Employee and Supervisor Ratings of Motivation:

Main Effects and Discrepancies Associated

with Job Satisfaction and Adjustment
in a Factory Setting’

BARBARAC. ILARDI,~DEANLEONE,TIM KASSER,

AND RICHARDM. RYAN
University of Rochester

Research and theory on employee job satisfaction and well-being has increasingly
concentrated on both intrinsic and extrinsic motivational factors. According to
self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985). autonomy, relatedness, and
competence are three intrinsic psychological needs that, if fulfilled in the workplace,
will lead to greater satisfaction, performance, and general well-being. This study
examines employee and supervisor perceptions of the employee’s autonomy,
competence, and relatedness in the workplace, as well as the degree and direction
of discrepancies between employee and supervisor reports. Both employee and
supervisor ratings of intrinsic motivational factors were significantly related to
work satisfaction, psychological health, and self-esteem, after controlling for the
extrinsic factors of pay and job status. Results of discrepancy analyses were somewhat
supportive of overrating being associated with greater well-being and job satisfaction.
Discussion of the results ties this study to relevant research from a self-determination
perspective and to the growing literature on discrepancies and self-perception.

Early research on job satisfaction and workers’ attitudes was based on the
premise that satisfied workers would be motivated to perform effectively
(e.g., Roethlisberger & Dickson, 1939). The antecedents of job satisfaction
were thus studied in the expectation that manipulation of such factors would
ultimately lead to higher productivity. Reviews of job satisfaction (Brayfield
& Crockett, 1955; Schwab & Cummings, 1970; Vroom, 1964), however,
indicate that, although high job satisfaction is reliably related to low employee
turnover and absenteeism (e.g., Mobley, 1977; Mutchinsky, 1977; Ross &

‘The authors gratefully acknowledge participants in Ilardi’s spring 1990 seminar on Group
Dynamics in Organizational Settings who assisted in data collection, and the invaluable help
of the employees and management in the upstate New York shoe factory where the data were
gathered. The authors also wish to acknowledge Ed Deci, Elizabeth Whitehead, and other
members of the Motivation Research Group at Rochester who made contributions. Funding
was provided by a faculty research grant from the University of Rochester and by grants
from NICHD (HD19914) and NIMH (MH18922) to the Motivation Research Group.
2Correspondenceconcerning this article should be addressed to Barbara C. Ilardi, Department
of Psychology, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627.

I 789

Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1993, 23, 21, pp. 1789-1805.

Copyright 1993 by V. H. Winston I% Son, Inc. All rights reserved.
1790 ILARDI ET AL.

Zander, 1957; Steers & Rhodes, 1978), it is typically only modestly and/or
indirectly related to job performance.
This lack of a clear relationship between satisfaction and performance led
to increased interest in other correlates of job satisfaction, such as en-
hanced personal adjustment and health (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Lawler, 1982;
McGregor, 1960). Some evidence indicates that high perceived control over
work-related outcomes is related to low levels of physical symptoms (Burke,
1969; Chadwick-Jones, 1970; Palmer, 1969; Spector, 1986) and that high
satisfaction is associated with fewer on-the-job accidents (Vroom, 1964),
though these issues have still not been extensively researched. Several
motivational frameworks have been used to conceptually examine these issues
(Herzberg, Mausner, & Snyderman, 1959; Porter & Lawler, 1968; Vroom,
1964; Vroom & Deci, 1992), all assuming essentially that higher levels of
motivation, resulting from the opportunities to satisfy important psychologi-
cal needs in the workplace, will result in positive work-related behaviors,
job-related attitudes, and general well-being.
More recently, self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) suggests
that individuals in a given social context will be more self-motivated and
experience greater well-being to the extent that they feel competent, autono-
mous (or self-determined), and related (or connected) to others. If an individ-
ual’s job provides these nutriments then the theory would predict that the
person will be more likely to evidence greater task enjoyment, general job
satisfaction, and psychological adjustment. Opportunities to experience
autonomy, competence, and relatedness on the job also promote an internal
perceived locus of causality (decharms, 1968) for behavior and thus can yield
a high degree of self-motivation and commitment (Deci & Ryan, 1985).
Several extensive reviews of both experimental and field studies support
this conceptual framework (e.g., Deci & Ryan, 1987, 1991; Ryan, 1993;
Ryan & Stiller, 1991). They have shown, for example, that autonomy-
supportive (as opposed to controlling) settings promote the experience of
self-determination, resulting in increased intrinsic motivation (e.g., Plant &
Ryan, 1985; Ryan, Mims, & Koestner, 1983), improved problem solving and
learning (Benware & Deci, 1984; Grolnick & Ryan, 1987), and enhanced
self-esteem and well-being (e.g., Grolnick & Ryan, 1989; Ryan & Grolnick,
1986). In addition, experiences of relatedness have also been found to pro-
mote motivation and subjective well-being (Ryan, Stiller, & Lynch, 1991).
Furthermore, research in organizational settings has shown that self-deter-
mination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985) is directly applicable to the workplace.
For example, an intervention based on the theory was implemented with
managers and subordinates in a major corporation (Deci, Connell, & Ryan,
1989). The intervention focused on teaching managers to show greater
support for employees’ self-determination by considering the subordinates’
 RATINGS OF MOTIVATION 1791

frame of reference, providing informational feedback, minimizing the use of

controls, and acknowledging subordinates’ feelings. Evaluations of the pro-
gram showed that managers’ orientations did change toward greater support
for self-determination in the work place, and such changes were subsequently
associated with subordinates having more positive perceptions of the work
climate and improved work attitudes. In a second study from the self-
determination perspective, Kasser, Davey, and Ryan (1992) examined the
work motivation of chronic psychiatric patients in a vocational rehabilitation
setting. They assessed the degree to which workers experienced autonomy,
competence, and relatedness on the job, finding that employees who rated
themselves, or were rated by their supervisors, as higher on these dimensions
evidenced greater work participation and performance.
The present study extends this line of research by examining worker
perceptions of competence, autonomy, and relatedness in a factory setting.
Specifically, we will examine whether workers’ experiences of autonomy,
relatedness, and competence in a factory milieu are related not only to overall
job satisfaction, but also to self-esteem and mental health. In order to assess
the unique contribution of these motivational variables to satisfaction and
mental health outcomes, all analyses will control for the influence of the
extrinsic variables of job status and pay.
Another interest of this study concerns the ramifications of the level of
agreement of employees and their supervisors concerning the employee’s
motivation. A growing literature suggests that discrepancies may constitute
useful information about the employee and about the employee-supervisor
relationship. Disagreement between employees and their supervisors on
motivation and performance ratings is relatively common-a meta-analysis by
Harris and Schaubroeck (1988) revealed that typically only a modest correla-
tion exists. This employee-supervisor discrepancy is often viewed as a sign
that persons are not “accurate” in their self-perceptions, and the disagreement
could be seen as a reflection of the accuracy with which employees perceive
the feedback they receive. However, some researchers (e.g.. Baird, 1977)
suggest that discrepancies may be useful in predicting outcomes for the em-
ployee. For instance, discrepancies may tell something about self-motivating
strategies on the part of employees, or about lack of ability to “connect” with
employees on the part of supervisors. At the very least, discrepancies carry
information about perceptions of the self and the work environment. For ex-
ample, Kasser et al. (1992) found that large discrepancies between psychiatric
patients’ ratings of motivation and those of their supervisor were associated
with lower participation, poorer performance, and lower social adjustment.
Other research has examined the relationships between discrepancies and
various outcomes in educational settings. Connell and Ilardi (1987) explored
discrepancies between self-perceptions of competence and either teacher
1792 ILARDI ET AL.

appraisals or objective test scores for fourth through sixth graders. They
found that children who overrated their own competence were more anxious
and had lower self-esteem than underraters. Ilardi, Assor, and Lin (1992)
detected differences in performance outcomes for high-school students whose
self-ratings were discrepant from objective test scores and from parent ratings
of competence. Phillips (1984, 1987) studied children who were highly
competent and who underrated their own performance, theorizing that under-
ratings of competence could serve as a self-protectivestrategy. She found that
children who underrated their own performance held very low expectations
for success, were anxious about performance evaluations, believed that
significant adults did not think highly of their abilities, and did not persist in
tasks. Taylor (1989) theorized that “positive illusions” (e.g., overrating) can
have beneficial mental health and self-esteem outcomes, as well as perform-
ance outcomes, and Baumeister (1989) has noted that there may be an optimal
margin for such discrepancies (maximum benefits occurring within that
margin). Assor, Tzelgov, Thein, Ilardi, and Connell (1990) presented data
from elementary-school children that provide some support for this view for
overrating.
On the basis of this literature, it is obvious that the relationship of
discrepancies between employees’ and supervisors’ motivation-relevant rat-
ings to employees’ mental health and job satisfaction will be a complex one.
Nonetheless, it seems that overrating by employees relative to their supervi-
sors will generally be associated with more positive outcomes. Therefore, in
addition to examining the relation of employees’ experience of autonomy,
competence, and relatedness to job satisfaction and psychological adjustment,
we will examine the relation of discrepancies in reports of the employees’
motivation to these outcome measures.
Specific hypotheses are tested concerning both motivation and discrepan-
cies. We predict that: (a) after controlling for the extrinsic motivational
factors of pay and job status, individuals who rate themselves as experiencing
more competence, autonomy, and relatedness in the work setting (or individu-
als who are rated by their supervisors as such) will show higher levels of
general job satisfaction, mental health, and self-esteem; and (b) individuals
whose self-ratings on motivational factors are higher than those of their
supervisors (i.e., overraters) will show higher levels of job satisfaction,
mental health, and self-esteem than those whose self-ratings are lower than
those of their supervisors (i.e., underraters).
Methods
Subjects
Subjects were 117 employees of a rural shoe factory located in western
 RATINGS OF MOTIVATION 1793

New York. The total sample consisted of 76.7% men and 90.5% Cauca-
sians; 82.9% of the sample had graduated from high school and 5.2% had
completed four years of college. The ages ranged from 18 to 60, with a
mean of 35.

Procedures
Management permitted questionnaire administration during normal work
hours with no penalties to employees. Throughout the day, groups of 6 to 8
employees were excused from their work stations and led to a nearby table
where a member of the research team briefed them about the purpose of the
study. If they agreed to participate, they were asked to sign a consent form
with the understanding that they could withdraw from the study at any time.
Participants then completed the questionnaires while the researcher remained
to answer any questions. Employees who participated in the study were
entered into a raffle for a grand prize worth $200.00 and one of two smaller
prizes consisting of restaurant certificates.

Measures
The Job Descriptive Index (JDI) (Smith, Kendall, & H u h , 1969) is a
measure of job satisfaction pertaining to six aspects of work. Two of the six
subscales were used: satisfaction with the type of work performed and an
overall job satisfaction scale, which was added in 1985. Satisfaction is
assessed by the respondent indicating whether an adjective or phrase applies
to a particular facet of his or her job. If the word applies, the respondent
records a “Y” (for Yes). If the word does not apply, he or she records an
“N” (for No). If the respondent cannot decide, he or she enters a question
mark (“?”). Scores were then weighted (3 for each “Y”response, 0 for each
“N” response, and 1 for each omission or question mark) following the
suggestions of Smith et al. (1969). A composite satisfaction score for each of
the two subscales was formed by summing the respective weights after
reversing negatively scored items. The JDI is widely used in the job satisfac-
tion literature (Price, 1977; Robinson, Athanasiou, & Head, 1969;
Schreisheim & Kinicki, 1981). Johnson, Smith, and Tucker (1982) reported
3-week test-retest reliabilities for the subscales ranging from .68 to .88, and
internal consistency reliabilities from .75 to .93.
The General HeaZth Questionnaire (GHQ) (Goldberg & Hillier, 1979) is
a 28-item instrument that detects the presence of four nonpsychotic psy-
chiatric disorders: somatic symptoms, anxiety and insomnia, social dysfunc-
tion, and severe depression. Factor analyses support the construction of the
scale. Respondents report on a 4-point Likert scale how frequently over the
past few weeks they have experienced particular symptoms related to
1794 ILARDI ET AL.

their physiological and psychological functioning (e.g., “been getting pain in

your head,” “felt that life is entirely hopeless”). Scores for each subscale
were derived by summing the answers to the respective questions. A total
score was derived by summing subscale scores such that a high score reflects
a greater frequency of symptoms. Reliabilities for the GHQ based on a
6-month test-retest interval have ranged from .51 to .90. Concurrent validity
for each of the subscales has been obtained with independent psychi-
atric assessments using the Clinical Interview Schedule (Goldberg, Cooper,
Eastwood, Kedward, & Shepard, 1970), with correlations ranging from
.51 to .76.
The SelfEsteem Inventory (Rosenberg, 1965) is a semantic differential
scale used to measure global feelings of self-worth. Respondents are asked to
rate, on a Gutman scale, how strongly they agree or disagree with statements
regarding feelings about themselves (e.g., “at times I think I am no good at
all”). Composite scores were generated so that higher scores indicated greater
self-esteem. Rosenberg reported a coefficient of scalability of .72 for a sample
of high school students. Scale validity has been demonstrated by showing
significant associations with such factors as depression, depressive affect,
psychosomatic symptoms, and being chosen by classmates as a leader (Robin-
son, Shaver, & Wrightsman, 1991).
The Work Motivation Form-Employee (WMF-E) (Kasser et al., 1992)
consists of 15 items rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale designed to tap
workers’ experience of autonomy, relatedness, and competence on the job.
Some of the items were adapted from the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory,
which has documented construct validity (Ryan, 1982) and a well-
developed factor structure (McAuley, Duncan, & Tammen, 1987). Super-
visors were asked to complete the Work Motivation Form-Supervisor
(WMF-S) for each of their subordinates. This measure is comparable to
the WMF-E in all respects except that it asks the supervisor to rate how
the employee experiences his or her job along these motivational dimen-
sions.
The WMF-E measures employees’ perceptions of the extent to which
they experience three motivating factors on their current job: autonomy (six
items, e.g., “Do you work because the work is important to you?”),
relatedness (three items, e.g., “How much do you consider the people you
work with to be your friends?”), and competence (three items, e.g., “How
difficult is work for you?”). The WMF-S asks supervisors to rate how they
believe the employee feels about his or her work, for example, “(Employee)
works because the work is important to him/her.” For each employee, a total
score was computed for the WMF-E and for the WMF-S by averaging the
composite scores of the autonomy, relatedness, and competence subscales.
Kasser et al. (1992) reported internal consistency for the WMF-E of .79 and
 RATINGS OF MOTIVATION 1795

Supervisor

LOW Medium High

Cell 1 4 7
Low n 17 9 11
% 14.5% 7.7% 9.4%

Cell 2 5 8
Employee Medium n 16 16 10
% 13.7% 13.7% 8.5 %

Cell 3 6 9
High n 6 13 19
% 5.1% 11.1% 16.2%

Figure 1 . Cell numbering sequence for discrepancies between employee and

supervisor ratings on the Work Motivation Form.

for the WMF-S of .87. Williams, Krusch, Papciak, and Ryan (1992) also
used the WMF-E to measure motivation to return to work for chronic
back pain patients. Internal consistency of the total score was again high
(a = .85).

Discrepancies

In order to analyze employee/supervisor discrepancies, we employed a

method presented in Assor et al. (1990). Scores for the WMF-E and for the
WMF-S were divided into three levels so that approximately 33% of the
scores on each form fell into either a high, moderate, or low category. A 3 x
3 matrix was then formed so that low, medium, and high scores for the
WMF-S formed the rows, and low, medium, and high scores for the WMF-E
formed the columns. In this way, one can examine discrepancies for different
levels of motivators, and one can also pool across different levels of motiva-
tors. Cells were then numbered from top to bottom, starting with Cell 1 in
the upper left hand corner. As can be seen in Figure 1, cells along the diagonal
from upper left to lower right (Cells 1, 5, and 9) represent congruent ratings.
Cells one away from the diagonal (Cells 2, 4, 6, and 8) represent moderate
over- or under-rating, and cells two away from the diagonal represent extreme
over- or under-rating (Cells 3 and 7). Some analyses then compared congruent
raters (1, 5 , 9) to discrepant raters (2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8) capitalizing on the
1796 ILARDI ET AL.

increase in power from the pooling of like cells. Similarly, there are two
moderate discrepancy cells for overraters and two for underraters, and these
were also pooled for some analyses.

Extrinsic Motivators

Measures of employee’s job status and level of pay were also collected.
For job status, each employee was asked to indicate his or her current job
title, which fell into one of five levels of the organizational hierarchy. They
included: (a) management, N = 30 (manager, officer, foreman, accountant);
(b) administration, N = 10 (order taker, credit department, secretary);
(c) skilled workers, N = 57 (craftsman, sewer, bottomer); (d) semi-skilled
workers, N = 15 (leather cutter); and (d) unskilled workers, N = 5 (mainte-
nance, janitorial, shipping room, lining cutter). Weekly salaries were exam-
ined for those employees who gave written consent ( n = 87). Hence, all
analyses using pay as a variable are derived from the subsample of 87.
Otherwise, the analyses include the total employee sample of 117.

Results

In order to test the first hypothesis that intrinsic motivators would relate
positively to job satisfaction, adjustment, and self-esteem, eight regression
analyses were conducted. In each, the two extrinsic variables (job status and
pay) were simultaneously entered at Step 1. Then scores from either the
WMF-E or WMF-S were entered at Step 2 so as to assess their unique
contributions after controlling for the extrinsic variables.
Results are reported in Table 1. Regarding general job satisfaction, job
title was significantly positively related to this measure, such that individuals
higher in the company hierarchy reported greater general job satisfaction. Pay
was not related to general job satisfaction in this sample. Both employee and
supervisor motivation ratings were positively and significantly related to
general job satisfaction. Entering the employee rating of motivation increased
the amount of variance explained by almost 20%,whereas supervisor ratings
of motivation increased the amount of variance by 7 % .
The same three variables, job title, WMF-E, and WMF-S, were also
significantly associated with satisfaction with the work task. Employee ratings
increased the amount of variance over 26 % , and supervisor ratings increased
it almost 12%. Again, individuals higher in the company hierarchy and those
who rated themselves or were rated by their supervisors as more highly
motivated reported greater work satisfaction.
Table 1 also presents regressions predicting employee self-esteem and
mental health. Extrinsic variables did not significantly relate to these out-
 RATINGS OF MOTIVATION 1797

Table 1

Regression Analyses of Extrinsic and Motivational Factors in the

Prediction of Work Satisfaction, Self-Esteem, and Mental Health

Satisfaction with Satisfaction with

job in general work on the job

R2 AR2 F R2 AR2 F

1. Job title 8.50** 7.77**

.10 .10 .09 .09
Pay .10 2.45
2. WMF-E .30 .20 23.51*** .35 .I6 33.55***
2. WMF-S .17 .07 7.04** .21 .I2 12.33***

Self-esteem GHQ

R2 AR2 F R2 AR2 F

1. Job title .22 1.87

.06 .06 .02 .02
Pay 3.03+ .43
2. WMF-E .20 .14 14.51** .08 .06 5.42*
2. WMF-S .ll .05 4.96* .07 .05 4.00*

+p < .lo. *p C .05.**p C .01.***p C .001.

comes, although pay was marginally associated with self-esteem. Both the
WMF-E and WMF-S variables made significant increments to the variance
accounted for in self-esteem, with changes of 14% and 5%, respectively. Both
these motivational variables were also related to general mental health.
Employee-rated motivation increased the amount of variance accounted for in
the GHQ by 6 % , and supervisor-rated motivation increased it by 4.5%. In
both cases, higher ratings of motivation were associated with greater mental
health.
Next we examined whether the three subscales of the WMF-E were
differentially related to the dependent variables. Regressions were performed
in which the two extrinsic factors and the three subscale scores were simulta-
neously entered into the equation. Autonomy was significantly associated
1798 ILARDI ET AL.

with three of the outcomes: general satisfaction, F(1, 81) = 1 5 . 9 2 , ~< .001,
satisfaction with the work task, F ( l , 81) = 43.96, p < .001, and general
mental health, F(1, 81) = 8.82, p < .01. Relatedness approached a sig-
nificance for general job satisfaction, F(1, 81) = 3.78, p = .07, while
competence was significantly associated with self-esteem, F(1, 81) = 17.14,
p < ,001.
A number of analyses were next conducted to determine whether agree-
ment between supervisor and employee ratings of motivation was related to
the latter’s job satisfaction, self-esteem, and mental health. Overall, the
employee and supervisor ratings on the WMF were significantly positively
correlated, r = .27, p < .01. Although this relationship was rather low, it is
consistent with earlier studies (Harris & Schaubroeck, 1988). A series of
analyses of variance were next run comparing various types of discrepant
individuals. These results are reported in Table 2.
Of initial interest was whether discrepancy per se was associated with the
outcome variables. In other words, does disagreement with supervisor, no
matter what the direction, relate to work and well-being outcomes? Therefore,
congruent raters (Cells 1, 5, and 9 from Figure 1) were compared to
inaccurate or discrepant self-raters (Cells 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8). No significant
differences were obtained on any of the dependent variables. Previous
research (Assor et al., 1990; Connell & Ilardi, 1987; Ilardi et al., 1992)
suggests that the direction of discrepancy predicts different outcomes; there-
fore overraters (Cells 2, 3 and 6), underraters (Cells 4, 7, and 8), and
congruent raters (Cells 1, 5, and 9) were compared on the four dependent
variables. One result approached significance. Overraters reported the highest
general job satisfaction, followed by congruent raters, then underraters, F (2,
114) = 2.59, p = .08. If we focus only on the comparison between overraters
(Cells 2, 3 and 6) and underraters (Cells 4, 7, and 8), then, additionally,
overraters report significantly higher general job satisfaction, F( 1, 63) =
5.41, p = .02, and marginally higher satisfaction with the work task, F(1,
63) = 3 . 0 2 , ~= .09,thanunderraters.
In addition to a simple comparison between over- and underraters, the
groups as defined in this study enable more subtle comparisons within and
across discrepancy groups. That is, moderate and extreme over- and
underraters may be compared. Evidence from prior research (Assor et al.,
1990; Connell & Ilardi, 1987; Kasser et al., 1992) suggests that magnitude
of discrepancy may be an important variable, although the evidence is
sometimes conflicting. Four separate comparisons were made. First, moder-
ate and extreme overraters were compared, resulting in no significant differ-
ences (all ps > .18). Similar findings were obtained for the second set of
analyses comparing moderate and extreme underraters (all ps > .31). Third,
moderate overraters (Cells 2 and 6) were compared with moderate underraters
 RATINGS OF MOTIVATION 1799

Table 2

Means and Standard Deviations for Discrepancy Groups

Satisfaction Satisfaction
with job with work
in general on the job Self-esteem GHQ

Inaccurate raters 39.2 26.3 32.4 38.5

(N = 65) (9.6) (10.9) (4.7) (7.6)
Congruent raters 37.3 25.9 31.4 38.5
(N = 52) (12.0) (11.6) (5.2) (6.8)
Underraters 36.4 3.9 31.4 39.0
(N = 30) (8.9) (9.6) (4.9) (5.9)
Overraters 41.7 28.5 33.2 38.0
(N = 35) (9.5) (11.7) (4.4) (8.9)
Moderate underraters 37.0 25.1 31.7 38.2
(N = 19) (8.7) (8.3) (5 .o> (6.1)
Moderate overraters 40.7 27.6 33.1 38.7
(N = 29) (10.1) (11.8) (4.1) (9* 6)
Extreme underraters 35.3 21.7 31.0 40.5
(N = 11) (9.5) (11.7) (4.9) (5.4)
Extreme overraters 46.5 32.8 33.3 34.8
(N = 6) (2.7) (10.6) (6.3) (1.2)

(Cells 4 and 8). Nonsignificant differences were obtained for all dependent
variables (all ps > .20). Lastly, the comparison of extreme overraters (Cell
3) with extreme underraters (Cell 7), resulted in a significant difference on
general job satisfaction, F(1, 15) = 7.78, p = .01, and a marginal difference
on satisfaction with the work task, F(1, 15) = 3.72, p = .07. In both cases,
extreme overraters reported greater work satisfaction. Although no signifi-
cant differences between the groups were evident for self-esteem, extreme
overraters scored lower on the GHQ, F(1, 15) = 6.06, p = .03. Supplemen-
tary analyses examining specific subscales of the GHQ revealed that, in
comparison to extreme underraters, extreme overraters reported signifi-
cantly lower levels of anxiety (Over mean = 1.42, SD = .14; Under mean =
1.8, SD = .38; F(1, 15) = 5.19, p = .04) and social dysfunction (Over
1800 ILARDI ET AL.

mean = 1.64, SD = .20; Under mean = 1.99, SD = .22; F(1, 15) = 10.43,
p = .01) and marginally lower levels of depression (Over mean = 1.06,
SD = .09; Under mean = 1.32, SD = .33; F(1, 15) = 3 . 5 9 , ~= .08).

Discussion

This study examined whether factory workers experiences of autonomy,

competence, and relatedness on the job were related to overall job satisfaction
and to aspects of personal adjustment and mental health. A further focus
was on the effects of discrepancies between worker and supervisor ratings
of motivational variables on worker satisfaction and psychological adjust-
ment.
The results generally supported hypotheses regarding the relationship
between experiences of autonomy, competence, and relatedness on the job and
general job satisfaction, satisfaction with the particular task, self-esteem, and
mental health. Whether reported by employee or supervisor, the degree to
which the employee was perceived as experiencing autonomy, competence,
and relatedness at work was associated with both greater job satisfaction and
personal well-being. Analyses of the WMF subscale scores for the employee
suggested, more specifically, that the experience of autonomy on the job was
particularly salient, being positively and significantly associated with
mental health, and both general job and work task satisfaction. This is
particularly noteworthy given the factory context of this study, where one
might assume that the constraints on autonomy in the workplace are relatively
strong compared to many work settings where opportunities for personal
initiative and input may be more pervasive. In addition, perceived competence
uniquely predicted self-esteem. Our findings relating the fulfillment of
these intrinsic psychological needs to job satisfaction and mental health thus
add to the growing evidence supporting the relevance of self-determination
theory to the work domain. This perspective suggests that when managers
attend to workers’ experiences of autonomy, competence, and relatedness in
the work setting, employee motivation will likely be enhanced (Deci et al.,
1989), which in turn can result in higher levels of task performance and
persistence (Kasser et al., 1992), job satisfaction, and better psychological
adjustment.
With respect to the hypothesis relating discrepancies between employee
and supervisor ratings of motivation to employee satisfaction and psychologi-
cal adjustment, the results were not as strong as expected. Comparisons
between congruent and discrepant raters showed only one significant differ-
ence, for self-esteem, with discrepant raters being higher. Additionally,
comparisons between over- and underraters on job and task satisfaction
were in the predicted direction, with overraters showing significantly higher
 RATINGS OF MOTIVATION 1801

general satisfaction and marginally higher satisfaction with specific job tasks.
Differences between over- and underrating were especially evident for ex-
treme groups, with extreme underrating associated with lower job satisfaction
and poorer well-being, consistent with the results of earlier studies (Assor
et al., 1990; Ilardi et al., 1992). Because these results rely on cells with very
small sample sizes, replication is warranted. Nonetheless, these results lend
some support to recent theoretical formulations suggesting that discrepancies
between self and other ratings, whether of objective performances or of
psychological experiences, are not simply a question of accurate versus
inaccurate perceptions. Rather, they can be related to clearly different out-
comes in widely varying samples and settings.
A noteworthy limitation of the present study is its correlational approach
and the fact that all data were collected at one point in time. Causal
relationships between variables can thus only be inferred. In particular the
relationship between autonomy, competence, and relatedness on the job and
self-esteem and mental health may not be a simple one. In fact, it is highly
likely that this association reflects a reciprocal causality in which those
employees who do not experience these needs being met in the workplace may
develop a poorer self-image and adjustment pattern, whereas those employees
with poorer premorbid adjustment are prone to derive less of these intrinsic
fulfillments at work or elsewhere. Other limiting factors include the small
range of outcomes assessed, the use of self-report for assessing adjustment
outcomes, and the small sample which constrained the power particularly of
the discrepancy analyses.
A central point of self-determination theory is that people work not only
for extrinsic rewards, but also to fulfill psychological needs such as those for
autonomy, competence, and relatedness. When work settings allow employ-
ees to have positive experiences in relation to these needs, motivation is
enhanced and workers feel better and are more satisfied with the jobs at which
they spend major portions of their lives. This research shows that even in the
context of a factory setting the degree to which work satisfies intrinsic
psychological needs contributes over and above the issues of pay and status
in determining an employee s satisfaction and well-being. More generally, the
present findings support the view that the conditions of work and one’s well-
being are interconnected, and that a focus on intrinsic psychological needs in
work settings can contribute to an understanding of individuals adjustment
and satisfaction in life.

References

Assor, A., Tzelgov, J., Thein, R., Ilardi, B. C., & Connell, J. P. (1990).
Assessing the correlates of over- versus underrating of academic
1802 ILARDI ET AL.

competence: A conceptual clarification and a methodological proposal.

Child Development, 61, 2085-2097.
Baird, L. S. (1977). Self and superior ratings of performance: As related to
self-esteem and satisfaction with supervision. Academy of Management
Journal, 20(2), 291-300.
Baumeister, R. F. (1989). The optimal margin of illusion. Journal of Social
and Clinical Psychology, 6 , 176-189.
Benware, C., & Deci, E. L. (1984). Quality of learning with an active versus
passive motivational set. American Educational Research Journal, 21,
755-765.
Brayfield, A. H . , & Crockett, W. H. (1955). Employee attitudes and em-
ployee performance. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 396-424.
Burke, R. J. (1969). Some preliminary data on the use of self-evaluations and
peer ratings in assigning university course grades. Journal of Educational
Research, 62, 444-448.
Chadwick-Jones, J. K. (1970). Recent interdisciplinary exchanges and the use
of analogy in social psychology. Human Relations, 23, 253-261.
Connell, J., & Ilardi, B. C. (1987). Self-system concomitants of discrepancies
between children’s and teachers’ evaluations of academic competence.
Child Development, 58, 1297-1307.
decharms, R. (1968). Personal causation: The internal affective determi-
nants of behavior. New York: Academic Press.
Deci, E. L., Connell, J. P., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Self-determination in a
work organization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 580-590.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and selj-determina-
tion in human behavior. New York: Plenum.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). Support of autonomy and the control
of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1024-
1037.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). A motivational approach to self Inte-
gration in personality. In R. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on
motivation: Vol. 38, Perspectives on motivation (pp. 237-288). Lincoln,
NE: University of Nebraska Press.
Goldberg, D. P., Cooper, B., Eastwood, M. R., Kedward, H. B., & Shepard,
M. (1970). A standardized psychiatric interview suitable for use in
community surveys. British Journal of Preventive and Social Medicine,
24, 18-23.
Goldberg, D. P., & Hillier, V. F. (1979). A scaled version of the General
Health Questionnaire. Psychological Medicine, 9, 139-145.
Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). Autonomy in children’s learning:
An experimental and individual difference investigation. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 890-898.
 RATINGS OF MOTIVATION 1803

Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1989). Parent styles associated with

children’s self-regulation and competence in school. Journal of Education
PSyChOlOgy, 81, 143-154.
Harris, M. M., & Schaubroeck, J. (1988). A meta-analysis of self-supervisor,
self-peer, and peer-supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology, 41, 43-62.
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B. (1959). The motivation to
work. New York: Wiley.
Ilardi, B. C., Assor, A. & Lin, Y-C.(1992). Overrating in youth: Easily
misleading, rarely extreme, and generally adaptive. Unpublished manu-
script, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.
Johnson, S. M., Smith, P. C., & Tucker, S. M. (1982). Response format of
the Job Descriptive Index: Assessment of reliability and validity by the
multi-trait, multi-method matrix. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67,
500-505.
Kasser, T., Davey, J., & Ryan, R. M. (1992). Motivation and employee-su-
pervisor discrepancies in a psychiatric vocational rehabilitation setting.
Rehabilitation Psychology, 37, 175- 187.
Lawler, E. E. (1982). Strategies for improving the quality of work life.
American Psychologist, 37, 486-493.
McAuley, E., Duncan, T., & Tammen, V. V. (1987). Psychometric proper-
ties of the Intrinsic Motivation Inventory in a competitive sport setting:
A confirmatory factor analysis. Research Quarterly for Exercise and
Sport, 60, 48-58.
McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. McGraw Hill: New
York.
Mobley, W. H. (1977). Intermediate linkages in the relationship between job
satisfaction and employee turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62,
237-240.
Mutchinsky, P. M. (1977). Employee absenteeism: A review of the litera-
ture. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 10, 3 16-340.
Palmer, J. A., Jr., (1969). Vindication, evaluation: The effect of the
stranger’s competence on the attitude similarity-attraction function. Dis-
sertation Abstracts International, 30, 34 12.
Phillips, D. (1984). The illusion of incompetence among academically
competent children. Child Development, 55, 2000-20 16.
Phillips, D. (1987). Socialization of perceived academic competence among
highly competent children. Child Development, 58, 1308-1320.
Plant, R., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and the effects of self-
consciousness, self-awareness, and ego-involvement: An investigation of
internally controlling styles. Journal of Personality, 53, 435-449.
Porter, L. W., & Lawler, E. E. (1968). Managerial attitudes andper$orm-
ance. Homewood, IL: Irwin-Dorsey.
1804 ILARDI ET AL.

Price, J. L. (1977). The study of turnover. Ames: Iowa State University

Press.
Robinson, J. P., Athanasiou, R., & Head, K. B. (1969). Measures of
occupational attitudes and occupational characteristics. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research.
Robinson, J. P., Shaver, P. R., & Wrightsman, L. S. (1991). Measures of
personality and social psychological attitudes. San Diego, CA: Aca-
demic Press.
Roethlisberger, F. J., & Dickson, W. J. (1939). Management and the worker.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press.
Ross, I. C., & Zander, A. (1957). Need satisfactions and employee turnover.
Personnel Psychology, 10, 327-338.
Ryan, R. M. (1982). Control and information in the interpersonal sphere: An
extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 45, 736-750.
Ryan, R. M. (1993). Agency and organization: Intrinsic motivation, auton-
omy and the self in psychological development. In J. Jacobs (Ed.),
Nebraska symposium on motivation (Vol. 40, pp. 1-56). Lincoln, NE:
University of Nebraska Press.
Ryan, R. M., & Grolnick, W. S. (1986). Origins and pawns in the classroom:
Self-report and projective assessments of individual differences in
children’s perceptions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
50, 550-558.
Ryan, R. M., Mims, V., & Koestner, R. (1983). Relation of reward contin-
gency and interpersonal context to intrinsic motivation: A review and test
using cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 45, 736-750.
Ryan, R. M., & Stiller, J. (1991). The social contexts of internalization:
Parent and teacher influences on autonomy, motivation and learning. In
P.R. Pintrich & M.L. Maehr (Eds.), Advances in motivation andachieve-
ment: Vol. 7, Goals and selj-regulatoryprocesses (pp. 115-149). Green-
wich, CT: JAI Press.
Ryan, R. M., Stiller, J., & Lynch, J. H. (1991). Representations of relation-
ships to teachers, parents, and @ends as predictors of academic motiva-
tion and self-esteem. Unpublished manuscript, University of Rochester.
Schreisheim, C. A., & Kinicki, A. J. (1981). The measurement of satisfaction
by the Job Descriptive Index (JDI): A review. Unpublished manuscript.
(Available from Chester A. Schreisheim, Department of Organizational
Behavior, Graduate School of Business Administration, University of
Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90007).
 RATINGS OF MOTIVATION 1805

Schwab, D. P., & Cummings, L. L. (1970). Theories of performance and

satisfaction: A review. Industrial Relations, 9, 408-430.
Smith, P. C., Kendall, L. M., & Hulin, C. L. (1969). The measurement of
satisfaction in work and retirement: A strategy for the study of attitudes.
Chicago: Rand McNally.
Spector, P. E. (1986). Perceived control by employees: A meta-analysis of
studies concerning autonomy and participation at work. Human Rela-
tions, 39, 1005-1016.
Steers, R. M., & Rhodes, S. R. (1978). Major influences on employee
attendance: A process model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 63, 391-
407.
Taylor, S. E. (1989). Positive illusions. Basic Books. New York: Harper.
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.
Vroom, V. H., & Deci, E. L. (1992). Management and motivation (2nd ed.).
London: Penguin.
Williams, G. C., Krusch, D. A., Papciak, A., & Ryan, R. M. (1992).
Motivation in a pain rehabilitation program. Unpublished manuscript,
University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.