The performance implications of ambivalent initiative: The interplay of autonomous and controlled motivations

By Adam M. Grant, Samir Nurmohamed, Susan J. Ashford, Kathryn Dekas. 2011

153 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/4f3df74c01e298e13ae239efa34f42aac234e71c

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Self-Determination Theory in Work Organizations: The State of a Science (2017, background): “Two studies by Grant et al. (2011) revealed that personal initiative positively predicted objective indicators of performance only for those who were high in autonomous motivation and low in controlled motivation.”
Beyond intrinsic and extrinsic motivation: A meta-analysis on self-determination theory’s multidimensional conceptualization of work motivation (2021, unknown): “…research indicates that the specific combination of high autonomous and low controlled motivation is associated with high levels of performance; while a combination of low autonomous and high controlled motivation is associated most strongly with distress (Grant et al., 2011; Strauss et al., 2017).”
Personal Initiative and Job Performance Evaluations: Role of Political Skill in Opportunity Recognition and Capitalization (2017, background): “Some research has explored moderators of the proactive behavior–performance relationship (e.g., Chan, 2006; Fuller, Marler, & Hester, 2012; Grant, Parker, & Collins, 2009; Grant et al., 2011), and scholars have noted the importance of considering worker characteristics when evaluating the effects of”
On the psychological and motivational processes linking job characteristics to employee functioning: Insights from self-determination theory (2015, background): “On the other hand, given that controlled motivation derives from an inadequate internalization of work goals and values, it renders employees less willing to fully invest themselves in their work and perform optimally (Grant, 2008; Grant et al., 2011).”
Pay, Intrinsic Motivation, Extrinsic Motivation, Performance, and Creativity in the Workplace: Revisiting Long-Held Beliefs (2015, methodology): “Grant et al. (2011), Study 1 [adapted from Ryan & Connell, 1989 scale] Workplace Controlled Motivation So my parents and mentors won’t get mad at me.”
When does proactivity have a cost? Motivation at work moderates the effects of proactive work behavior on employee job strain (2017, methodology): “Specifically, Grant et al. (2011) reported two studies exploring how the interaction of controlled and autonomous motivation at work shaped the effect of proactivity-related concepts on performance outcomes.”
When Putting Work Off Pays Off: The Curvilinear Relationship between Procrastination and Creativity (2020, unknown): “When it comes to different types of motivation, more is not necessarily better: it is the quality, not the quantity, that seems to matter most (Grant, Nurmohamed, Ashford, & Dekas, 2011; Vansteenkiste, Sierens, Soenens, Luyckx, & Lens, 2009).”