Mediating Role of Individual-Organization and Individual-Job Proportion in Correlation with Public Service Motivation and Job Performance among Nurses of Governmental Hospitals in Isfahan, Iran*

Document Type : Original Article

Authors
Ali Naseri Mohammad Abadi 1
Abolghasem Nouri 2
Azadeh Askari 1
Robab Sadegh 3
1 PhD Student, Psychology, School of Psychology and Educational Sciences, The University of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
2 Professor, Psychology, Research Center of Social Factors Effective on Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
3 Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Shahid Beheshti, Rasht, Iran
Abstract
Introduction: Public service motivation (PSM) is one of the few motivational theories, which
investigates the motivation and its organizational outcomes such as job performance in public and
governmental sectors. By emphasizing on direct effect of PSM on job performance, previous
studies led to contradictory results. In this study, it is supposed that the effect of PSM on job
performance is indirect; thus individual-organization and individual-job proportion were
investigated as mediator variables in this correlation.
Methods: Since nursing is one of the best jobs that the PSM might be observed in, this study was
conducted in governmental hospitals. Similarly, 103 nurses, who were employed in governmental
hospitals of Isfahan, were randomly selected and then answered to PSM, individual-organization
proportion, individual-job proportion and job performance questionnaires. Thereafter, the data
were analyzed through SPSS AMOS™ structural equation modeling software.
Results: Findings indicated that the PSM had a significant and positive correlation with both
individual-organization proportion (β = 0.371, P < 0.01) and individual-job proportion (β = 0.561,
P < 0.001). In addition, positive correlation between individual-organization proportion and
individual-job proportion with job performance was also significant (β = 0.367, P < 0.001) and
(β = 0.482, P < 0.001), respectively. However, according to what was assumed and hypothesized
for the individual-organization proportion and individual-job proportion, PSM did not have a
significant correlation with job performance; therefore, the individual-organization proportion
and individual-job proportion confirmed these two variables to serve as a mediator.
Conclusion: While private organizations could rely more on material rewards such as financial aid
for motivating their employees in the direction of employer’s goals and interests, governmental
organizations should focus on requesting their employees in order to attempt for advancing the
community goals as well as satisfying individual needs in order to increase their efficiency.

Keywords

1. Perry JL. Measuring Public Service Motivation: An Assessment of Construct Reliability and Validity. J Public
Adm Res Theory 1996; 6(1): 5-22.
2. Leisink P, Steijn B. Public service motivation and job performance of public sector employees in the Netherlands.
International Review of Administrative Sciences 2009; 75(1): 35-52.
3. Wise LR. The Motivational Bases of Public Service. Public Administration Review 1990; 50(3): 367-73.
4. Perry JL. Bringing Society In: Toward a Theory of Public-Service Motivation. J Public Adm Res Theory 2000;
10(2): 471-88.
5. Perry JL, Vandenabeele W. The behavioral dynamics of Public Service Motivation. In: Perry JL, Hondeghem A,
Editors. Motivation in Public Management: The Call of Public Service: The Call of Public Service. Oxford, UK:
OUP Oxford; 2008. p. 18-45.
6. Lewis GB, Frank SA. Who Wants to Work for the Government? Public Administration Review 2002; 62(4): 395-404.
7. Moynihan DP, Pandey SK. The Role of Organizations in Fostering Public Service Motivation. Public
Administration Review 2007; 67(1): 40-53.
8. Naff KC, Crum J. Working for America, Does Public Service Motivation Make a Difference? Review of Public
Personnel Administration 1999; 19(4): 5-16.
9. Alonso P, Lewis GB. Public Service Motivation and Job Performance, Evidence from the Federal Sector. The
American Review of Public Administration 2001; 31(4): 363-80.
10.Brewer G. Employee and Organizational Performance'. In: Perry JL, Hondeghem A, Editors. Motivation in
Public Management: The Call of Public Service: The Call of Public Service. Oxford, UK: OUP Oxford; 2008. p.
136-56.
11.Kristof-Brown AL, Zimmerman RD, Johnson Ec. Consequences of Individuals' Fit at Work: A Meta-Analysis of
Person-Job, Person-Organization, Person-Group, and Person-Supervisor Fit. Personnel Psychology 2005; 58(2):
281-342.
12. Edwards JR. Person-job fit: A conceptual integration, literature review, and methodological critique. In: Cooper
CL, Robertson IT, Editors. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. New Jersey, NJ:
Wiley; 1991. p. 283-357.
13.Hoffman BJ, Woehr DJ. A quantitative review of the relationship between personG_ôorganization fit and
behavioral outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior 2006; 68(3): 389-99.
14.O'Reilly CA, Chatman J. Organizational commitment and psychological attachment: The effects of compliance,
identification, and internalization on prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology 1986; 71(3): 492-9.
15.Cable DM, DeRue DS. The convergent and discriminant validity of subjective fit perceptions. J Appl Psychol
2002; 87(5): 875-84.
16.Camilleri E. Antecedents affecting public service motivation. Personnel Review 2007; 36(3): 356-77.
17.Cacioppe R, Mock P. A comparison of the quality of work experience in government and private organizations.
Human Relations 1984; 37(11): 923-40.
18.Bright L. Does person-organization fit mediate the relationship between public service motivation and the job
performance of public employees? Review of Public Personnel Administration 2007; 27(4): 361-79.
19.Barnard CI. The Functions of the Executive: 30th Anniversary Edition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press; 1968.
20. Frank SA, Lewis GB. Government EmployeesWorking Hard or Hardly Working? American Review of Public
Administration 2004; 34(1): 36-51.
21. Latham GP. Work Motivation: History, Theory, Research, and Practice. London, UK: SAGE; 2006. p. 54-65.
22. Perry JL, Hondeghem A. Motivation in public management: The call of public service. Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press; 2008: 56-79, 322-44.
23.Vandenabeele W. Government calling: public service motivation as an element in selecting government as an
employer of choice. Public Administration 2008; 86(4): 1089-105.
24. Pandey SJ, Stazyk EC. Antecedents and correlates of public service motivation. In: Perry JL, Hondeghem A,
Editors. Motivation in Public Management: The Call of Public Service: The Call of Public Service. Oxford, UK:
OUP Oxford; 2008. p. 201-21.
Health Information Management
Volume 9, Issue 5
November and December 2012
Pages 733-743