which contains 10 motivational factors scored one for the most importance and 10 for the least importance. This questionnaire was used by Turani et al. in Iran with the retest reliability and correlation of r=0.84 (13).
Data analysis was performed in SPSS version 20 using central indicators and descriptive statistics dispersion. The correlation between job motivation and motivational priorities was assessed using Spearman’s correlation-coefficient due to non-normal data distribution. Moreover, the Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-square were applied to compare the mean scores of the study groups. In all the statistical analyses, the P-value of less than 0.05 was considered significant.
Results
The mean age of the participants was 26-50 years, and their mean work experience was 11-30 years. Most of the participants were selected from Gorgan city (n=160; 42.2%), and the smallest number of the participants was in Minoodasht city (n=16; 4.2%). In total, 273 participants (71.8%) had a personal property, 313 (82.6%) worked overtime, 258 participants (68.1%) were employed in medical wards, and the remaining staff were employed in other wards. The majority of the participants were female (n=266; 70.2%), 284 participants (47.9%) had Persian ethnicity, and the majority (n=288; 76%) were married.
According to the findings, interest in the job was the first priority of 84 participants (19.8%), and their lowest motivational priority was full attention and appreciation of the work done (n=39; 9.1%). No significant correlations were observed between the statistical tests, motivational priorities, and other demographic and occupational characteristics (e.g., age, gender, workplace, marital status, overtime work, work shifts, and job position). However, Chi-square showed a significant difference between the city of residence and the motivational priorities of participation (P=0.049), appreciation (P=0.008) and honesty (P=0.040).
According to the results of Kruskal-Wallis test, the mean score of job motivation had a significant difference between various ethnicities (P=0.012). Due to the non-normal distribution of the data, Spearman’s statistical test indicated a significant correlation between job motivation and motivational priorities of management's friendly understanding and attention to employees’ problems (P=0.49; r=-0.095).
Table 1. Frequency distribution of motivational priorities in viewpoint of staff of Golestan University of medical sciences, Iran
- In the priority of employees' motivational factors the interesting, work discipline, respectful orders and job security are the first while salary and benefits are in the middle range of employees. There is also a significant relationship between motivational factors and mutual understanding.
Provision of quality services is an important policy of health service organizations (1). Statistics suggest that although the quality of most products has improved in recent decades, the quality index of medical services remains unchanged (2). Motivation is a significant influential factor in the quality of human resource services (3, 4), as well as a determinant of the performance improvement of employees. The current level of individual motivation could act as a regulatory factor to optimize employees’ performance (5-7). Motivation and its application are of great importance in health services (8).
In various studies, motivation has been evaluated along with satisfaction and motivation to achieve goals, which could arise from internal or external factors (9). Hospitals are a primary health service organization with a particular structure and complexity, and manpower is considered the main source of service provision in hospitals. Therefore, recognizing and analyzing the motivational factors of hospital employees are paramount (10).
Several studies confirm the relationship between job motivation, organizational commitment, and job satisfaction. For instance, Franco et al. consider the most important motivational factors to be effectiveness, honesty in management, and job security (11). Furthermore, Timmerck identified factors such as a sense of accomplishment, recognition, a sense of responsibility, and promotion as the most important motivational priorities (12). In another study, Raisi and Mohebifar also reported factors such as adequate salary/job benefits, favorable working conditions, and job security to be the first three priorities in this regard (13).
Hospital jobs impose physical and psychological pressures on employees (14), and measuring motivation is a critical concept in this area (15), which provides theoretical and practical insights into the reasons behind different behaviors (16).
The present study aimed to evaluate the correlation between job motivation and the motivational priorities of the employees working in the hospitals affiliated to Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Iran.
Materials and Methods
This cross-sectional study was conducted on 367 hospital staff of Golestan University of Medical Sciences in 2016 during nine months. The participants were selected via stratified sampling based on the number of the staff per each hospital, followed by a simple randomized self-report, which was performed for the staff of the administrative and financial departments. The nursing and paraclinical employees with minimum work experience of six months who were willing to participate were enrolled in the study.
Data were collected using questionnaires, which were distributed by pre-trained individuals among the eligible samples. Research tools included a demographic questionnaire (age, gender, work experience, ethnicity, marital status, position, workplace, and work shifts) and the standard situational motivation scale (SIMS). The SIMS contains 16 phrases that are scored based on a seven-point likert scale (completely incorrect=1, completely correct=7) within the score range of 16-112; the higher scores in this scale indicate higher job motivation.
The internal reliability of the SIMS has been measured using the Cronbach's alpha for the subscales of internal motivation (0.86), known regulators (0.65), external motivation (0.73), and lack of motivation (0.62) (17). In Iran, Abedanzadeh et al. have also measured the Cronbach's alpha of the scale for the subscales of internal motivation (0.80), known regulators (0.88), external motivation (0.81), and lack of motivation (0.84; total: 0.82) (18). In the present study, a test version of the SIMS was completed by 30 hospital staff, and the Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the entire instrument was calculated to be 0.86. The questionnaire of Lawrence Lindal was also used for data collection in the present study, which contains 10 motivational factors scored one for the most importance and 10 for the least importance. This questionnaire was used by Turani et al. in Iran with the retest reliability and correlation of r=0.84 (13).
Data analysis was performed in SPSS version 20 using central indicators and descriptive statistics dispersion. The correlation between job motivation and motivational priorities was assessed using Spearman’s correlation-coefficient due to non-normal data distribution. Moreover, the Mann-Whitney U test and Chi-square were applied to compare the mean scores of the study groups. In all the statistical analyses, the P-value of less than 0.05 was considered significant.
Results
The mean age of the participants was 26-50 years, and their mean work experience was 11-30 years. Most of the participants were selected from Gorgan city (n=160; 42.2%), and the smallest number of the participants was in Minoodasht city (n=16; 4.2%). In total, 273 participants (71.8%) had a personal property, 313 (82.6%) worked overtime, 258 participants (68.1%) were employed in medical wards, and the remaining staff were employed in other wards. The majority of the participants were female (n=266; 70.2%), 284 participants (47.9%) had Persian ethnicity, and the majority (n=288; 76%) were married.
According to the findings, interest in the job was the first priority of 84 participants (19.8%), and their lowest motivational priority was full attention and appreciation of the work done (n=39; 9.1%). No significant correlations were observed between the statistical tests, motivational priorities, and other demographic and occupational characteristics (e.g., age, gender, workplace, marital status, overtime work, work shifts, and job position). However, Chi-square showed a significant difference between the city of residence and the motivational priorities of participation (P=0.049), appreciation (P=0.008) and honesty (P=0.040).
According to the results of Kruskal-Wallis test, the mean score of job motivation had a significant difference between various ethnicities (P=0.012). Due to the non-normal distribution of the data, Spearman’s statistical test indicated a significant correlation between job motivation and motivational priorities of management's friendly understanding and attention to employees’ problems (P=0.49; r=-0.095).
Table 1. Frequency distribution of motivational priorities in viewpoint of staff of Golestan University of medical sciences, Iran
| % | N | Motivational Priorities |
| 19.8 | 84 | Interest in job |
| 17.7 | 79 | Serious and respectful discipline and order in workplace |
| 16.7 | 72 | Job security |
| 15.3 | 66 | Adequate and appropriate salary and job benefits |
| 14.0 | 60 | Feeling of participation and belonging in workplace |
| 13.0 | 56 | Integrity and uniformity of management toward employees |
| 10.1 | 50 | Management’s friendly understanding and attention to employees’ problems |
| 9.8 | 42 | Suitable working conditions |
| 9.3 | 40 | Possibility of promotion and career advancement |
| 9.1 | 30 | Full attention and appreciation in task performance |
A significant correlation was observed between various job motivation subscales (e.g., regulators and participation) (P<0.05). In addition, Spearman’s test regarding the subscale of external motivation and motivational factors indicated significant associations between interest in the job, discipline, and serious and respectful order in the workplace (P<0.05). Furthermore, Spearman’s test regarding the subscale of intrinsic motivation and motivational factors indicated significant correlations between interest in the job, discipline, and serious and respectful order in the work environment (P<0.05). The same test regarding the subscale of lack of motivation and motivational factors showed significant associations between interest in the job, discipline, serious and respectful order in the workplace, and job security (P<0.05) (Table 2).
Table 2. Correlations between job motivation and motivational priorities of hospital staff of Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Iran
| Motivational Priorities | |||||||||||
| Salary and Job Benefits | Participation in Decision-making | Understanding | Upgrade | Workplace Conditions | Honesty | Gratitude | Security | Discipline | Interest in Job | Row | |
| -0.021 | -0.114* | -0.137 | -0.73 | -0.135** | -0.53 | -0.019 | -0.101* | -0.147** | -0.242** | r |
Known regulators |
| 0.671 | 0.018 | 0.004 | 0.132 | 0.005 | 0.270 | 0.699 | 0.036 | 0.002 | 0.000 | P-value | |
| -0.049 | 0.046 | 0.000 | 0.056 | 0.063 | 0.024 | 0.019 | 0.052 | 0.094 | 0.231 | r | External motivation |
| 0.309 | 0.342 | 0.991 | 0.245 | 0. 192 | 0.0627 | 0.701 | 0.0284 | 0.051 | 0.000 | P-value | |
| -0.032 | -0.176** | -0.168** | -0.111* | -0.132** | -0.047 | -0.023 | -0.043 | 0.128** | -0.296** | r | Intrinsic motivation |
| 0.514 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.024 | 0.006 | 0.0336 | 0.639 | 0.379 | 0.008 | 0.000 | P-value | |
| 0.046 | 0.152** | 0.075 | 0.152** | 0.051 | 0.016 | 0.043 | 0.122* | 0.134** | 0.229** | r | Lack of motivation |
| 0.338 | 0.002 | 0.121 | 0.002 | 0.293 | 0.736 | 0.371 | 0.011 | 0.005 | 0.000 | P-value | |
| -0.009 | 0.039 | 0.095 | 0.029 | 0.043 | 0.011 | 0.005 | 0.020 | -0.024 | -0.018 | r |
Job motivation (total |
| 0.858 | 0.415 | 0.049 | 0.544 | 0.396 | 0.818 | 0.912 | 0.0687 | 0.627 | 0.0714 | P-value | |
Discussion
According to the results of the present study, job motivation had no significant correlation with the priorities of the hospital staff in most cases, while job motivation was significantly correlated with the motivational factor of management's understanding and friendly attention to employees' problems. In this regard, the study conducted by Franco et al. indicated that honesty in management was the most important motivational factor in the viewpoint of healthcare providers (11). Moreover, Leonteva et al. and Van Borg evaluated healthcare providers regarding the same subject and reported a feeling of kinship was an important motivational factor in the viewpoint of the staff (20). However, their findings are inconsistent with the present study as the mentioned three motivational priorities of the employees were reported to be adequate salaries and benefits, proper work conditions, and job security (13). This discrepancy could be due to cultural and social differences. In addition, the aforementioned studies were mainly focused on managers, while we focused on hospital employees regarding their motivational factors.
According to the current research, factors such as interest in the job, discipline, and serious and respectful order in the workplace were the motivational priorities of the hospital employees. This is consistent with the results obtained by Balut, which indicated the main motivational factors to be job performance, development and promotion, related professional status, internal success, mental and intellectual factors, and the perception and response of individual toward their job (21). In another study conducted by Raisi et al., the first three motivational priorities were reported to be adequate salary and job benefits, proper work conditions, and job security. In the opinion of the managers and employees in the mentioned study, interest in the job was the only factor with a significant difference, and no significant difference was reported in the other factors (13). This is inconsistent with the results of the present study possibly due to interpersonal differences between the subjects.
In the current research, the factors of management's understanding and friendly attention to employees' problems, a sense of participation and belonging in task performance, and adequate salaries and job benefits had the lowest priority. According to Lambero et al., success factors and communication with colleagues had no significant correlations with job satisfaction in physicians (9). On the other hand, Farnham et al. reported that intrinsic motivation and overall motivation had a significant, positive correlation with job satisfaction (22), which is inconsistent with our findings. Although it may seem that salary and job benefits are an important motivational priority, this factor was overshadowed by the other priorities of the hospital staff in the current research.
Conclusion
According to the results, the main motivational priorities of the hospital staff were interest in the job, serious and respectful order in the work environment, and job security, followed by salary and job benefits. Furthermore, a significant correlation was denoted between the motivational factors and mutual understanding, which highlights the importance of various motivational factors.
Acknowledgments
The study protocol was approved by the officials of Golestan University of Medical Sciences (ethics code: 191390081540 IR.GOUMS.REC). Hereby, we extend our gratitude to the Vice Chancellor for Research and Technology of the university and the participants for assisting us in this research project.
How to cite:
Roohi Gh, Mahmoodi-shan Gh.R. Job Motivation and the Influential Factors in Hospital Staff of Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Iran (2016); Jorjani Biomedicine Journal. 2021; 9(4):55-61.
Type of Article: Brief Report |
Subject:
Health
Received: 2021/09/1 | Accepted: 2021/11/16 | Published: 2021/12/28
Received: 2021/09/1 | Accepted: 2021/11/16 | Published: 2021/12/28
References
1. Mate KS, Rooney AL, Supachutikul A, Gyani G. Accreditation as a path to achieving universal quality health coverage. Globalization and health. 2014;10(1):1-8. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID] [Google Scholar]
2. Boerma T, Eozenou P, Evans D, Evans T, Kieny M-P, Wagstaff A. Monitoring progress towards universal health coverage at country and global levels. PLoS medicine. 2014;11(9):e1001731. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID] [Google Scholar]
3. Chaker M, Al-Azzab N. Patient satisfaction in Qatar orthopedic and sports medicine hospital (ASPITAR). International Journal of Business & Social Sciences. 2011;2(7):69-78. [Google Scholar]
4. Handayani PW, Hidayanto AN, Sandhyaduhita PI, Ayuningtyas D. Strategic hospital services quality analysis in Indonesia. Expert Systems with Applications. 2015;42(6):3067-78. [view at publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
5. Ratelle CF, Guay F, Vallerand RJ, Larose S, Senécal C. Autonomous, controlled, and amotivated types of academic motivation: A person-oriented analysis. Journal of educational psychology. 2007;99(4):734. [view at publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
6. Kusurkar R, Ten Cate TJ, Vos C, Westers P, Croiset G. How motivation affects academic performance: a structural equation modelling analysis. Advances in health sciences education. 2013;18(1):57-69. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID] [Google Scholar]
7. Deci EL, Ryan RM. Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian psychology/Psychologie canadienne. 2008;49(3):182. [view at publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
8. Pearson ES, Hall CR. Examining body image and its relationship to exercise motivation: An 18-week cardiovascular program for female initiates with overweight and obesity. Baltic Journal of Health and Physical Activity. 2013;5(2):121-31. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
9. Lambrou P, Kontodimopoulos N, Niakas D. Motivation and job satisfaction among medical and nursing staff in a Cyprus public general hospital. Human resources for health. 2010;8(1):1-9. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID] [Google Scholar]
10. Aduo-Adjei K, Emmanuel O, Forster OM. The impact of motivation on the work performance of health workers (Korle Bu Teaching Hospital): Evidence from Ghana. Hospital Practices and Research. 2016;1(2):47-52. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
11. Franco LM, Bennett S, Kanfer R, Stubblebine P. Determinants and consequences of health worker motivation in hospitals in Jordan and Georgia. Social science & medicine. 2004;58(2):343-55. [view at publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
12. Abolhoseini E, Mobaraki H, Kamali M, Shaarbafchi-Zade N. Relationship Between Performance Evaluation and Therapists' Job Motivation of Rehabilitation Centers and Public Hospitals of Tehran Based on Herzbergs' Two-Factor Model. Archives of Rehabilitation. 2018;18(4):316-27. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
13. Reisi P, Mohebi Far R. Motivated managers and employees view job teaching hospitals. Journal of Qazvin University of Medical Sciences. 2004;10(38):101-8. [Google Scholar]
14. Rezaei J, Naderi S, Mahmoudi E, Rezaei S, Hashemian AH. Job burnout rate and related demographic factors in nursing personnel employed in emergency departments of chosen educational hospitals by Kermanshah University of Medical Science in 2012. Advances in Biological Research. 2015;9(2):117-27. [Google Scholar]
15. Clancy RB, Herring MP, Campbell MJ. Motivation measures in sport: A critical review and bibliometric analysis. Frontiers in psychology. 2017;8:348. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID] [Google Scholar]
16. Hardcastle SJ, Hagger MS. Psychographic profiling for effective health behavior change interventions. Frontiers in Psychology. 2016;6:1988. [view at publisher] [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID] [Google Scholar]
17. Guay F, Vallerand RJ, Blanchard C. On the assessment of situational intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: The Situational Motivation Scale (SIMS). Motivation and emotion. 2000;24(3):175-213. [view at publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
18. Abedanzadeh R AB, Ahmadi N, Ramazanzade H. Determining the validity and reliability of situational motivation scale in middle school male students in Tehran. In: Semi-Annually Journal of Sport Management & Behavior Movement. 2016. 12L 85-96.
19. Leontieva Ls, Khalilova Tv, Galochkina Mv, Symaniuk Ee, Spirchagova En. Factors of motivation in the professional activity of medical staff. Revista Espacios. 2017;38(33). [view at publisher] [Google Scholar]
20. van der Burgt SM, Kusurkar RA, Croiset G, Peerdeman SM. Exploring the situational motivation of medical specialists: a qualitative study. International journal of medical education. 2018;9:57. [DOI] [PMID] [PMCID] [Google Scholar]
21. Ballout HI. Career success: the effects of human capital, person‐environment fit and organizational support. Journal of managerial psychology. 2007. [view at publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
22. Furnham A, Eracleous A, Chamorro‐Premuzic T. Personality, motivation and job satisfaction: Hertzberg meets the Big Five. Journal of managerial psychology. 2009. [view at publisher] [DOI] [Google Scholar]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
