Where intrinsic job satisfaction fails to work: national moderators of intrinsic motivation

Journal of Organizational Behavior

J. Organiz. Behav. 24, 159–179 (2003)

Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/job.186

Where intrinsic job satisfaction fails towork: national moderators of intrinsicmotivationy

XU HUANG1* AND EVERT VAN DE VLIERT2

1Department of Management, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong2Department of Social and Organizational Psychology, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands

Summary This study sought for national characteristics that moderate the individual-level relationshipbetween job characteristics and job satisfaction. Data from two distinct questionnaire surveysadministered to 107,292 employees in 49 countries was analyzed by employing multilevelmodeling. Results showed that the link between intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfac-tion is stronger in richer countries, countries with better governmental social welfare pro-grams, more individualistic countries, and smaller power distance countries. By contrast,extrinsic job characteristics are strongly and positively related to job satisfaction in all coun-tries. In addition, we found that intrinsic job characteristics tend to produce motivating satis-faction in countries with good governmental social welfare programs irrespective of thedegree of power distance, while they do not tend to work so in countries with poor govern-mental social welfare programs as well as a large power distance culture. Socio-economic andcultural approaches to explaining cross-national variation in work motivation are discussed.Copyright # 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Introduction

In poorer countries (e.g., Adigun & Stephenson, 1992; Kanungo, 1990), in less individualistic coun-

tries (cf. Diener & Diener, 1995), and in countries with larger power distances (e.g., Earley &

Stubblebine, 1989; Eylon & Au, 1999), intrinsic job characteristics such as challenge, recognition,

autonomy, and the work itself are less closely related to job satisfaction, while extrinsic job character-

istics such as pay, job security, and working conditions are more closely linked with job satisfaction.

Despite the great contribution of these pioneering studies to our understanding of cross-national dif-

ferences in intrinsic/extrinsic motivation, two questions remain unsatisfactorily addressed. The first

Received 3 August 2001Revised 30 January 2002

Copyright # 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Accepted 18 October 2002

* Correspondence to: Xu Huang, Department of Management, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon,Hong Kong. E-mail: [email protected] pilot study was carried out while Xu Huang was a visitor at the Norwegian Social Science Data Services (NSD) in Bergen,Norway, under the Training and Mobility of Researchers Programme funded by the European Union. The main study wasconducted while Xu Huang was a PhD student at the University of Groningen, the Netherlands, under the Ubbo EmmiusFellowship Program.

question pertains to how to ‘explain’ the cross-national variation in the link between job characteristics

and job satisfaction, if any. Based on the World Values Survey, a three-wave (1981, 1990–1991, 1995–

1998) worldwide investigation of sociocultural and political values and beliefs of publics in more than

65 societies containing almost 80 per cent of the world’s population, Inglehart (1997, p. 329) suggested

that cross-national differences in people’s values and in how they evaluate their environments, lives,

and work might lie in differences in economic development in conjunction with cultural inertia. Build-

ing on this assertion, we attempt to shed light on how both socio-economic factors and cultural factors

predict cross-national variation in the relationship between intrinsic job characteristics and extrinsic

job characteristics, on the one hand, and job satisfaction, on the other. The second question is how the

above explanations should be scientifically tested. The conclusions of early comparative cross-national

studies were largely based on inferences instead of direct statistical testing. For example, when com-

paring workers’ behaviors in the USA and Britain, the researchers merely attributed the stronger link

between supervisors’ feedback and work performance in the USA to the fact that the USA has a smal-

ler power distance culture than Britain does (Earley & Stubblebine, 1989). Adopting a multilevel

approach, the current paper statistically tests the link between national characteristics and observed

cross-national differences in individual-level relationships.

In the following section, we formulate eight hypotheses about the influence of national character-

istics on how people perceive and evaluate their work environments. In a pilot study, we tested the

hypotheses by using a relatively small sample of nations and respondents. Based on the findings in

the pilot study, we then retested the hypotheses in the main study by using a much larger sample of

nations and respondents that allowed more refined model testing to rule out rival explanations at the

country level.

Job Characteristics and Job Satisfaction Worldwide

In the second half of the past century, Herzberg, Mausner, and Snyderman’s (1959) pioneering work on

the model of motivational versus hygiene factors inspired countless studies on the relationship between

intrinsic as well as extrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction (Locke, 1976). The weight of evi-

dence from previous research seems clear: both intrinsic and extrinsic job characteristics are positively

related to job satisfaction (cf. Dunnette, Campbell, & Hakel, 1967), but these relationships are also

dependent on third factors. A salient third factor is the extent to which workers value intrinsic job char-

acteristics and extrinsic job characteristics (Mottaz, 1985). Almost automatically, the workers’ valua-

tions draw attention to cross-national differences in people’s basic values in general (Hofstede, 1991,

2001; Schwartz, 1992), and work values in particular (Harding, Philips, & Fogarty, 1986; MOW Inter-

national Research Team, 1987). It has indeed been shown that the values workers attach to intrinsic job

characteristics and to extrinsic job characteristics vary substantially depending on nationality (Clark,

1998). Past studies have also demonstrated that the link between job characteristics and job satisfaction

varies across nations (Adigun & Stephenson, 1992; Earley & Stubblebine, 1989; Eylon & Au, 1999;

Kanungo, 1990).

Socio-economic and cultural explanations

In essence, we assume that the cross-national variation in the relationships between intrinsic as well

as extrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction may be systematically tied to certain national

160 XU HUANG AND E. VAN DE VLIERT

Copyright # 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. J. Organiz. Behav. 24, 159–179 (2003)

characteristics that predispose how the inhabitants value these job characteristics. In the cross-national

research literature, there are two sets of overarching explanatory frameworks in which socio-economic

factors and cultural factors seem to be paramount in explaining the cross-national variation in work-

related values and attitudes (e.g., Aycan, Kanungo, & Sinha, 1999; Davis, Schoorman, & Donaldson,

1997; Hofstede, 1991, 2001; Inglehart, 1997; Smith, 1992; Trompenaars, 1993). Before laying out

hypotheses on the basis of the socio-economic perspective and the cultural perspective, it should be

noted that, recently, research exploring the cross-national differences in people’s affective outcomes,

such as life satisfaction and job satisfaction, has been on the increase. Socio-economic factors (e.g.,

Veenhoven, 1991; Veenhoven & Ehrhardt, 1995), cultural factors (e.g., Hui, Yee, & Eastman, 1995;

Arrindell et al., 1997), or both (Van de Vliert & Janssen, 2002) were related to life satisfaction or

job satisfaction at the country level. However, the focal interest in the current paper is to examine

the moderating effect of national characteristics on the individual level link between job characteristics

and job satisfaction instead of the main effects of national characteristics on job satisfaction (see

Figure 1).

Socio-economic perspectiveThe major theoretical principle underlying the socio-economic perspective is firmly welded to

Maslow’s (1954) well-known need-gratification theory of well-being, which postulates that higher

needs become salient as lower needs are gratified. Prior studies suggested that lower needs are less

potent for predicting happiness in rich countries than in poor countries (Veenhoven, 1991; Veenhoven

& Ehrhardt, 1995). Moreover, Adigun and Stephenson (1992) found that British workers were moti-

vated more by intrinsic job factors such as achievement, the work itself, and recognition, whereas

Nigerian workers were motivated more by extrinsic job factors such as pay, fringe benefits, and work-

ing conditions. Kanungo (1990) revealed that Indian workers seemed to be indifferent towards chal-

lenging jobs. Inglehart (1997, p. 31) explained that, in economically developed countries, people tend

to take survival for granted. Such societies have experienced a gradual but phenomenal value change in

the course of economic development. Over time, values related to economic achievement have become

less salient than values related to enhancing self-expression (Inglehart, 1997, p. 33). Workers in richer

countries may attach more value to the intrinsic aspects of work and, therefore, may be motivated more

by intrinsic rewards, because they have taken survival for granted. By contrast, workers in poorer

countries may be motivated more by extrinsic rewards, because the lower needs (e.g., food, money)

are still more salient than the higher needs (e.g., self-esteem, self-actualization). Therefore, we

expected that:

Figure 1. National wealth, social security, cultural individualism, and cultural power distance as country-level moderators of the individual level relationship between intrinsic/extrinsic job characteristics and job

satisfaction

NATIONAL MODERATORS OF INTRINSIC MOTIVATION 161


Hypothesis 1: The positive relationship between intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction is

stronger in richer countries.

Hypothesis 2: The positive relationship between extrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction is

weaker in richer countries.

Apart from national wealth, another socio-economic characteristic that affects the extent to which peo-

ple take survival for granted is the degree of development of the national social welfare programs (or

social security system). Interest in the function of social security has heightened in the wake of the

emergence of welfare states in the last century (Ashford, 1986). The nub of the arguments is that a

fully developed social security system serves as a vehicle to secure the fulfillment of basic human

needs (Taylor-Gooby, 1991). In countries with a well-developed social welfare system, people are

more likely to experience good physical well-being, economic autonomy, and emancipation from

the confinement of a particular social system (Doyal & Gough, 1984; Plant, 1985; Weale, 1983).

The development of a social security system may well engender a shift in social value norms towards

an emphasis on self-expression. Hence, it is plausible to argue that, in countries with a well-developed

social security system, workers may tend to place more emphasis on higher needs and are therefore

more likely to be motivated by intrinsic rewards. In countries without a well-developed social security

system, on the other hand, workers may be motivated more by extrinsic rewards that satisfy basic

needs. Thus, it followed that:


stronger in countries with a better social security system.


weaker in countries with a better social security system.

Cultural perspectiveIt is intriguing that, compared to the socio-economic perspective, the cultural perspective takes a rather

different approach to the explanation of the cross-national differences in needs structure. People from a

particular country are seen as prone to placing more emphasis on higher needs, not simply because

their lower needs are gratified, but primarily because this is a culturally inherited trait (see Hofstede,

1991, pp. 73–74). For instance, cultural individualism has been consistently found to be positively

related to self-esteem at country level (Chiu, 1993; Nevis, 1983; Page & Cheng, 1992). Moreover,

self-esteem is more strongly related to life satisfaction in more individualistic countries (Diener &

Diener, 1995; Oishi, 2000; Oishi, Diener, Lucas, & Suh, 1999). These findings are basically supportive

of Hofstede’s (1991) observation that in individualistic cultures people tend to be self-reliant, be self-

motivated, and place more value on individual interests. If such culturally inherited values serve as a

criterion for evaluating the meaning of various management techniques and the valences of their beha-

vioral outcomes, it should not come as a surprise that workers in individualistic countries value intrin-

sic job characteristics more than do workers in collectivistic countries. By contrast, in collectivistic

countries, economic and social security is often considered more important to life than freedom and

control in the work place (Kanungo, 1990), and economic as well as social goals are ranked higher than

individual goals (Alpander & Carter, 1995; Nevis, 1983). Put differently, in collectivistic countries,

higher needs such as self-actualization often give way to lower needs such as economic security

and social affiliation (Hofstede, 1991). Hence, workers in collectivistic countries are more likely to

place great emphasis on extrinsic aspects of their jobs than workers in individualistic countries.


stronger in countries with a more individualistic and less collectivistic culture.




weaker in countries with a more individualistic and less collectivistic culture.

Culturally transmitted individualistic or collectivistic needs alone, however, may not provide a suffi-

cient explanation of the cross-national differences in people’s evaluations of job characteristics. A clo-

sely related cultural variable, cultural power distance, defined and investigated by Hofstede (1980,

1991), may, in part, also explain such differences. For instance, frequent recognition of good work

and feedback, often regarded as desirable intrinsic rewards in small power distance countries, were

interpreted by employees in large power distance countries as undesirable and unnecessary

(Earley & Stubblebine, 1989). Hofstede (1991) argued that a small power distance culture is charac-

terized by a more participative style of management and greater aspiration to autonomy among indi-

vidual workers. It is, therefore, reasonable to expect that intrinsic job characteristics, such as autonomy

and management feedback, are valued more by workers in countries with a smaller power distance

culture. By contrast, in countries with a large power distance culture, people take social inequality

for granted, and less powerful people are usually dependent on the more powerful people. Moreover,

in these countries, status, power, skills, and wealth are expected to go together. In other words, the

pursuit of more tangible rewards, such as pay, promotion, and good working conditions, may be the

primary goal of most people as they strive for more power and more privileges. Hence:


stronger in countries with a smaller cultural power distance culture.


weaker in countries with a smaller cultural power distance culture.

Explanatory competitors

Selecting the four most commonly used country-level predictors—national wealth, national social

security, cultural individualism, and cultural power distance—as country-level moderators of the link

between job characteristics and job satisfaction in the current research was complicated by the fact that

all four national characteristics are potential explanatory competitors. Therefore, it is desirable to iden-

tify which one is the ultimate country-level explanatory variable, if any. In a broader sense, it is intri-

guing to see whether the socio-economic variables or the cultural variables have more explanatory power.

We trust that the above problem can be mitigated by controlling for potential confounds. In this vein,

we sought to control for as many of the hypothesized moderating effects as possible by allowing the

four moderators—national wealth, national social security, cultural individualism, and cultural power

distance—to control for each other. Therefore, taking the above arguments together, we attempted to

explore whether controlling all other predictors will disconfirm some of the eight hypotheses.

Pilot Study

We conducted a pilot study using the data retrieved from the International Social Survey Program

(ISSP). Nineteen of the ISSP members took part in the 1997 Work Orientation Survey. After dropping

all respondents who were not full-time workers or who had missing values, we finally based our

analysis on a sample of 8,506 full-time employees nested within 19 countries. In this pilot study,

job satisfaction was measured using a 7-point Likert scale item (1¼Disagree to 7¼Agree): ‘How



satisfied are you in your (main) job?’ Intrinsic job characteristics (IJC) and extrinsic job characteristics

(EJC) were measured using five 5-point Likert scale items (1¼Disagree to 5¼Agree). Two items

were predominantly IJC (‘My job is interesting’; ‘I can work independently’) and three items were

predominantly EJC (‘My job is secure’; ‘My income is high’; ‘My opportunities for advancement

are high’). National wealth was the Gross National Product per capita (GNP) retrieved from a statis-

tical reference book, National Cultures of the World (Parker, 1997). Social security level was measured

using a dummy variable retrieved from the same statistical reference book with 1 and 0 referring to a

country with or without a full social security system, respectively. Hofstede’s (1991) individualism

index and his power distance index (both ranging from 1 to 100) were used as the operationalizations

of cultural individualism and cultural power distance.

In order to distinguish IJC from EJC, we performed a confirmatory factor analysis using the Lisrel

8.14 computer package (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1993) on the five items at the individual level. The multi-

ple indicators of model fit indicated that the two-factor model of two IJC items versus three EJC items

achieved the maximum model fit among the three hypothetical models. Following the procedures used

by Mullen (1995), Singh (1985), and Peterson et al. (1995), we performed a multi-sample factor ana-

lysis to examine whether the factor structures of job characteristics are equivalent across nations. The

results showed a modest equivalence of the constructs across 19 countries (CFI¼ 0.95;

RMSEA¼ 0.07; for the meaning of the indicators, see Byrne, 1994).

Employing multilevel analysis (see the Method section for a detailed description of multilevel ana-

lysis), we tested whether the relationships between IJC and EJC, on the one hand, and job satisfaction,

on the other, vary across nations. We found that the link between IJC and job satisfaction significantly

varied across nations (residual variance¼ 0.01, p< 0.05), while the link between EJC and job satisfac-

tion did not vary across nations (residual variance¼ 0.00, n.s).

We also found that the cross-national variation in the link between IJC and job satisfaction could be

explained by the four national characteristics (national wealth, social security, individualism, and

power distance), but to varying degrees. Plots of the results showed that, in support of Hypotheses

1, 3, 5, and 7, the positive relationship between IJC and job satisfaction was stronger in richer coun-

tries, in higher social security countries, in more individualistic countries, and in smaller power

distance countries (see Figure 2).

Context

The Surveys and the TimeframeThe data of the pilot study was retrieved from the Work Orientation Survey 1997, part of Interna-

tional Social Survey Programme (ISSP), which is a voluntary grouping of study teams in 27 nations.

The purpose of the survey was to investigate work-related attitudes such as job satisfaction and job

stress across the nations. Two waves of the Work Orientation Survey were conducted in the 1990s.

Work Orientation Survey 1997 was the second wave. Nineteen of the ISSP members have taken

part in this survey, including Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, West Germany, East

Germany, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, Poland, Portugal,

Russia, Slovenia, Spain, and Sweden.

The data of the main study was drawn from a survey conducted in 2000 in a multinational

company. The survey was conducted by the company and was aimed at studying the differ-

ences in employees’ work-related attitudes, including job satisfaction, organizational commitment,



organizational trust, perceived organizational effectiveness, perceived management competence,

acceptance of change and so forth, across the company’s business units in different countries.

We took a small part of the above two surveys to test our hypotheses in this research. The data used

in our study was obtained from employees located in 41 countries, including Argentina, Australia,

Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Denmark, Egypt, Finland, France, Germany,

Greece, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, The Netherlands, New Zeal-

and, Norway, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Salvador, South Africa, South Korea,

Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Thailand, Turkey, UK, USA, and Venezuela.

The SampleThe sample of the pilot study was selected on the basis of random sampling and thus included

respondents from different industries and professions. The demographic breakdown of the sample

was 61 per cent male (N¼ 5,218), 39 per cent female (N¼ 3,288), 41 per cent lower class

(N¼ 3,493), and 59 per cent middle or higher class (N¼ 5,013). The mean age was 39.5, and the

mean year of education was 13.9.

A detailed description of the sample of the main study can be found in the Methods Section. A

prior agreement with the multinational company largely restricts our description of the nature of the

organization’s work. However, we can indicate that the respondents performed production, main-

tenance, clerical, professional, or managerial work.

Figure 2. National wealth, social security, cultural individualism, and cultural power distance as moderators of therelationship between intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction in the pilot study



Method

Compared to the pilot study, there were several methodological improvements in the main study. First,

we used a larger sample, which is more likely to minimize the problem of multicollinearity when

building more complex multilevel models (Kreft & De Leeuw, 1998; Snijders & Bosker, 1999). Sec-

ond, we used a 7-item measure of job satisfaction instead of the single-item measure used in the pilot

study. Third, compared to the pilot study, the sample of the main study covered a wider range of coun-

tries, thus enhancing the cross-national generalizability of the findings.

Sample

The data was drawn from a survey conducted in 2000 in a multinational company. Questionnaires were

administered to employees through the management. All items were translated into the languages of

the countries under investigation by professional translation agencies. Employees were told that the

questionnaires would be kept completely anonymous so that the management would not be able to

identify the individual respondents. The response rate was about 76 per cent. The analysis was based

on a sample of 98,786 respondents from 41countries (see the Appendix): 62 per cent male, 51 per cent

blue-collar workers, and 49 per cent white-collar workers. The average age was 36, and the average

tenure period was 10 years.

Dependent variable: job satisfaction

Job satisfaction was measured using the average of seven items: ‘How satisfied are you with the fol-

lowing aspects of your current job: ‘‘Being treated with fairness and respect’’; ‘‘Your pay’’; ‘‘Recog-

nition for performance’’; ‘‘Your benefits’’; ‘‘Career opportunities’’; ‘‘Job security’’; ‘‘The training you

have received’’’ (1¼Very dissatisfied to 5¼Very satisfied: Cronbach’s�¼ 0.83).

Independent variables: job characteristics and national characteristics

In the literature, intrinsic job characteristics (IJC) often refer to job content and tasks that lead to self-

expression and self-actualization, while extrinsic job characteristics (EJC) refer to the job context or

the environment in which the work is done or to job features determined by external events or other

people (Voydanoff, 1978). However, there are two problems with such definitions. First, job features

determined by external events or other people could also cause intrinsic motivation (e.g., Bandura,

1988; Lindenberg, 2001). For example, recognition for one’s work was regarded as an intrinsic job

factor in classical work (Hackman & Oldham, 1976; Herzberg et al., 1959), although this job charac-

teristic inevitably involves another person: the boss. In this paper, we defined intrinsic job character-

istics as job features that are more likely to enhance self-expression and self-actualization, whereas we

defined extrinsic job characteristics as job features that tend to meet workers’ lower-order needs, such

as security needs and social affiliation needs (Maslow, 1954). The second problem in distinguishing

intrinsic and extrinsic job characteristics is that a job characteristic may contribute to both intrinsic and

extrinsic motivation, depending on the workers’ perceptions (Lindenberg, 2001). For example, promo-

tion is regarded as an extrinsic job factor (e.g., Mottaz, 1985; Spector, 1996). Yet, promotion is clearly

related to an intrinsic job factor: growth or advancement (Herzberg et al., 1959). Similarly, it was



found that extrinsic job characteristics such as pay (e.g., Tang & Gilbert, 1995) and security (Kuhnert

& Palmer, 1991) contribute to both intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction. To deal with this problem,

we adopted a strategy of using the factor scores of a number of IJC and EJC items so that each respon-

dent’s perception of the degree of intrinsic and extrinsic job characteristics could be estimated.

Predominantly IJC was represented by a 2-item 5-point Likert scale measure (1¼Disagree to

5¼Agree): ‘My job offers little opportunity to use my skills and abilities’; ‘My immediate boss sel-

dom gives me recognition for work done well’. Predominantly EJC was represented by a 3-item

5-point Likert scale measure (1¼Disagree to 5¼Agree): ‘From what I hear, our pay is as good as

in other companies in our industry’; ‘Overall the physical working conditions where I work are satis-

factory (e.g., ventilation, temperature, space to work,)’; ‘The people I work with are willing to help

each other, even if it means doing something outside their usual activities’. Based on an overall pan-

cultural factor analysis, each respondent’s five raw scores were multiplied by the corresponding load-

ings on the intrinsic and extrinsic job factors analysis, respectively. Next, to disentangle the individual

differences and the country differences, we centered the individual-level IJC and EJC on their country

means (individual score minus country mean, see Kreft & De Leeuw, 1998, pp. 106–107). As in

the pilot study, we conducted a confirmatory factor analysis and a multi-sample confirmatory factor

analysis. National wealth, social security, cultural individualism and cultural power distance were the

same as in the pilot study.

Control variables

Past research has shown that demographic variables, such as gender, age, job level, and tenure, also

affect the job satisfaction responses of individuals (e.g., Locke, 1976). Therefore, these variables were

controlled for with the help of dummy variables for gender (dichotomy), age group (five levels), job

level (five levels), and tenure group (seven levels). As mentioned earlier, national wealth, national

social security, cultural individualism, and cultural power distance were strongly intercorrelated. In

order to identify the most powerful country-level explanatory variable, we let the four country-level

predictors control for each other. Because potential confounds among the national characteristics may

not only come from the main effects of competitors, but also from their interaction terms with other

variables (Anderson & Anderson, 1996), we adopted a very conservative approach by including all

four country-level variables and all possible two-way and three-way interactions of job characteristics

and national characteristics in the model.

Analyses

Data analyses were performed using Mlwin, a computer package for analyzing multilevel models

(Goldstein et al., 1998). Mlwin produces estimates comparable to the unstandardized regression coeffi-

cients in ordinary regression analysis. However, compared to ordinary regression analysis, multilevel

analysis allows improved model specification and more accurate estimation of standard errors (Snijders

& Bosker, 1999). Moreover, how well a given model fits the data can be tested by chi-square change.

Results

As in the pilot study, to distinguish IJC from EJC, we performed a confirmatory factor analysis at the

individual level. Similar to the results of the pilot study, the multiple indicators of model fit presented



in Table 1 indicated that the two-factor model of two IJC items versus three EJC items achieved the

maximum model fit among the three hypothetical models. When we conducted the multi-sample con-

firmatory analysis to check the structural equivalence of job characteristics items using the entire sam-

ple, the Lisrel 8.14 computer program failed to generate any results on such a large sample. Therefore,

we split the sample into three parts. In each part, we randomly selected six countries and performed the

multi-sample confirmatory analysis. Again, the findings showed a modest equivalence across nations

(CFI ranging from 0.87 to 0.95, RMSEA ranging from 0.07 to 0.05). Table 2 provides an overview of

summary statistics and correlations between all the variables at the country level and the individual

level.

To test the hypotheses, we performed a stepwise multilevel analysis and tested the improvement of

model fit as shown in Table 3. Mlwin decomposes the variance of the dependent variable, job satisfac-

tion, into two levels of variance: country-level variance and individual-level variance. As a rule (see

Kreft & De Leeuw, 1998), if the country-level variance accounts for 5 per cent or more of the total

variance, it will be worthwhile to conduct multilevel analysis to try to explain variances from both

levels. The results, not presented in the table, showed that 6 per cent of the total variance of job satis-

faction had to be explained at country level. The analyses shown in Table 3 were conducted after con-

trolling for demographic variables. We put IJC and EJC into the model in Step 1. The significant

positive coefficients (IJC: �¼ 0.18, p< 0.001; EJC: �¼ 0.35, p< 0.001) and a significant improve-

ment of model fit (�2¼ 32,895.7, d.f.¼ 2, p< 0.001) indicated that, at the individual level, IJC and

EJC were positively related to job satisfaction. In Step 2, we tested whether the links between IJC

and EJC, on the one hand, and job satisfaction, on the other, significantly vary across nations. A highly

significant increase of model fit in Step 2 (�2¼ 2,678.6, d.f.¼ 5, p< 0.001) indicated that there was

considerable variation in the job characteristics–job satisfaction links (or job characteristic slopes)

across countries. Mlwin also produces estimates of the residual variances of the slopes (Kreft & De

Leeuw, 1998) to indicate to what extent the IJC–satisfaction link and the EJC–satisfaction link vary

across nations, respectively. The results not presented in the table showed a significant variation in the

IJC–job satisfaction link across nations (residual variance of the IJC slopes¼ 0.01, p< 0.001).

Although the residual variance of the EJC–satisfaction link also reached significance (residual var-

iance of the EJC slopes¼ 0.00, p< 0.001), the variance was too small to indicate any practically sig-

nificant variation in the slopes. Thus, in line with the findings of the pilot study, Hypotheses 2, 4, 6, and

8, dealing with the explanations of the variation of the slopes in terms of EJC, were not confirmed.

Before moving on to Step 3 to let the four country-level variables control for each other, following

the same procedure as in the pilot study, we tested Hypotheses 1, 3, 5, and 7. The results, not presented

in the table, showed that the four interaction terms of IJC and wealth (�¼ 0.05, p< 0.001), IJC and

social security (�¼ 0.14, p< 0.001), IJC and individualism (�¼ 0.08, p< 0.001), and IJC and power

distance (�¼�0.07, p< 0.001), were all significant and there was a significant increase in model fit

(see Figure 3). Hence, the four hypotheses were supported.

Table 1. Goodness-of-fit indices for one- and two-factor models of intrinsic job characteristics and extrinsic jobcharacteristics

Model �2 d.f. GFI AGFI RMSR CFI

Null model 20,738.42* 10 0.92 0.88 0.12 0.00One-factor model 1,873.8* 6 0.98 0.96 0.05 0.79Two-factor model 905.07* 2 1.00 0.97 0.02 0.96

Note: GFI, goodness-of-fit index; AGFI, adjusted goodness-of-fit index; RMSR, root mean square of residuals; CFI, comparativefit index. Two-factor model� one-factor model: �2(4)¼ 908.73 ( p< 0.001).*p< 0.001.



Tab

le2

.M

ean

s,st

and

ard

dev

iati

on

s,an

dze

ro-o

rder

corr

elat

ion

s(N

¼9

8,7

86

)

MS

D1

23

45

67

1.

Intr

insi

cjo

bch

arac

teri

stic

s—

——

�0

.41y

0.5

9y

0.5

8y

0.5

0y

�0

.62y

0.0

32

.E

xtr

insi

cjo

bch

arac

teri

stic

s—

—0

.15y

—�

0.3

0�

0.3

7*

�0

.20

0.0

20

.67y

3.

Nat

ion

alw

ealt

h1

4,2

86

.55

28

,28

2.5

00

.18y

�0

.00

—0

.61y

0.7

0y

0.6

9y

0.0

44

.S

oci

alse

curi

ty0

.69

0.4

60

.19y

�0

.05y

0.7

2y

—0

.51y

�0

.41y

�0

.15

5.

Ind

ivid

ual

ism

55

.41

26

.78

0.2

0y

�0

.03y

0.7

5y

0.7

2y

—�

0.6

9y

�0

.01

6.

Pow

erd

ista

nce

54

.63

19

.85

�0

.19y

�0

.04y

�0

.68y

�0

.55y

�0

.65y

—�

0.2

67

.Jo

bsa

tisf

acti

on

3.2

30

.75

0.2

7y

0.5

6y

�0

.01y

�0

.05y

�0

.01y

�0

.04y

—

Notes:

*p<

0.0

5;y p

<0

.01.



In Step 3, we entered national wealth, social security, cultural individualism, and cultural power dis-

tance, so that the four predictors would control for each other. Power distance stood out as the only

significant predictor of job satisfaction. In addition, two of the four interaction terms entered in Step 4,

IJC and social security (�¼ 0.05, p< 0.05) and IJC and power distance (�¼�0.04, p< 0.01), were

significant. In Step 5, six two-way interaction terms of the four country-level variables were entered

but none of them reached significance. Finally, we tested all cross-level three-way interactions

between IJC and the six combinations of two national characteristics in Step 6. It is worth noting that,

after controlling for all these effects, the two-way interaction effect of IJC and power distance on job

satisfaction was the only two-way interaction that remained significant. Another significant interaction

term was the three-way interaction of IJC, social security, and power distance (�¼ 0.06, p< 0.05). The

plots in Figure 4 show that intrinsic job characteristics were linked to job satisfaction in all countries

Table 3. Summary of hierarchical multilevel analyses

Job satisfaction

Variables Entry Entry Final Final Increase in modelfit

beta SEa beta SE

Step 1Intrinsic job characteristics (IJC) 0.18z 0.00 0.20z 0.05Extrinsic job characteristics (EJC) 0.35z 0.00 0.36z 0.01 �2(2)¼ 32,895.7z

Step 2 (random slopes)IJC 0.21z 0.01 — —EJC 0.36z 0.01 — — �2(5)¼ 2,678.6z

Step 3National wealth (W) �0.02 0.03 �0.03 0.10Social security (SECU) �0.07 0.07 0.03 0.17Individualism (IND) �0.05 0.04 �0.10 0.11Power distance (PD) �0.11y 0.04 �0.06 0.08 �2(4)¼ 10*

Step 4IJC�W �0.01 0.01 �0.02 0.03IJC� SECU 0.05* 0.02 0.03 0.05IJC� IND 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03IJC� PD �0.04y 0.01 �0.08z 0.02 �2(4)¼ 28.5z

Step 5W� SECU �0.02 0.11 �0.01 0.11W� IND 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06W� PD �0.04 0.04 �0.03 0.04SECU� IND 0.06 0.12 0.07 0.12SECU� PD �0.08 0.10 �0.05 0.10 �2(6)¼ 8.9IND� PD 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05

Step 6IJC�W� SECU 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.03IJC�W� IND �0.01 0.02 �0.01 0.02IJC�W� PD 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01IJC� SECU� IND 0.02 0.04 0.02 0.04IJC� SECU� PD 0.06* 0.03 0.06* 0.03 �2(6)¼ 13*IJC� IND� PD �0.02 0.02 �0.02 0.02

Notes:*p< 0.05; yp< 0.01; zp< 0.001.aSE, standard error.



Figure 3. National wealth, social security, cultural individualism, and cultural power distance as moderators of therelationship between intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction in the main study

Figure 4. National social security and cultural power distance as joint moderators of the relationship betweenintrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction in the main study



with high levels of social security, small power distance, or both, while there was no relationship

between intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction in countries with both low levels of social

security and large power distances (simple slope test: �¼ 0.01, n.s.).

Discussion

The results of the pilot study and the main study reported here show that, whereas the link between

intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction varied significantly from country to country, the posi-

tive relationship between extrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction remained more or less the

same across the 49 countries. Furthermore, the consistent results across the two studies show that the

cross-national variation in the link between intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction can be

explained by national wealth, national social security, cultural individualism, and cultural power dis-

tance. The relationship between intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction is stronger in richer

countries, higher social security countries, more individualistic countries, and countries with a smaller

power distance culture.

These findings are in harmony with the explanations drawn from the socio-economic perspective, on

the one hand, and the cultural perspective, on the other. The socio-economic perspective explains the

stronger link between intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction in richer countries and in coun-

tries with better social security systems in terms of survival issues being less important and intrinsic

aspects of jobs being more important for workers (Inglehart, 1997). From the cultural perspective, on

the other hand, the stronger link between intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction in more indi-

vidualistic countries and in countries with a smaller power distance culture is attributed to cultural

norms. In those countries, people are more likely to be socialized to focus on intrinsic aspects of their

jobs (Hofstede, 1980). For example, it was found that people in individualistic countries tend to attach

more value to high-order needs, such as self-actualization, than people in collectivistic countries

(Alpander & Carter, 1995; Nevis, 1983). Recent research has also shown that empowerment (Eylon

& Au, 1999; Robert et al., 2000) and receiving recognition from a boss (Earley & Stubblebine, 1989)

were more likely to be accepted by employees in countries with a smaller power distance culture.

The findings also suggest that social security is a stronger moderator of the intrinsic job character-

istics–job satisfaction link than national wealth. It appears that the degree of development of social

security system is more likely to capture the degree of socio-economic development of a nation than

national wealth per se. In a high social security country, people are more likely to be able to fulfill not

only their basic human needs such as physical well-being and safety, but also their need for emancipa-

tion from the confinement of a particular social system (Taylor-Gooby, 1991). Besides, Hofstede

(1991) as well as Shackleton and Ali (1990, p. 111) observed that cultural power distance is more rele-

vant for organizational structure and behavior in organizations than cultural individualism, for power

distance is closely related to dominant organizational phenomena such as sharing power and centra-

lization. Similarly, our findings do suggest that cultural power distance was a stronger determinant of

how workers assess their intrinsic job characteristics than cultural individualism.

The remaining question is whether socio-economic factors or cultural factors determine the cross-

national variation in the impact of intrinsic job characteristics on job satisfaction. Inglehart (1997)

pointed out that, since Marx and Weber, there has been an unresolved tension between socio-economic

determinism and cultural determinism in explaining social development. Whereas Marxists tend to

attribute social and cultural changes to economic development and improvement of productivity,

Weberians argue that it is culture that nurtures economic development and social change. Rejecting both



socio-economic determinism and cultural determinism, Inglehart contended that value changes in

societies are linked to both socio-economic factors and cultural factors. Indeed, this socio-cultural

perspective has drawn much attention in recent cross-national studies (e.g., Arrindell et al., 1997;

Inglehart, 1997; Oishi et al., 1999), in which socio-economic and cultural factors were used simulta-

neously to explain cross-national differences in people’s values, attitudes, and behaviors. The findings

shown in Figure 4, too, are supportive of the idea that socio-economic factors and cultural factors rein-

force and compensate each other in shaping people’s evaluations of their work. Specifically, intrinsic

job characteristics are associated with job satisfaction in countries with high social security and small

power distances, because in these countries (e.g., Denmark, Netherlands, and the USA) socio-economic

status and cultural norms predispose people to value intrinsic aspects of their jobs more. Moreover,

there is a significant link between intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction in countries with high

social security and large power distance (e.g., Malaysia, Colombia, and Venezuela). It seems that social

security alone is sufficient to shift people’s values towards self-expression, thus making them value

intrinsic aspects of their jobs more. In addition, compared to high social security countries, in low social

security countries people are unlikely to take survival for granted, but they may still value intrinsic job

characteristics if their country has a relatively small power distance culture (e.g., Argentina, Pakistan,

and South Africa). Although we were not in a position to include many Eastern European countries in

our sample, it makes a good sense to argue that many of the Eastern European countries may belong to

this category. Finally, if a country’s socio-economic status and cultural norms constitute an environment

in which intrinsic rewards from one’s job are undermined, such as those countries with low social secur-

ity and large power distances (e.g., Egypt, Mexico, and the Philippines), intrinsic job characteristics are

not related to job satisfaction. In a nutshell, intrinsic motivation might work in countries with higher

levels of social security irrespective of the degree of power distance, while it might not function in larger

power distance countries with lower levels of social security.

Limitations

The studies have three salient limitations. First, while job satisfaction was an overall measure in the

pilot study, we used a job ‘facet’ approach to measure job satisfaction in the main study. At first glance,

all facets including pay, benefits, job security, career opportunity, training received, recognition for

performance, and being treated with respect seem to be external. The lack of a more straightforward

measure of intrinsic job satisfaction dealing with achievement or the work itself may explain why the

IJC–satisfaction link is whereas EJC–satisfaction link is not moderated. However, we argue that the

facets of recognition and respect are to some extent intrinsic in nature, not only because many psychol-

ogists believe they are (Dyer & Parker, 1975), but also because they were indeed treated as facets

representing intrinsic job satisfaction in some prior studies (Hackman & Oldham, 1976; Herzberg

et al., 1959; Simonetti & Weitz, 1972; Singer & Coffin, 1996; Wernimont, 1966). Moreover, it has been

repeatedly ascertained that subjective satisfaction measures tend ‘to constitute a syndrome, so that

when satisfaction is expressed with one realm it is likely to be expressed in other realms as well’

(Inkeles, 1997, p. 335). Workers’ general affective states of certain aspects of their jobs may well ‘spill

over’ onto evaluations of other job aspects (cf. Bamundo & Kopelman, 1980; Judge & Watanabe,

1993; Near & Rechner, 1992). Furthermore, although job satisfaction was measured differently in

the pilot study and the main study, the patterns of moderating effects on the IJC–satisfaction link

are essentially the same as in both studies.

Second, since it was not intended that the two surveys used in the studies would be used exclusively

to examine the relationship between job characteristics and job satisfaction, intrinsic job characteris-

tics were measured using two items in each study only, leading to a potential problem of construct



validity. However, this problem is mitigated by the fact that the confirmatory factor analyses of the

different job characteristic items in the pilot study and the main study revealed a similar two-factor

structure of intrinsic versus extrinsic job characteristics. Moreover, in both studies, we found that

the link between intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction varied from country to country, while

the relationship between extrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction remained nearly constant

across countries. Finally, although the two studies used completely different samples as well as differ-

ent items to measure intrinsic job characteristics, the interaction effects of intrinsic job characteristics

and each of the four national characteristics showed remarkable convergence (see Figures 2 and 3).

A related third problem is that in the main study one of the two IJC items (‘my immediate boss

seldom gives me recognition for performance’) and one of the job satisfaction measures (‘satisfaction

with recognition for performance’) are closely linked conceptually. Likewise, the EJC item ‘from what

I hear, our pay is as good as in other companies in our industry’ is conceptually linked to ‘satisfaction

with pay’. The closely related items may blur the empirical test of the theoretical relationships between

job characteristics and job satisfaction, the central concern of the paper. However, even though the IJC

item and the job satisfaction item are conceptually related, our findings still showed that in lower social

security countries with a large power distance culture, IJC was not related to job satisfaction. Though it

is not clear whether, in the main study, the consistently strong individual level link between EJC and

job satisfaction is due to the fact that ‘satisfaction with pay’ may be closely related to the correspond-

ing EJC items, at least in pilot study, we found that EJC was strongly related to job satisfaction across

nations as well.

Implications for cross-cultural researchers

In the past, most cross-national organizational research was conducted at country level. Despite the con-

tribution of these studies to our understanding of cross-national variation in organizational behaviors,

little is known about how national contexts influence the impact of organizational variables on workers’

attitudes and behaviors. Many prominent scholars (e.g., House, Rousseau, & Thomas-Hunt, 1995; Van

de Vijver & Leung, 1997; Rousseau, 1985) argue that it is essential to develop a multilevel approach to

organizational research in order to address cross-level phenomena. The current study is perhaps among

the first to use a multilevel approach to address national contextual influences on individual workers’

attitudes. It is noteworthy that, as presented in Table 3, the main effect of cultural power distance on job

satisfaction disappeared after the cross-level interaction term was entered into the model. In other

words, the main effect of cultural power distance was an illusion as it was taken over by the cross-level

moderating effect of cultural power distance on the IJC–satisfaction link. Moreover, the multilevel

approach seems to be useful to examine how different national characteristics jointly influence the rela-

tionship between organizational variables and workers’ attitudes and behaviors.

Implications for management theorists

The notion that intrinsic rewards are more important than extrinsic rewards in producing job satisfac-

tion has been deeply embedded in the imperatives of nearly every concept of modern management

ideas (e.g., Steers, Porter, & Bigley, 1996, p. 19; Thierry, 1998, p. 263). Nevertheless, some of the early

research has shown that the link between intrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction is not neces-

sarily stronger than the link between extrinsic job characteristics and job satisfaction (e.g., Dunnette

et al., 1967; Waters, 1972; Wernimont, 1966). Although we did not test the relative impacts of intrinsic

job characteristics and extrinsic job characteristics on job satisfaction directly, we have made a strong

case that while intrinsic job characteristics are not related to job satisfaction in countries with low



social security and a large power distance culture, extrinsic job characteristics are strongly and posi-

tively linked to job satisfaction in all countries.

Implications for managers

The main thrust of our findings is that the intrinsic job characteristics–job satisfaction link is absent or

less discernible in low social security countries and large power distance countries. This finding is in line

with many prior studies. For example, Adigun and Stephenson (1992) found that intrinsic job factors are

less effective in motivating Nigerian workers than British workers, and Earley and Stubblebine (1989)

demonstrated that, in large power distance countries, workers considered boss recognition manipulative

and, thus, undesirable. Even more surprisingly, Eylon and Au (1999) contended, with some empirical

support, that workers in large power distance cultures may even perform better under disempowered

conditions where tasks are structured, information is more limited, and responsibilities are explicit

and few. These findings contradict conventional wisdom that intrinsic rewards, such as empowerment,

participation, more challenge, and more recognition from one’s boss, are desirable for all workers.

Rather, our findings suggest that implementing management intervention techniques that overemphasize

the intrinsic rewards for workers in countries with poor social security systems and a large power dis-

tance culture could be ineffective, especially in manufacturing multinational companies.

Author biographies

Xu Huang is an Assistant Professor at the Department of Management at the Hong Kong Polytechnic

University. He received his PhD from the University of Groningen (the Netherlands) and MA from

Lancaster University (UK). His research interests include cross-cultural organizational psychology,

psychological empowerment, organizational justice, and management issues in China. He has pub-

lished in the Journal of International Business Studies and Applied Psychology: An International

Review.

Evert Van de Vliert is a Professor of Organizational and Applied Social Psychology at the University

of Groningen, the Netherlands. His research has been published in Academy of Management Journal,

Academy of Management Review, Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychol-

ogy, Journal of International Business Studies, Journal of Organizational Behavior, and Journal of

Personality and Social Psychlogy. His key book publication is Complex Interpersonal Conflict Beha-

viour: Theoretical Frontiers (Psychology Press, 1997). Van de Vliert’s current research interests focus

on cross-national organization psychology, with an emphasis on the impact of atmospheric thermocli-

mate on leadership and human resource management.

References

Adigun, I. O., & Stephenson, G. M. (1992). Sources of job motivation and satisfaction among British and Nigerianemployees. Journal of Social Psychology, 132, 369–376.

Alpander, G. G., & Carter, K. D. (1995). Strategic multinational intra-company differences in employeemotivation. In T. Jackson (Ed.), Cross-cultural management (pp. 92–109). Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.



Anderson, C. A., & Anderson, K. B. (1996). Violent crime rate studies in philosophical context: a destructivetesting approach to heat and southern culture of violence effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,70, 740–756.

Arrindell, W. A., Hatzichristou, C., Wensink, J., Rosenberg, E., Van Twillert, B., Stedema, J., & Meijer, D. (1997).Dimensions of national culture as predictors of cross-national differences in subjective well-being. Journal ofPersonality and Individual Differences, 23, 37–53.

Ashford, D. E. (1986). The Emergence of the welfare states. New York: Basil Blackwell.Aycan, Z., Kanungo, R. N., & Sinha, J. B. P. (1999). Organizational culture and human resource management

practices: the model of culture fit. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 30, 501–526.Bamundo, P. J., & Kopelman, R. E. (1980). The moderating effects of occupation, age, and urbanization on the

relationship between job satisfaction and life satisfaction. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 17, 106–123.Bandura, A. (1988). Self-regulation of motivation and action through goal systems. In V. Hamilton, G. H.

Bower, & N. H. Fryda (Eds.), Cognition, motivation, and affect: A cognitive science view (pp. 37–61).Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.

Byrne, B. M. (1994). Testing for the factorial validity, replication, and invariance of a measuring instrument: aparadigmatic application based on the Maslach burnout inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 29, 289–311.

Chiu, L. H. (1993). Self-esteem in American and Chinese (Taiwanese) children. Current Psychology: Researchand Reviews, 11, 309–313.

Clark, A. E. (1998). Measures of job satisfaction: what makes a good job? Evidence from OECD countries. InOECD Working Papers: Labour Market and Social Policy Occasional Papers No. 34 (Vol. 6). Paris: OECD.

Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy ofManagement Review, 22, 20–47.

Diener, E., & Diener, M. (1995). Cross-cultural correlates of life satisfaction and self-esteem. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 68, 653–663.

Doyal, L., & Gough, I. (1984). A theory of human needs. Critical Social Policy, 10, 6–33.Dunnette, M. D., Campbell, J. P., & Hakel, M. D. (1967). Factors contributing to job satisfaction and job

dissatisfaction in six occupational groups. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 2, 143–174.Dyer, L., & Parker, D. F. (1975). Classifying outcomes in work motivation research: an examination of the

intrinsic–extrinsic dichotomy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60, 455–458.Earley, P. C., & Stubblebine, P. (1989). Intercultural assessment of performance feedback. Group andOrganization Studies, 14, 161–181.

Eylon, D., & Au, K. Y. (1999). Exploring empowerment cross-cultural differences along the power distancedimension. International Journal of Intercultural Relation, 23, 373–385.

Goldstein, H., Rasbash, J., Plewis, I., Draper, D., Browne, W., Yang, M., Woodhouse, G., & Healy, M. (1998). AUser’s Guide to MlwiN. London: University of London.

Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory. OrganizationalBehavior and Human Decision Processes, 16, 250–279.

Harding, S., Philips, D., & Fogarty, M. P. (1986). Contrasting values in western Europe: Unity, diversity, andchange. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. (1959). The motivation to work. New York: Wiley.Hofstede, G. H. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Beverly Hills,

CA: Sage.Hofstede, G. H. (1991). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. London: McGraw-Hill.Hofstede, G. H. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizationsacross nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

House, R., Rousseau, D. M., & Thomas-Hunt, M. (1995). The MESO paradigm: a framework for the integration ofmicro and macro organizational behavior. Research in Organizational Behavior, 17, 71–114.

Hui, C. H., Yee, C., & Eastman, K. L. (1995). International replication note: the relationship betweenindividualism–collectivism and job satisfaction. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 44, 276–282.

Inglehart, R. (1997). Modernization and postmodernization: Cultural, economic and political change in 43societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Inkeles, A. (1997). National character: A psycho-social perspective. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Joreskog, K. G., & Sorbom, D. (1993). New features in Lisrel 8. Chicago: Scientific Software International.Judge, T. A., & Watanabe, S. (1993). Another look at the job satisfaction–life satisfaction relationship. Journal ofApplied Psychology, 78, 939–948.



Kanungo, R. N. (1990). Work alienation in developing countries: western models and eastern realities. In A. M.Jaeger, & R. N. Kanungo (Eds.), Management in developing countries (pp. 193–208). London: Routledge.

Kreft, I., & De Leeuw, J. (1998). Introducing multilevel modeling. London: Sage.Kuhnert, K. W., & Palmer, D. R. (1991). Job security, health, and the intrinsic and extrinsic characteristics of work.Group and Organization Studies, 16, 178–192.

Lindenberg, S. (2001). Intrinsic motivation in a new light. KYKLOS, 54, 317–342.Locke, E. A. (1976). The nature and causes of job satisfaction. In M. D. Dunnette (Ed.), Handbook of industrialand organizational psychology (pp. 1297–1349). Chicago: Rand McNally.

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row.Merritt, A. C. (2000). Culture in the cockpit: do Hofstede’s dimensions replicate? Journal of Cross-CulturalPsychology, 31, 283–301.

Mottaz, C. J. (1985). The relative importance of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards as determinants of worksatisfaction. Sociological Quarterly, 26, 365–385.

MOW International Research Team. (1987). The meaning of working. London: Academic Press.Mullen, M. R. (1995). Diagnosing measurement equivalence in cross-national research. Journal of InternationalBusiness Studies, third quarter, 573–596.

Near, J. P., & Rechner, P. L. (1992). Cross-cultural variations in predictors of life satisfaction: an historical view ofdifferences among West European countries. Social Indicators Research, 29, 109–121.

Nevis, E. C. (1983). Using an American perspective in understanding another culture: toward a hierarchy of needsfor the People’s Republic of China. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 19, 249–264.

Oishi, S. (2000). Goals as cornerstones of subjective well-being: linking individuals and cultures. In E. Diener, &E. M. Suh (Eds.), Culture and subjective well-being (pp. 87–112). London: MIT Press.

Oishi, S., Diener, E. F., Lucas, R. E., & Suh, E. M. (1999). Cross-cultural variations in predictors of lifesatisfaction: perspectives from needs and values. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 980–990.

Page, R. C., & Cheng, H. (1992). A preliminary investigation of Chinese and American perceptions of the self.Psychologia, 35, 12–20.

Parker, M. P. (1997). National cultures of the world: A statistical reference. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Peterson, M. F., Smith, P. B., Akande, A., et al. (1995). Role conflict, ambiguity, and overload: a 21-nation study.Academy of Management Journal, 38, 429–452.

Plant, R. (1985). The very idea of a welfare state. In P. Bean, J. Ferris, & D. Whynes (Eds.), In Defence of welfare(pp. 3–30). London: Tavistock.

Robert, C., Probst, T. M., Martocchio, J. J., Drasgow, F., & Lawler, J. J. (2000). Empowerment and continuousimprovement in the United States, Mexico, Poland, and India: predicting fit on the basis of the dimensions ofpower distance and individualism. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 643–658.

Rousseau, D. M. (1985). Issues of level in organizational research: multi-level and cross-level perspectives.Research in Organisational Behaviour, 7, 1–37.

Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical testsin twenty countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). SanDiego, CA: Academic Press.

Shackleton, V. J., & Ali, A. H. (1990). Work-related values of managers: a test of the Hofstede model. Journal ofCross-Cultural Psychology, 21, 109–118.

Simonetti, S. H., & Weitz, J. (1972). Job satisfaction: cross cultural effects. Personnel Psychology, 25, 107–118.Singer, M. S., & Coffin, T. K. (1996). Cognitive and volitional determinants of job attitudes in a voluntary

organisation. Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality, 11, 313–328.Singh, J. (1995). Measurement issues in cross-national research. Journal of International Business Studies, thirdquarter, 597–619.

Smith, P. B. (1992). Organizational behavior and national cultures. British Journal of Management, 3, 39–51.Snijders, T. A. B., & Bosker, R. J. (1999). Multilevel analysis: An introduction to basic and advanced multilevelmodeling. London: Sage.

Spector, E. S. (1996). Industrial and organizational psychology: Research and practice. New York: Wiley.Steers, R. M., Porter, L. W., & Bigley, G. A. (1996). Motivation and leadership at work. New York: McGraw-

Hill.Tang, T. L. P., & Gilbert, P. R. (1995). Attitudes toward money as related to intrinsic and extrinsic job satisfaction,

stress and work-related attitudes. Personality and Individual Difference, 19, 327–332.Taylor-Gooby, P. (1991). Social change, social welfare and social science. New York: Harvester Weatsheaf.Thierry, H. (1998). Motivation and satisfaction. In P. J. D. Drenth, H. Thierry, & C. J. De Wolff (Eds.), Handbookof work and organizational psychology (pp. 253–289). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.



Trompenaars, F. (1993). Riding the waves of culture: Understanding cultural diversity in business. London:Nicholas Brealey.

Van de Vijver, F., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross-cultural research. Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage.

Van de Vliert, E., & Janssen, O. (2002). ‘Better than’ performance motives as roots of satisfaction across more andless developed countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33, 380–397.

Veenhoven, R. (1991). Is happiness relative? Social Indicators Research, 24, 1–34.Veenhoven, R., & Ehrhardt, J. (1995). The cross-national pattern of happiness: test of predictions implied in three

theories of happiness. Social Indicators Research, 34, 33–68.Voydanoff, P. (1978). The relationship between perceived job characteristics and job satisfaction among

occupational status groups. Sociology of Work and Occupations, 5, 179–192.Waters, L. K. (1972). An empirical test of five versions of the two-factor theory of job satisfaction. OrganizationalBehavior and Human Performance, 7, 18–24.

Weale, A. (1983). Political theory and social welfare. London: Macmillan.Wernimont, P. F. (1966). Intrinsic and extrinsic factors in job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 50,

41–50.

Appendix: Country-Level Variables and Sample Sizesfor Two Studies Covering 49 Countries

Pilot study Main studyGNP Social security Individualism Power distance N N

1. Argentina 6,800 0 46 49 5042. Australia 17,000 1 90 36 4413. Austria 20,200 1 55 11 3,8474. Belgium 23,950 1 75 65 4,4695. Brazil 2,680 1 38 69 5,0396. Bulgaria 1,140 0 3517. Canada 20,800 1 80 39 3298. Chile 2,550 0 23 63 3589. Colombia 1,500 1 10.5 72.5 136

10. Czech 2,710 0 43411. Denmark 24,400 1 74 18 483 13212. Egypt 730 0 38 80 5913. Finland 26,000 1 63 33 23414. France 20,400 1 71 68 378 6,06315. Germany W. 22,300 1 67 35 431 7,22716. Germany E. 22,300 1 67 35 16117. Greece 8,200 1 35 60 16918. Hong Kong 14,600 0 25 68 3,26619. Hungary 3,350 1 57120. India 369 0 48 77 3,08921. Indonesia 680 0 14 78 1,30322. Israel 12,100 1 54 13 57323. Italy 18,600 1 76 50 379 56324. Japan 26,900 1 46 54 437 31025. Malaysia 2,960 1 26 104 1,25226. Mexico 3,660 0 30 81 7,91327. Netherlands 18,300 1 80 38 17,26928. New Zealand 14,900 1 79 22 417 134

Continues



Appendix: Continued

29. Norway 44,000 1 69 31 892 9830. Pakistan 410 0 14 55 39231. Peru 1,430 0 16 64 5532. Philippines 860 0 32 94 337 2,01033. Poland 2,260 1 26434. Portugal 9,000 1 27 63 746 90535. Russia 2,340 0 48036. Salvador 1,190 0 8 66 12437. S. Africa 2,960 0 65 49 32738. S. Korea 6,650 1 18 60 36239. Singapore 16,500 1 20 74 4,09040. Slovenia 6,490 0 27 76 41541. Spain 13,200 1 51 57 290 68042. Sweden 25,100 1 71 31 467 20143. Switzerland 33,200 1 68 34 31144. Taiwan 10,000 0 17 58 6,88745. Thailand 1,940 0 20 64 4,20846. Turkey 3,670 1 37 66 28047. UK 16,700 1 89 35 3,93148. USA 23,400 1 91 40 9,62649. Venezuela 3,400 1 12 81 193



Where intrinsic job satisfaction fails to work: national moderators of intrinsic motivation

Documents

Transcript of Where intrinsic job satisfaction fails to work: national moderators of intrinsic motivation