Association between psychosocial work environment and employee motivation depending on job hierarchy level:

Andrey Smolyanov; Anders Paalzow; Katerina Hellström; Tamara Kinunen; Svetlana Gurieva

doi:10.17323/2312-5942-2025-15-4-191-213

Andrey Smolyanov St-Petersburg University, 6 Makarova Embankment, St Petersburg, 199034, Russia https://orcid.org/0009-0002-9141-8957
Anders Paalzow Stockholm School of Economics in Riga, Strēlnieku iela 4A, Centra rajons, Rīga, LV-1010, Latvia https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5148-643X
Katerina Hellström Stockholm School of Economics, Sveavägen 65, 113 83 Stockholm, Sweden https://orcid.org/0009-0008-9083-8427
Tamara Kinunen St-Petersburg University, 6 Makarova Embankment, St Petersburg, 199034, Russian Federation https://orcid.org/0009-0002-7107-099X
Svetlana Gurieva St. Petersburg State University, Russian Federation, 199034, St. Petersburg, Universitetskaja nab., buld.7/9 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4305-432X

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17323/2312-5942-2025-15-4-191-213

Keywords: work motivation, psychosocial working environment, random forest

Abstract

Purpose. The International Labor Organization considers workplace well-being to be a key factor determining the long-term effectiveness of the employing company and considers this concept to refer to all aspects of working life, from safety and workplace organization to work attitudes, psychological climate and work organization — that is, the psychosocial environment. The purpose of this study is to establish the existence and strength of the association between work motivation and the psychosocial working environment. Methodology. The study is based on E. Deci and R. Ryan’s “Self-DeterminationTheory”, and the “Danish Psychosocial Working Environment Questionnaire” was used. The survey involved 268 employees in a Russian company operating in the fast-food market was conducted. The reliability of the questionnaire is tested by standardized Cronbach´s alpha coefficient and the association between the constructs being studied by linear regression model and random forest algorithm. Findings.The results reveal differences across groups on different levels of the job hierarchy. Ordinary worker shave a simple structure of this association. The main psychosocial factor influencing their motivational self-determination is the opportunity for learning and development. For qualified specialists, along with this factor, the ability to perform and the lack of emotional complexity of work are important. The most complex association between work motivation and psychosocial working environment is among managers, for whom support and trust from colleagues, the level of independence, role clarity and other psychosocial factors are significant. Originality. The study’s originality lies in exploring a previously unexamined association between constructs and adapting the instruments on a different sample from the one they were initially developed for. Practical implications. The results obtained can be used in designing and creating psychosocial environment in the organization that stimulates the increase of efficiency and productivity, as well as in employee development programs.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Clausen, T., Madsen, I. E. H., Christensen, K. B., Bjorner, J., Poulsen, O. M., Maltesen, T., Borg, V., Rugulies, R. (2019). The Danish Psychosocial Working Environment Questionnaire (DPQ): Development, content, reliability and validity. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 45(4), 356–369. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3793

Clausen, T., Christensen, K., Sørensen, J., Bjorner, J., Madsen, I., Borg, V., Rugulies, R. (2023). The predictive validity of the danish psychosocial work environment questionnaire with regard to onset of depressive disorders and long-term sickness absence. Annals of Work Exposures and Health, 67(2). https://doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxac069

Fey, C. F. (2005). Opening the black box of motivation: A cross-cultural comparison of Sweden and Russia. International Business Review, 14(3), 345–367. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2005.03.004

Flatt, C., Jacobs, R. L. (2019). Principle assumptions of regression analysis: testing, techniques, and statistical reporting of imperfect data sets. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 21(4), 484–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422319869915

Gagné, M., Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26(4), 331–362. DOI: https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1002/job.322

Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., Snyderman, B. B. (1959). Motivation to Work. UK: Taylor and Francis.

Howard, J. L., Gagné, M., Morin, A. J. S., van den Broeck, A. (2016). Motivation profiles at work: A self-determination theory approach. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 95–96, 74–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2016.07.004

Indeed and Glassdoor’s. (2023). Hiring and Workplace Trends Report. https://www.glassdoor.com/research/app/uploads/sites/2/2022/11/Indeed-Glassdoors-2023-Hiring-Workplace-Trends-Report-Glassdoor-Blog.pdf

International Labor Organization. (1998). Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety. https://www.iloencyclopaedia.org

International Labor Organization. (2009). Workplace Well-being. http://www.ilo.org/safework /info/WCMS_118396/lang--en/index.htm

Kain, J., Jex, S. (2010). Karasek’s job demands-control model: A summary of current issues and recommendations for future research. In D. Ganster (ed.), Research in Occupational Stress and Well-being. UK: Emerald.

Karasek, R. (1998). Demand/Control Model: A social, emotional, and physiological approach to stress risk and active behaviour development. In: J. Stellman (ed.), Encyclopaedia of Occupational Health and Safety. Switzerland: International Labor Office.

Kotera, Y., Aledeh, M., Rushforth, A., Otoo, N., Colman, R., Taylor, E. (2022). A shorter form of the work extrinsic and intrinsic motivation scale: Construction and factorial validation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(21), 13864. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19211

Krejcie, R., Morgan, D. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 30(3), 607–610. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316447003000308

Legault, L. (2017). Self-Determination Theory. In V. Zeigler-Hill (ed.), Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. Germany: Springer.

Lloyd, R., Mertens, D. (2018). Expecting More out of Expectancy Theory: History Urges Inclusion of the Social Context. International Management Review, 14(1), 24.

Mark, G., Smith, A, (2008). Stress models: A review and suggested new direction. In J. Houdmont (ed.), Occupational Health Psychology: European Perspectives on research, education and practice. UK: Nottingham University Press.

McClelland, D. (1988). Human Motivation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Navarro, J. Arrieta, C. (2010). Chaos in Human Behavior: The Case of Work Motivation. The Spanish journal of psychology, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1017/s1138741600003826

Nieuwenhuijsen, K., Bruinvels, D. J., Frings-Dresen, M. H. W. (2010). Psychosocial work environment and stress-related disorders, a systematic review. Occupational Medicine, 60(4), 277–286. https://doi.org/10.1093/occmed/Fkqq081

Nordic Council of Ministers (2015). Workplace Inspection of the psychosocial working environment in the Nordic countries. Denmark: TemaNord.

Nordgren Selar, A., Falkenberg, H., Hellgren, J., Gagné, M., Sverke, M. (2020). “It’s [Not] All ‘Bout the Money”: How do performance-based pay and support of psychological needs variables relate to job performance? Scandinavian Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 5(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.16993/sjwop.107

Oparina, E., Kaiser, C., Gentile, N., Tkatchenko, A., Neve, J.-E., D’Ambrosio, C. (2025). Machine learning in the prediction of human wellbeing. Scientific Reports, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-84137-1.

Pejtersen, J. H., Kristensen, T. S., Borg, V., Bjorner, J. B. (2010). The second version of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health, 38.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1403494809349858

Probst, P., Wright, M. N., Boulesteix, A. (2019). Hyperparameters and tuning strategies for random forest. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, 9(3). https://doi.org/10.1002/widm.1301

Rugulies, R. (2019). What is a psychosocial working environment? Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 45(1), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3792

Ryan, R., Deci, E. (2015). Self-Determination Theory. In: International Encyclopaedia of the Social & Behavioural Sciences, vol. 11. Holland: Elsevier, 7886–7888.

Schreiber-Gregory, D., Bader, K. (2018). Logistic and Linear Regression Assumptions: Violation Recognition and Control.

Shabes, V., Troshchenkova, E., Potapova, T., Ivarsson, L., Damber, U., Bostedt, G. (2012). Complex values in different cultures: Some research results of psycholinguistic experiments with russian and swedish students. US-China Education Review, A1, 70–83.

Stade, M., Bernstorff von, C., Niestroj, N., Nachtwei, J. (2011). (Not) everybody’s darling: Value and prospects of multiple linear regression analysis and assumption checking. Empirische Evaluationsmethoden, 15, 17–34.

Stansfeld, S., Candy, B. (2006). Psychosocial work environment and mental health—a meta-analytic review. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 32(6), 443–462. https://doi.org/10.5271/SJWEH.1050

Sverke, M. (2009). The importance of the psychosocial work environment for employee well-being and work motivation. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 35(4), 241–243.

https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.1336

Tremblay, M. A., Blanchard, C. M., Taylor, S., Pelletier, L. G., Villeneuve, M. (2009). Work Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivation Scale: Its value for organizational psychology research. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 41(4), 213–226. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0015167

Turner, A., Lawrence, P. (1965). Industrial jobs and the worker: An investigation of response to task attributes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, Graduate School of Business Administration.

vanVoorhis, C. R. W., Morgan, B. L. (2007). Understanding power and rules of thumb for determining sample sizes. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 3(2), 43–50. https://doi.org/10.20982/TQMP.03.2.P043

Vergunov, E., Nikolaeva, E., Bobrova, Y. (2019). On the issue of psychometric reliability of some psychological methods. Theoretical and Experimental Psychology, 12(1).

Warr, P. (2017). Happiness and Mental Health. In: C. Cooper, J. Quick (Eds.), The Handbook of Stress and Health (57–74). USA: Blackwell.