激励人们工作:不同假设背后的价值

IF 7 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Hannes Leroy
{"title":"激励人们工作:不同假设背后的价值","authors":"Hannes Leroy","doi":"10.1111/joms.13109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Agency theory and self‐determination theory have contrasting assumptions about what motivates human beings and, accordingly, suggest differing methods of motivating others – from extrinsic rewards aimed at controlling agency to facilitating human agentic behaviour. These different assumptions are consequential – organizations and societies would look wildly different with the adoption of the one or other perspectives, with important implications for human welfare and wellbeing. The introduction to this <jats:italic>Point</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>Counterpoint</jats:italic> (PCP) calls on prominent scholars in both perspectives to clarify as well as question their assumptions about human motivation. An invitation to take a step back and clarify one's beliefs with precision, elucidating both the ideas and the data they are based on. At the same time, this PCP constitutes an invitation to explore how one's own personal preferences or values might be guiding their own (selection of) research and argumentation. We hope such internal reflection and external dialogue moves the conversation from us‐versus‐them to shared passion, from contradictory to paradoxical, and from stalemates to practical solutions that are sufficiently integrative to address today's complex societal challenges.","PeriodicalId":48445,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Management Studies","volume":"91 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Motivating People to Work: The Value Behind Diverse Assumptions\",\"authors\":\"Hannes Leroy\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/joms.13109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Agency theory and self‐determination theory have contrasting assumptions about what motivates human beings and, accordingly, suggest differing methods of motivating others – from extrinsic rewards aimed at controlling agency to facilitating human agentic behaviour. These different assumptions are consequential – organizations and societies would look wildly different with the adoption of the one or other perspectives, with important implications for human welfare and wellbeing. The introduction to this <jats:italic>Point</jats:italic> and <jats:italic>Counterpoint</jats:italic> (PCP) calls on prominent scholars in both perspectives to clarify as well as question their assumptions about human motivation. An invitation to take a step back and clarify one's beliefs with precision, elucidating both the ideas and the data they are based on. At the same time, this PCP constitutes an invitation to explore how one's own personal preferences or values might be guiding their own (selection of) research and argumentation. We hope such internal reflection and external dialogue moves the conversation from us‐versus‐them to shared passion, from contradictory to paradoxical, and from stalemates to practical solutions that are sufficiently integrative to address today's complex societal challenges.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48445,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Management Studies\",\"volume\":\"91 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":7.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Management Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13109\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Management Studies","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.13109","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

代理理论和自我决定理论对人类的动机有着截然不同的假设,并相应地提出了不同的激励他人的方法--从旨在控制代理的外在奖励到促进人类代理行为。这些不同的假设会产生重大影响--如果采用其中一种或另一种观点,组织和社会的面貌就会大不相同,从而对人类的福利和福祉产生重要影响。本《观点与对立面》(PCP)的导言呼吁这两种观点的著名学者澄清并质疑他们对人类动机的假设。邀请大家退后一步,精确地澄清自己的信念,阐明观点及其所依据的数据。与此同时,本 PCP 还邀请大家探讨自己的个人偏好或价值观是如何指导自己(选择)研究和论证的。我们希望通过这种内部反思和外部对话,使对话从 "我们 "与 "他们 "的对立走向共同的激情,从矛盾走向悖论,从僵局走向切实可行的解决方案,以充分整合的方式应对当今复杂的社会挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Motivating People to Work: The Value Behind Diverse Assumptions
Agency theory and self‐determination theory have contrasting assumptions about what motivates human beings and, accordingly, suggest differing methods of motivating others – from extrinsic rewards aimed at controlling agency to facilitating human agentic behaviour. These different assumptions are consequential – organizations and societies would look wildly different with the adoption of the one or other perspectives, with important implications for human welfare and wellbeing. The introduction to this Point and Counterpoint (PCP) calls on prominent scholars in both perspectives to clarify as well as question their assumptions about human motivation. An invitation to take a step back and clarify one's beliefs with precision, elucidating both the ideas and the data they are based on. At the same time, this PCP constitutes an invitation to explore how one's own personal preferences or values might be guiding their own (selection of) research and argumentation. We hope such internal reflection and external dialogue moves the conversation from us‐versus‐them to shared passion, from contradictory to paradoxical, and from stalemates to practical solutions that are sufficiently integrative to address today's complex societal challenges.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.40
自引率
5.70%
发文量
99
期刊介绍: The Journal of Management Studies is a prestigious publication that specializes in multidisciplinary research in the field of business and management. With a rich history of excellence, we are dedicated to publishing innovative articles that contribute to the advancement of management and organization studies. Our journal welcomes empirical and conceptual contributions that are relevant to various areas including organization theory, organizational behavior, human resource management, strategy, international business, entrepreneurship, innovation, and critical management studies. We embrace diversity and are open to a wide range of methodological approaches and philosophical perspectives.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信