Presentation by Kirsten Hilger

1. Motivation & Commitment FromPerspectiveoftheSocial Identity Approach Presentationby Kirsten Hilger

2. Gliederung • Theories of Motivation • Motivation and the Social Identity Approach • Empirical Evidence • Take-Home-Massage • Discussion

3. 1. Theoriesof Motivation Groupwork: • Weneed4 Groups: • Readthe Text (10 min) • Write Facts on a Flip Chart (5 min) • Presentthebasicassumptions (3 min)

4. 2. Motivation andthe SI-Approach • Social Identity Approach:  Social Identity Theory (SIT)  Self-Categorization Theory (SCT) • SCT: We can define us at 3 levels of abstraction: • SIT: Each level of Self-Definition is associated with a distinct set of needs • Level of Self-Categorization determines which factor will motivate us in a given context • Category-Salience  Self-Definition  Activation of Needs Higher Needs Lower Needs

5. 2. Motivation andthe SI-Approach • But what determinesthe level of Self-Definition? • Category-Salience:  Cognitive Accessibility  Category-Situation Fit • Empirical Evidence: Salience increased, If categories were mentioned, if one category is set into a context of others and if a category is set into conflict with others. • SIT: Whether individuals think of themselves in terms of a given social Identity depends on: • Status of their Ingroup • Perceived permeability of group boundaries • An Individual’s belief system

6. 2. Motivation andthe SI-Approach Groupwork:  Which Need / Motive / Contextual Factor is addressed or activated and guides behavior on which Level of Self-Categorization?

7. 2. Motivation andthe SI-Approach

8. 3. Empirical Evidence • Parker (1997): • Students who were assigned to a higher-status group and group-boundaries were believed to be permeable had significant greater need for achievement (more motivation), than those who were locked into membership of the low-status group.  Example?

9. 3. Empircal Evidence • Van Dick et al. (2006): • Relationship between Organizational Identification (OI) and Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB). • Moderate positive but universal relationship: OI  OCB • Even in longitudinal studies found  Causality • Job Satisfaction  OCB  Performance Outcomes • Definition as Member of an organization influences behavior and performance

10. 3. Empircal Evidence • Van Dick et al. (2008): • Distinction: Work-Group-Identification & Organizational-Identification • Relation to Job Satisfaction and OCB? Interaction: Level of Self-Categorization influences Behavior & Attitudes!

11. 4. Take-Home-Message • The nature of work motivation is bound up with workers‘ sense of who they are. • If we define the Self in terms of Personal Identity, we are motivated to enhance ourselves as individuals. (need for achievement, career commitment) • But if we define ourselves in term of group membership (Social Identity is more salient), we are less motivated by personal gains and more motivated by the prospect of contributing to group goals.

12. 5. Discussion • What does this mean practically? • How can Managers increase Organizational Identification? • How to make a special category more salient? • Does it work everywhere?

13. Für Eure Aufmerksamkeit !

14. Literatur • Haslam, S. A. (2004). Psychology in organizations: The social identity approach (2nd ed.). London: Sage. • Van Dick, R., Grojean, M. W., Christ, O. & Wieseke, J. (2006). Identity and the extra-mile: Relationships between organizational identification and organzational citizenship behaviour. British Journal of Management, 17, 283-301. • Van Dick, R., Van Knippenberg, D., Kerschreiter, R., Hertel, G. & Wieseke, J. (2008). Interactive effects of work group and organizational identification on job satisfaction and extra-role bahavior. Journal of Vocational Bahavior, 72, 388-399.