Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date of Submission
Summary of Arguments
Argument 1
Argument 1 argues that it is increasingly challenging to find the motivation to work at a job that is inherently not your true calling. As such, it should suffice to say that intrinsic motivation is an essential prerequisite to the commencement of any job opportunity. Arguments made further instigate the notions that business performance may be improved through intrinsic motivation where each employee works in their specified dockets to foster corporation development in tandem with SDG goal 8.2, which alludes to the achievement of higher levels of economic productivity through diversification, technological upgrading and innovation, as well as through the focus on high-value addition and labour-intensive sectors. It was also duly noted that extrinsic motivation may be used in the long-term in the pursuit of short-term gain by employees, thereby compromising the quality of work and bringing about various ethical concerns (Aguinis et al., 2013).
Argument 2
Argument 2 argues that most companies and institutions are inclined to foster intrinsic motivation where creativity and development are required. Intrinsic motivation brings cohesion, harmony and unity of purpose to every person at the workplace. While extrinsic motivation may serve the organization in the short-term, long-term results can only be adequately communicated and executed where all personnel feel implored by personal goals, passion and desire to improve through their stipulated job descriptions.
Supporting Statement
I concur with the argument that intrinsic motivation is essential in the workplace. The crucial decision of opportunity cost beguiles employees at the workplace. Therefore, as argued, intrinsic motivation is imperative for employee motivation’s sole purpose. The Candle Problem, created by Sam Glucksberg realized that mechanical rewards and punishments hindered creativity and were useless in terms of economic productivity (Duncker & Lees, 1945). Human beings are inherently steered towards specific goals, and the realization of the same is primarily a result of intrinsic motivation. The drive to keep working and improving their efficiency and creativity at the workplace may not only make them more driven to the company’s goals but will culminate in the more important aspect of passion and dedication to the job. A great example of the applicability of intrinsic motivation would be the dissemination of specific tasks to employees who may be interested in them rather than providing a monetary incentive for the same tasks to be done. Quintessentially, arguments 1 and 2 bring to light the imperative nature of intrinsic motivation by the employees in a company.
References
Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Culpepper, S. A. (2013). Best-practice recommendations for estimating cross-level interaction effects using multilevel modeling. Journal of Management, 39(6), 1490-1528.
Amabile, T. M., & Pratt, M. G. (2016). The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in organizational behavior, 36, 157-183.
Duncker, K., & Lees, L. S. (1945). On problem-solving. Psychological monographs, 58(5), i.
“Intrinsically motivated employees perform better in their careers than extrinsically motivated ones”
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date of Submission
Summary of Arguments
Argument 1
Argument 1 argues that it is increasingly challenging to find the motivation to work at a job that is inherently not your true calling. As such, it should suffice to say that intrinsic motivation is an essential prerequisite to the commencement of any job opportunity. Arguments made further instigate the notions that business performance may be improved through intrinsic motivation where each employee works in their specified dockets to foster corporation development in tandem with SDG goal 8.2, which alludes to the achievement of higher levels of economic productivity through diversification, technological upgrading and innovation, as well as through the focus on high-value addition and labour-intensive sectors. It was also duly noted that extrinsic motivation may be used in the long-term in the pursuit of short-term gain by employees, thereby compromising the quality of work and bringing about various ethical concerns (Aguinis et al., 2013).
Argument 2
Argument 2 argues that most companies and institutions are inclined to foster intrinsic motivation where creativity and development are required. Intrinsic motivation brings cohesion, harmony and unity of purpose to every person at the workplace. While extrinsic motivation may serve the organization in the short-term, long-term results can only be adequately communicated and executed where all personnel feel implored by personal goals, passion and desire to improve through their stipulated job descriptions.
Supporting Statement
I concur with the argument that intrinsic motivation is essential in the workplace. The crucial decision of opportunity cost beguiles employees at the workplace. Therefore, as argued, intrinsic motivation is imperative for employee motivation’s sole purpose. The Candle Problem, created by Sam Glucksberg realized that mechanical rewards and punishments hindered creativity and were useless in terms of economic productivity (Duncker & Lees, 1945). Human beings are inherently steered towards specific goals, and the realization of the same is primarily a result of intrinsic motivation. The drive to keep working and improving their efficiency and creativity at the workplace may not only make them more driven to the company’s goals but will culminate in the more important aspect of passion and dedication to the job. A great example of the applicability of intrinsic motivation would be the dissemination of specific tasks to employees who may be interested in them rather than providing a monetary incentive for the same tasks to be done. Quintessentially, arguments 1 and 2 bring to light the imperative nature of intrinsic motivation by the employees in a company.
References
Aguinis, H., Gottfredson, R. K., & Culpepper, S. A. (2013). Best-practice recommendations for estimating cross-level interaction effects using multilevel modeling. Journal of Management, 39(6), 1490-1528.
Amabile, T. M., & Pratt, M. G. (2016). The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in organizational behavior, 36, 157-183.
Duncker, K., & Lees, L. S. (1945). On problem-solving. Psychological monographs, 58(5), i.
