Values Motivation

Business Process Management Journal
Values, motivation, commitment, performance and rewards: analysis model

Marcela Lage Monteiro de Castro Mrio Teixeira Reis Neto Cludia Aparecida Avelar Ferreira Jorge Felipe da Silva Gomes
Article information:
To cite this document:
Marcela Lage Monteiro de Castro Mrio Teixeira Reis Neto Cludia Aparecida Avelar Ferreira Jorge Felipe da Silva Gomes
, (2016),"Values, motivation, commitment, performance and rewards: analysis model", Business Process Management
Journal, Vol. 22 Iss 6 pp. -
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-09-2015-0132
Downloaded on: 24 September 2016, At: 10:00 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 0 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:333301 []
Downloaded by Cornell University Library At 10:00 24 September 2016 (PT)
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for Authors service
information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines are available for all. Please
visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company manages a portfolio of
more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as providing an extensive range of online
products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee on Publication
Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive preservation.
*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

VALUES, MOTIVATION, COMMITMENT, PERFORMANCE AND
REWARDS: ANALYSIS MODEL
1 Introduction
The changes in society arising from the globalization process bring the fragility
of the individual in face of the organizations, which increasingly search for competitive
results. One of the challenges is to get the organizational commitment of human capital
(Kaplan and Norton, 1997, Gracioli, Godoy, Lorenzett and Godoy 2012, Kelwalatenna
and Premaratne, 2013).
The organizational commitment is a dynamic process that must be worked
continuously. Administrators can then measure the level of commitment in the
organization, in order to create strategies to strengthen it or increase it, highlighting the
importance of having an ongoing process to sustain the desired levels of commitment
(Liou, 2008).
The organizational commitment, according to Meyer and Herscovitch (2001),
can take many forms and can also be able to influence the organizational capacity and
the welfare of employees. Thus, by having different shapes, or psychological
configurations, the commitment allows the various individual behaviors. One of the
strategies is the employee motivation to be relevant to the organizational management,
this is an important driver of organizational performance (Alonso and Lewis, 2001,
Saeid Arrabi, Devi Subramaniam and Abu Baker Akeel, 2013).
In this sense, the idea of reward seeks to satisfy the needs that generate the
motivation to work, however, we cant ignore the individual values that guide and direct
the actions, behavior and assess of the people (Schwartz, 1999). The values are
characterized as what the individual considers desirable for certain aspects of life, which
direct their behavior, enable the assessment of people and events, and can also justify
actions and evaluations. In this scenario, this research chose to analyze the association
between the constructs values, motivation, commitment, performance and rewards
(Schwartz, 1999).
The aim of this study was to investigate how the constructs values, motivation,
commitment, performance and reward are associated by professionals in different
countries, from an Hypothetical Structural Model. To achieve the overall goal, it was
necessary to evaluate the constructs that comprise the hypothetical model proposed in
this study considered prominent: (1) to identify groups (clusters) of different
individuals, according to personal values; (2) to verify the associative relationships of
each group of individuals according to the variables of the proposed Hypothetical
Structural Model; and (3) to verify the validity and appropriateness of the proposed
Hypothetical Structural Model.
2 Theoretical Framework
The theoretical basis for purposes of this study encompasses the concepts of
value, motivation, commitment and reward, with a view to the validation of an
hypothetical structural model, that allows to identify the way that employees shall,
individually, combine these crucial factors to their professional performance.
2.1 Human Values

The Human Values according to Medeiros, Gouveia, Gusmo, Milfont and
Aquino (2012) are useful to the survival of individuals, groups or companies. They are
embedded in culture, and they shape the desired behaviors, ensuring harmony in the
1
conviviality and continuity of such a society. Schwartz (1992) depicts the existence of
six specific characteristics in understanding values:
1. Values are beliefs linked to affection; 2. They refer to desirable goals
that motivate the action; 3.They transcend specific actions and situations;
4.They serve as standards or criteria; 5. They are sorted in order of
importance relative to each other; 6. They contribute to the action as they
are relevant in the context" (Schwartz, 1992, pp.3-4).
For Schwartz (1994), the values have the basic function of motivating and
controlling the behavior of individuals. They encourage acts of harmony to maintain the
smooth functioning of groups and society at large.
The individual values in line with the Organization values, strengthen the
organizational commitment. Values are influenced both by society and by personal
experiences, establishing several forms of attitudes towards different experiential
aspects, ordered according to the degree of importance as guiding principles of life

(Schwartz, 1999).
In turn, Schwartz and Boehnke (2004) appoint a set of basic values, able to be
identified throughout society, which are associated with abstract goals and ranging in
importance, serving as oriented principles in the life of a person or group, as stated in
Table 1.
------------------------------
Insert Table 1 Here
------------------------------
The model of Schwartz, Vecchione, Fischer, Ramos, Demirutku, Dirilen-

Gumus, Cieciuch, Davidov, Beierlein, Verkasalo, Lnnqvist and Konty (2012)
describes the order of values around the circle, and is based on conflict or consistency
between the values. In this new model, the second round, with reference to the center
out, indicates the boundaries between the four values of higher order, which can be
grouped into a circular motivational continuity. Equivalent to the original theory, this
new model provides greater accuracy of prediction and explanation for a set of attitudes
and beliefs regarding the behavior (FIGURE 1).
------------------------------
Insert Figure 1 Here
------------------------------
There is indeed a concern in relation to the fundamental values that people in all
different cultures recognize. According to Schwartz (2012), the values are structured in
similar ways throughout culturally diverse groups. This suggests that there is a universal
organizational motivation, and although the nature of values and its structure may be
universal, individuals and groups differ substantially from the relative importance
assigned to the values.
The values determine the performance of an organization and they will be
evaluated as a function of productivity, social responsibility or of the authority
maintenance (Sagiv and Schwartz, 1995).
Finishing the theoretical exposition of the values, we have the following
insights: the values are characterized by two functional dimensions represented by
orientation and motivating type, in which the convergence between these two
dimensions originates other six sub-dimensions represented by six specific values:
experimentation, achievement, existence, super-personal, interactive and regulations.
This structure is then capable of covering the main dimensions presented by other
2
models proposed by Schwartz (1992). It can be seen an evolution and refinement in the
Table of values made by Schwartz et al. (2012), which reinforces the importance of
values as an individual motivational factor. The definitions, systems, theories and
structures presented corroborate to understand the types of values that individuals are
based for their choices and behaviors.
2.2 Motivation
Armstrong (2007, pp.120) depicts the concept from the initial understanding of
the noun "reason". For him, "a reason is a reaction to do something - to move in a
certain direction". In this way, individuals are motivated to perform certain actions
because they believe that the completion of an activity will lead to the achievement of
their objectives.
For Aworemi, Abdul-Azeez and Durowoju (2011), the motivation generates
benefits for organizations, as it puts human resources in action, enhances the level of
efficiency of the employees, leads to the achievement of organizational objectives,

builds friendly relationship, and finally, leads to stability of the workforce. The values
have the basic function of motivating and controlling the behavior of individuals. Park
and Word (2012) in accordance with Aworemi et al. (2011) and Aarts and Custers
(2012) add that the behavior is driven and motivated by unconscious goals, according to
the situation or environment.
In this study, the major motivational theory, according Bowditch and Buono
(2006) and Hitt, Muller and Colella (2007) was based on grounds of the Hypothetical
Structural Model covered in this study (FIGURE 1), and the preparation of the research
questionnaire. In conclusion, organizational results are impacted by motivation. In this
competitive environment, the employee motivation should be a management strategy
(Steers et al., 2004).
Locke (2000) and Schunk and Usher (2012), state that the needs are outlined by
the individual values, the values set out certain goals and the objectives guide the
actions to be taken. In addition, this relation can also be interpreted as follows: the
objectives achieved correspond to the materialization of values and values shape the
needs to be met.
Therefore, the organizations that wish to maintain their competitiveness and
sustainability need to consider the individuals motivation as an essential element in
establishing organizational commitment and achieving better performance and
productivity.
2.3 Commitment
According to Allen and Meyer (1990, 1997), the commitment can be defined as
a psychological state that connects the individual and the organization. This
psychological state establishes the relationship between the employee and the
organization, providing implications for the employee's decision. According to Meyer
and Allen (1997), the organizational commitment may contain several dimensions. The
dimensions considered are: affective, instrumental and regulatory.
According to Meyer and Herscovitch (2001), the component that sets the
dimensions of the compromise, would be the nature of the psychological state. This
commitment may be entered into with employees through the payment for performance,
adding competitive advantage. In this study, we will use the concept of payment
associated with salary, characterized as payments made by the company to the
employee resulting from a work developed.
Even with varying definitions, there is a diversity of forms that the construct
commitment can take. However, the finding that commitment is the key to
3
organizational success is represented by all authors. For the authors, the way to
consolidate the commitment is through argument (Meyer, Becker and Vandenberghe,
2004).
Table 2 depicts the variety of approaches used for general conceptualization of
the construct.
------------------------------
Insert Table 2 Here
------------------------------
The thought that characterizes the affective commitment corresponds to desire.

People who have affective commitment perform certain tasks because they want to. In
turn, the perception of the cost characterizes the instrumental commitment. The
individual with instrumental commitment mainly reflects on the possible consequences
that his/her attitude could cause him/her in terms of cost. And finally, the thought to the
legal commitment is the obligation to continue the given task. The regulatory
commitment is consolidated through the internalization of a number of the individual
conduct rules (Meyer and Herscovitch, 2001).
2.4 Rewards and Performance
This concept represents the material and tangible gains earned by employees in
the performance of their profession, and may take fixed or variables values. The base
salary demonstrates the recognition of the employee's value to the organization,
reflecting also the individual's potential and his/her importance to the organization. The
variable remuneration is the variable portion of remuneration linked to the achievement
of performance targets and results obtained in a given period (Jensen, Mcmullen and
Strak, 2007).
In organizations, the management remuneration consists of three dimensions: (i)
functional compensation, which uses the position to consolidate the plans for jobs and
wages; (ii) variable remuneration, which has as its central principle the recognition of
the contribution of employees (individual) as a factor to be paid; and finally, (iii)
benefits represented by medical and dental plan, life insurance, transportation, food
basket, accident insurance or study grants (Rodrigues, 2006,Gheno and Berlitz, 2011,
Marras, 2012).
The performance is presented in its complex form of measurement (Lyster and
Arthur, 2007) due to the presence of subjective factors as the nature of the organization,
support availability or regulatory restrictions, in which individuals have little or even no
influence. Cognitive limitation would be another aspect to be considered, identifying the
small probability of an individual enhance their performance. Dayaran (2010) states that
it must be taken into account the influence that the individual carries on third party
performance in the organizational context.
Kreitner and Kinicki (2007) portray those members of the organization pay
people for their expertise and to do their best according to the interest of the
organization. The organizations seek to build their human and social capital. Human
capital is defined by the productive potential of knowledge and actions of an individual,
and the social capital is the resulting productive potential of strong relationships, good
will and cooperation efforts.
In order to provide theoretical support to the hypothetical model proposed in this
study, the main focus of this subsection is to identify the importance of reward in the
organizational context, influencing the motivation, the commitment and performance of
4
employees and the organizational outcomes and, moreover, having its conceptual basis
ruled in reward and performance.
2.5 The relationship between the constructs

Several studies mention the motivation as an important driver of organizational
performance (Alonso and Lewis, 2001 Saeid Arrabi et al., 2013), since the goals
achieved correspond to the materialization of values and values shape the needs to be
met (Schunk and Usher, 2012).
According to Schwartz (1999), personal values permeate the choices that
individuals make in different situations in their lives. This suggests that values affect the
motivations, because the motivation is the basis of the studies about the human
behavior. Because of the perception that studies use the theory of basic values, i.e., treat
values as distinct entities, Schwartz et al. (2012) refined their theory of value by
proposing a more accurate set of meaningful values, conceptually distinct, and with
universal coverage. It was stipulated then that the "basic values theory" would be
identified as "original theory of value."
The analysis of the samples about the Original Theory of Value includes high
geographical, cultural, linguistic, religious, age, gender and occupational groups
diversity, with national representatives from 37 countries (Bilsky, Janik and Schwartz
2011, Davidov, Schmidt and Schwartz 2008, Schwartz 2006) which were found the
oppositions of self-transcendence to the self-improvement and the openness to change
to the conservation, which are almost universally present. Furthermore, each of the basic
values differs by at least 80% of the samples. These results show that people in most
cultures respond differently to the types of values and that the most extensive
orientations of values captured by adjacent values are almost universally discriminated.
This strongly supports the idea that human values form the motivational continuous
postulated by theory.
The motivation of employees is a strategy for organizations (Steers et al., 2004)
because it is a crucial factor in establishing the organizational commitment to achieving
better results. This commitment is defined as a psychological state that unites the
individual and the organization (Meyer, Allen and Smith, 1993).
The intrinsic motivation can be expanded in the organizational environment
through choices, because it provides people a sense of personal control. As a result, we
can see the increase of morality, creativity, innovation, as well as performance,
organizational commitment and turnover (Chua and Yegar, 2006). However, Patall
(2012) attests that the perception of the effect of choices can change the characteristics
of the choice, person and situation.
The commitment is a complex construct due to the several forms it can take and
it is considered the key to organizational success (Meyer et al., 2004). According to
Meyer and Herscovitch (2001), all behavior will depend on the nature of the
commitment to which the employee is associated, defining the need for the organization
to understand what 'compromises' each of your employees, so as to act focused on the
outcome that it want to achieve. This dissemination is based on the assumption that high
levels of commitment of the employees lead to improved job performance, providing
positive results for both (Bastos, 1993 Mowday 1998, Stephens et al., 2004).
For Simitrans, Watkins, Ifie and Georgakas (2012) there are several lines of
study about commitment, and one of these lines puts the career and organization
commitments in conflict of interest. Somers and Birnbaum (2000) address the dilemma
of the individuals of knowing which place to deposit their loyalty: in the career or in the
organization. Other studies oppose this line of thought, and reported a positive
5
relationship between organizational commitment and career. Somers and Birnbaum
(2000) mention such researches indicating high levels of satisfaction among individuals
who were at the same time committed to career and organization, and demonstrate
empowerment, unlike those committed only with the career or the organization.
According to Carson and Carson (1997), individuals committed to career and with the
organization are considered doubly compromised.Such definitions support the
understanding of the relationship between organizational commitment and career
commitment, identifying the influences generated both for the individual and to
organizations, according to the profile type (SOMERS; BRINBAUM, 2000). The
authors demonstrate significant contributions in describing the impact of each profile in
the organizational context, which may affect processes and outcomes such as turnover
and job performance. On the contrary, most of the researches about organizational
commitment focused on the exhibition of their antecedents and consequences and their
possible implications in different contexts (Meyer and Herscovitch, 2001). This leads to
the reflection about the importance of understanding the process of commitment

consolidation in the organizational context.
Rewards are a management strategy that surrounds the constructs motivation and
commitment (Jensen, Mcmullen and Stark, 2007) influencing performance.
The performance is a vital component of the motivation model. This is due to the
fact that more effort leads to higher performance, and higher performance leads to
rewards. If this relationship is not perceived, the performance may be compromised
(Murray and Gerhart, 1998). According to the concepts of motivational theories, if the
organization does not allow to maintain or to exceed the expectations of employees, will
be generated feelings of frustration, which will compromise the performance and,
therefore, the organizational results. For Vroom (1964), the reward received will be
important for each one individually, and should therefore be offered based on individual
values. Renko, Kroeck and Bullough (2012) supplement stating that the various types of
valence are related to different intentions and behavioral outcomes.
Finally, according to Taras, Steel and Kirkman (2011), it is important to learn
how cultural differences can cause discrepancies in perceptions and evaluations of
business processes and how the results can help to predict future disagreements and to
avoid misunderstandings and ease the conflict. The organizational focus should be on
issues related to business and not on personal differences, to finally be able to improve
performance and provide a more pleasant working environment.
According to Locke and Latham (2002), commitment is important to enhance
the relationship between goal and performance. However, the commitment should be
supported by two factors: relevance and achievement. It is noteworthy that in the search
for a successful goal, it is necessary a feedback in a timely manner and consciously.
Choi and Fishbach (2011) reported the existence of two models of choice: instrumental
and experimental. The first, the instrumental choice, is considered intrinsically
motivated. According to these authors, extrinsic actions serve as means to an end.
Individuals engage in extrinsic actions to achieve external goals and they engage in
intrinsic actions to achieve the reward for their commitment. In addition, should also be
noted that the two modes of choice are not mutually exclusive. The individual goals
guide behavior toward the desired results, motivating over time, and also providing
orientation and meaning, contributing to the acquisition of competence. The perception
of the progress of these goals supports the self-efficacy and motivation (Schunk and
Usher, 2012).
According to Chip, De Martino, Shimojo and O'Doherty (2012), recent
experiments suggest an abnormal interaction between incentives and performance. The
6
authors disclose that the individual performance increases as incentives also increase,
however, very high levels of incentive leads to the paradoxical result of poorer
performance. This demonstrates the relevance of the companies know their performance
from different perspectives, outlining their strengths and weaknesses, so as to define
action strategies regarding the reward system. Cognitive limitation would be other
aspect to be considered, being identified the small probability of the individual optimize
his/her performance. Dayaran (2010) states that it must take into account the influence
that the individual exerts on third party performance in the organizational context.
3 Method
The survey was cross-sectional, descriptive and quantitative. The sample of
individuals corresponding to three different countries, with information collected from a
sample of 406 respondents and from a convenience sample of two companies, one
company in the oil and gas sector, surveyed in Mexico and the United States, and the
other company in the electronics industry, researched in Brazil.

The general characteristics of this study were defined as a cross-cultural study,
seeking the relations between values, motivation, commitment, rewards and
performance for three individual cultural units: United States, Mexico and Brazil.
Six hypotheses were raised in the hypothetical structural model (H1 - the
individual values are associated to his/her motivation; H2 - the motivation is associated
with impairment; H3 - the commitment is associated with performance; H4 the
performance (results) achieved is associated with rewards; H5 - the rewards are
associated with motivation; H6 - the reward is associated with the commitment to the
organization).
The sample is divided in Brazil (82 of 150 employees), United States (97 of 147
employees) and Mexico (227 of 285 employees). The data collection was performed
through a questionnaire and prepared for data handling process. In this process, first, the
responses were tabulated in Excel spreadsheets and subsequently processed as indicated
in the following item.
The framework of the Measurement Model (FIGURE 2) and the Structural
Model were adjusted in different countries in order to study the metric equivalence and
the equivalence in the regression structures. After analyzing the structural equation,
groups were created from the similarity of the responses about the Values construct. To
perform a grouping, an hierarchical cluster analysis was used via Wards method, using
the Euclidean distance. The created groups were related to the countries of the
companies of the respondents, from a Correspondence Analysis. Finally, for Structural
Equation Modeling via PLS method, it was used plspm function ( ) of the plspm
package of R software (version 3.0.3). The questionnaire was built. The questionnaire
(annex 1).
------------------------------
------------------------------
4 Results and Discussion
4.1 Brazil
Considering only Brazil (82 sample), it can be seen that in the Structural Model:
there was a significant (p-value = 0.001) and positive ( = 0.365 [0.24; 0.56]) influence
of Performance over Rewards. Thus, the higher the performance, the greater will be the
7
reward. The performance was able to explain 13.3% of the variability of Reward; there
was a significant (p-value = 0.000) and positive ( = 0.672 [0.57, 0.78]) influence of
Reward over Motivation. Thus, the greater the reward, the greater will be the
motivation.
The values did not show a significant influence (p-value = 0.759) on the
motivation. Reward and Values were able to explain 45.5% of the variability of
Motivation; there was a significant (p-value = 0.000) and positive ( = 0.628 [0.30;
0.82]) influence of Reward over Commitment. Thus, the greater the reward, the greater
will be the commitment. The motivation did not show a significant influence (p-value =
0.413) over commitment.
Reward and Commitment were able to explain 48.0% of the variability of
Commitment. The model presented a GoF of 48.2%, indicating a good adjustment of
the model (TABLE 3).
------------------------------
Insert Table 3 Here
------------------------------
In Brazil, the Structural Model was presented according to Figure 3.
------------------------------
------------------------------
Brazil portrays in this analysis, the capitalist image of the construct Performance
influencing Reward, which in turn influences the Motivation and Commitment. It is
visible the lack of influence of Values on Motivation and Motivation on Commitment.
Thus, the hypotheses H1 - the individual values are associated with his/her motivation;
H2 - the motivation is associated with the commitment; and H6 - the motivation is
associated with the commitment to the organization, are rejected. Brazil refuses to claim
Park and Word (2012) that define motivation as a means of getting people to take
ownership of the organization's needs, achieving higher performance levels.
On the other hand, the hypotheses H3 - the commitment is associated with
performance; H4 - the performance (results) achieved is associated with rewards; and
H5 - the rewards are associated with motivation, are confirmed, which reinforces the
concept of organizational commitment presented by Meyer and Herscovitch (2001) -
"[...] A relative strength of identification and involvement of an individual in a specific
organization" (Mowday et al.,1998,pp.392.) - besides affirming the importance of
rewards tied to performance, consequently, the importance of performance
management, considered part of the reward system in which each element is associated
with reward, being treated as an integrated and coherent system (Yiannis, 2009).
4.2 United States of America

Considering only the United States (97 sample), it can be confirmed in the
Structural Model that: there was a significant (p-value = 0.000) and positive ( = 0.483
[0.27, 0.67]) influence of Performance over Rewards. Thus, the higher the performance,
the greater will be the reward. The performance was able to explain 23.3% of the
variability of Reward; there was a significant (p-value = 0.000) and positive ( = 0.560
[0.36, 0.70]) influence of Reward over Motivation. Thus, the greater the reward, the
greater will be the motivation.
8
The construct Values did not show a significant influence (p-value = 0.732) on
Motivation. Reward and Values were able to explain 30.5% of the variability of
Motivation; there was a significant (p-value = 0.000) and positive ( = 0.661 [0.52,
0.81]) influence of Reward over Commitment.
Thus, the greater the reward, the greater will be the commitment. The construct
Motivation did not show a significant influence (p-value = 0.904) on Commitment.
Reward and Commitment were able to explain 44.6% of the variability of Commitment.
The model presented a GoF of 49.6%, indicating a good adjustment of the model
(TABLE 4).
------------------------------
Insert Table 4 Here
------------------------------
The Structural Model United States of America (FIGURE 4)

------------------------------
------------------------------
Thus, the hypotheses H1 the individual values are associated with his/her
motivation; H2 - the motivation is associated with the commitment; and H6 - the reward
is associated with the commitment to the organization, are rejected. The hypotheses H3
- the commitment is associated with performance; H4 - performance (results) achieved
is associated with rewards; and H5 - the rewards are associated with motivation, are
confirmed, highlighting the statement of Kohn (1998, pp.30) that "payment became
contingent on task performance, and all the rest will walk alone."
Similar to Brazil, the United States depicts the strongest capitalist image of the
construct Performance influencing Reward, which in turn influences Motivation and
Commitment, and it presents no influence of the construct Values on Motivation and
Motivation on Commitment.
4.3 Mexico
Considering only Mexico (227 sample), it can be seen that in the Structural
Model: there was a significant (p-value = 0.000) and positive ( = 0.272 [0.15, 0.41])
influence of Performance over Reward. Thus, the higher the performance, the greater
will be the reward. Performance was able to explain 7.4% of the variability of Reward;
there was a significant (p-value = 0.000) and positive ( = 0.418 [0.30, 0.54]) influence
of Reward over Motivation.
Thus, the greater the reward, the greater will be the motivation. There was also a
significant (p-value = 0.051) and positive ( = 0.119 [0.04; 0.27]) influence of Values
over Motivation. Reward and Values were able to explain 20.8% of the variability of
Motivation; there was a significant (p-value = 0.000) and positive ( = 0.497 [0.35,
0.67]) influence of Reward over Commitment. Thus, the greater the reward, the greater
will be the commitment.
The Motivation also had a significant (p-value = 0.000) and positive ( = 0.264
[0.12, 0.43]) influence on Commitment. It can be seen that the impact of Reward on
Commitment was significantly higher than the impact of Motivation. Reward and
Commitment were able to explain 43.3% of the variability of Commitment. The model
presented a GoF of 39.5%, indicating a good adjustment of the model (TABLE 5).
9
------------------------------
Insert Table 5 Here
------------------------------
The Structural Model Mexico (FIGURE 5)
------------------------------
------------------------------
Mexico differs from other analyzes because it allows the analysis of the
association of all studied constructs. So, Values influence Motivation, which influences
Commitment; Performance influences Rewards, which also influences Commitment.
In this model, all the hypotheses of this work are confirmed: H1 - the individual
values are associated with his/her motivation; H2 - the motivation is associated with
commitment; H3 - the commitment is associated with performance; H4 - the
performance (results) achieved is associated with rewards; H5 - the rewards are
associated with motivation and H6 - the reward is associated with the commitment to
the organization.
Thus, it is shown a better balance, representing the best hypothetical structural
model studied, which may mean that individuals in this locality feel better performing
their routines in the working place.
The differentiation between the three countries can be explained with the support
of Freitas (1997, p. 41), which reports that organizations have unique cultures, fed by a
number of factors, and that national culture is one of the factors in the formation of
organizational culture.
This confirms the concept of Medeiros et al. (2012), reporting that the values,
when working for the survival of individuals, groups or companies, are embedded in
culture, and begin to shape the desired behaviors, ensuring harmony in the conviviality
and continuity of such a society.
This also reinforces Bergamini (2006) in his proposal for understanding that the
motivation to work encompasses the individual, work and the organization, defining the
individual's loyalty, according to the intensity of his/her Affective Commitment. Thus,
the Affective Commitment is reflected in positive feelings in relation to the
Organization and its values.
It was used an hierarchical cluster analysis via Ward's method (Ward, 1963),
using the Euclidean distance. Thus, it was shown below the dendrogram for the
grouping of respondents (FIGURE 6) (TABLE 6).
------------------------------
------------------------------
------------------------------
Insert Table 6 Here
------------------------------
The Figure 7 points to Schwartzs theory (2012) in which it suggests the

existence of a universal organization of motivations in which the individuals differ from
the relative importance assigned to the values.
10
------------------------------
------------------------------
In Table 7, it can be established the profile of each group. Therefore, it can be

seen that: group-1 is mainly characterized by the high average of the Materialism,
Hedonism and Rationality values; group-2 is mainly characterized by presenting one of
the highest averages of Hedonism and one of the lowest averages of Challenge; Group-3
is mainly characterized by the lower average in Hedonism and Affection values; Group-
4 is mainly characterized by the higher averages in Hedonism, Internal Harmony,
Benevolence, Affection and Affiliation; group-5 is mainly characterized by the higher
averages of Challenge and Benevolence and one of the lowest averages of Hedonism;
Group-6 is characterized in general for presenting the lowest averages for all values.
------------------------------
Insert Table 7 Here
------------------------------
It is presented in Table 8 the general comparison between countries, of the
indicators that represent each construct, from the average of their respective items. The
highest average values of Commitment (Affective, Instrumental, Regulatory and
Professional), Rewards (Monetary and Non-monetary), Motivation and Performance
(Goal Attainment and Absence of Conflict and Complaints) occurred in Mexico,
followed by the United States and Brazil, whereas Absence of Conflicts and Complaints
was higher in Brazil than in the United States. Regarding the values, Brazil had the
highest average values of Hedonism, Inner Harmony, Affection and Affiliation, while
Mexico had the highest average values for Rationality, Family Attachment, Challenge,
Benevolence and Materialism.
------------------------------
Insert Table 8 Here
------------------------------
Table 9 shows the validity and quality of first-order constructs, once filled the
basic assumptions for the development of latent variables (indicators) in that: all were
unidimensional (Dim = 1); all constructs showed convergent validity (AVE > 0.50); all
constructs presented Cronbach's alpha (CA) and Dillon-Goldstein's coefficient above
0.70. In other words, all they had the required levels of reliability; in all constructs the
adjustment of the factor analysis was adequate, since all KMO were greater than or
equal to 0.50.
------------------------------
Insert Table 9 Here
------------------------------
In Tables 10 and 11 the constructs "Value", "Commitment", "Rewards",
"Performance" and "Motivation" are demonstrate by Exploratory Factor Analysis.
Therefore, it can be seen that only the items CN3, CP1, CP3 and V22 were eliminated,
since they presented factor loadings below the minimum acceptable (0.50).
------------------------------
Insert Table 10 Here
------------------------------
11
------------------------------
------------------------------
In Table 11, considering all countries, the weights, the factor loadings and the
commonalities of the Measurement Model can be checked. Thus, it can be seen the need
to exclude some items of the construct 'values', since they presented factorial loads well
below the acceptable minimum threshold (0.50), and besides that, the confidence
intervals were not significant at all (zero value).
The construct 'performance' also presented factor loading for Absence of
Complaints and Conflicts well below the acceptable minimum. In the case of the
construct 'performance' in the absence of an indicator to measure the Absence of
Complaints and Conflicts, the construct becomes first order, being reflected directly by
the questions related to the achievement of goals.
In the analysis of the Measurement Model, the convergent validity, discriminant

validity and reliability of the constructs were adjusted and validated (TABLE 12.13).
------------------------------
------------------------------
------------------------------
------------------------------
In the Measurement Model (TABLE 13) it was excluded the Inner Harmony,
Affection, Affiliation, Hedonism and Materialism values, and Performance returned as a
first order construct, being reflected directly by the questions related to the goals
achievement. Thus, it can be noted that: there was no factor loadings below 0.50 and all
weights were significant, indicating validity and quality of the Measurement Model; the
construct 'values' was represented by Rationality, Family Attachment, Challenge and
Benevolence values, and Rationality and Challenge were the items of greatest weight in
the index formation to measure the concept. As for the construct 'performance' the most
important items to form the index were AM-1, AM-4 and AM-5. To construct 'reward',
the Non-Monetary reward showed a weight greater than the Monetary reward. To
'motivation' construct, the item Mot-1 was the most relevant for index formation. To
'commitment' construct, the Affective commitment, showed the greatest weight, while
the Instrumental commitment, the lowest.
In the overview it can be seen a greater degree of importance of the constructs
'commitment' and 'rewards' in all surveyed countries, causing the difference is
determined by the constructs 'values' and 'performance', enabling the weighting of the
regional culture impact on these constructs.
It is worth mentioning the robustness of the construct 'commitment' in all the
countries studied, this being defined, according to Allen and Meyer (1990, 1997), as a
psychological state that connects the individual and the organization. Considered as the
one with more weight, the Affective commitment reflects the sense of loyalty,
establishing strong employee identification with the organization's objectives and values
(Mohamed et al., 2006).
In Table 14, it is noted the analysis of convergent validity, the discriminant
validity, the dimensionality and the reliability of the constructs. The constructs showed
the CA and DG reliability indices above 0.70, demonstrating thereby, the reliability of
12
them; the constructs were unidimensional, since no second eigenvalue (2av.) was
greater than 1; the constructs showed AVEs higher than 0.50, indicating convergent
validity; the shared variance was lower than the Average Variance Extracted (AVEs) of
the compared constructs and thus, it was obtained the discriminant validity.
------------------------------
------------------------------
5 Conclusions
Therefore, in general, the research allowed the verification of the association
between the constructs motivation, commitment, performance and reward, excluding the
construct values. However, by defining each country, we found the association of the
construct values with motivation in Mexico, thereby demonstrating a better balance of
the proposed Hypothetical Structural Model.

As specific objectives, it was possible to identify 6 groups (clusters) of different
individuals according to values, and also, its associative relationship according to the
variables of the proposed Hypothetical Structural Model. The identification of each
cluster was possible, according to the variables of the hypothetical structural model, and
the groups with greater proximity between Mexico and United States were very similar,
mostly because US companies have many Mexicans in their staff.
In this approach, in which the geographical area is significant for understanding
the research, the organizational culture values the sharing and the pursuit of values
common to all individuals within an organization. Thus, making values an essential
element in the understanding of culture and for determining the organizational
performance.
Finally, generally speaking, the hypothetical structural model was rejected
because of no association of the construct value to the motivation. This allows future
studies addressing in detail each country studied, since the model differed from country
to country.
It is expected that this work can stimulate others that aim to explore the
hypothetical structural model in more countries or organizations in order to understand
the influence of the constructs in organizational management, enabling people
management area to be more effective in conducting relevant management processes for
each organization.
Therefore, it is understood that the approach used in this work could eventually
be replicated in other regions to seek confirmations and / or contradictions of the results,
contributing to future studies to relate such constructs.
The study collaborates with academia when it presents the validation of a model
in the virtuous circle of life at work. And also collaborates at management level by
providing the basis that managers need to support the work and to obtain good
performance.
It also suggests that further research be undertaken using other features other
than those adopted in this work, to constitute the independent variables on the analyzed
constructs. It is important to emphasize the need for future studies with all aspects and
features of this study. Increasing the sample size facilitated with some hypotheses,
whose tests were not feasible due to the limitation of data, can be effectively tested,
allowing a greater understanding of the researched problem.
References
13
Aarts, H. and Custers, R. (2012),Unconscious goal pursuit: non-conscious goal
regulation and motivation, In: R. M. Ryan (nd.), Oxford handbook of human
motivation, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 85-107.
Allen, N.J and Meyer, J.P. (1990),The measurement and antecedents of affective,
continuance and normative commitment to the organization, Journal of Occupational
Psychology, Vol. 63, pp. 1-18.
Alonso, P. and Lewis, G. B. (2001), Public service motivation and job performance
evidence from the federal sector, The American Review of Public Administration, Vol.
31 No 4, pp. 363-380.
Armstrong, M.(2007), A handbook of employee reward management and practice,
(2.nd), London, Philadelphia, PA: Kogan Page.
Aworemi, J. R., Abdul-Azeez, I. A., Durowoju and S. T. (2011),An empirical study of
the motivational factors of employees in Nigeria, International Journal of Economics
& Finance, Vol. 3 No. 5, pp. 227-233.
Bastos. A. V. B. (1993), "Organizational commitment: a balance of results and

challenges surrounding this research tradition", Journal of Business Administration,
Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 52-64.
Bergamini, C.W. (2006), Psychology applied to business administration: Organizational
Behavior psychology, (4.nd ), So Paulo: Atlas.
Bilsky, W. Janik, M. and Schwartz, S. H. (2011),The structural organization of human
values Evidence from three rounds of the European Social Survey (EES), Journal of
Cross-Cultural Psychology, Vol. 42, pp.759-776.
Bowditch, J. L. and Buono, A. F. (2006), Fundamentals of organizational behavior, Rio
de Janeiro: LTC
Camara, P.(2006), The rewards systems and the strategic management of human
resources, (2.nd),Rev. aum. Lisbon: Dom Quixote.
Carson, K. and Carson, P. (1997), Career entrenchment: a quiet march toward
occupational death?, Academy of Management Executive, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 62-74.
Chib, V. S., De Martino, B., Shimojo, S. and ODoherty, J. (2012),Neural Mechanism
underlying paradoxical performance for monetary incentives are driven by loss
aversion, Neuron, No. 74, pp. 582-594.
Choi, J. and Fishbach, A. (2011), Choice as an end versus a means, Journal of
Marketing Research, Vol. 48 No. 3, pp. 544-554.
Chua, R. Y. and Iyengar, S. S. (2006),Empowerment through choice? A critical
analysis of the effects of choice in organizations, Research in Organizational
Behavior, Vol. 27, pp. 41-79.
Dayaran, K. (2010), Leadership and vision: involving strategies, SCMS Journal of
Indian Management, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 20-28.
Freitas, A.B. (1997), Brazilian traits for organizational analysis. In: Motorcycle,
Fernando C. P. and Caldas, M. P (org). Organizational culture and Brazilian culture.
So Paulo: Atlas.
Gheno, R.and Berlitz, J. (2011), Strategic remuneration and benefits package: a case
study applied at the operational level of a multinational, Administration magazine
UFSM, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 268-287.
Gouveia, V. V., Milfont, T. L., Fischer, R. and Coelho, J. A. P. M. (2009),
Functionalist theory of human values: applications to organizations, Mackenzie
Administration Magazine, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 34-59.
Gracioli, C., Godoy, L. P., Lorenzett, D. B. and Godoy, T. P. (2012), Intellectual
capital: an innovative tool in the search for competitive advantages, Journal of
business administration and Innovation, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 96-120.
14
Hitt, M. A., Muller, C. C. and Colella, A. (2007), Organizational behavior: a strategic
approach, Rio de Janeiro: LTC.
Jensen, D., Mcmullen, T. and Stark, M. (2007), The managers guide to rewards: what
you need to know to get the best for and from your employees, New York: Amacom.
Kaplan, R. and Norton, D. P.(1997), The strategy in action: balanced scorecard, Rio de
Janeiro: Campus.
Kelwalatenna, S.; Premaratne, G. (2013),An empirical investigation into the behavior
of intelectual capital, IUP Journal of Knowledge Management, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 38-
57.
Kohn, A.(1998), Punished by rewards, So Paulo: Atlas.
Kreitner, R., Kinicki, A. (2007), Organizational behavior, Boston: McGraw-Hill Irwin.
Liou, S. (2008), An analysis of the concept of organizational commitment. Nursing
Frum, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 116-124.
Locke, E. A. (2000), Motivation, cognition, and action: an analysis of studies of task
goals and knowledge, Applied Psychology: an internal review, Vol. 49, pp. 408-429.
Locke, E. A. and Latham, G. (1990), Work motivation and satisfaction: light at the end
of the tunnel, Psychological Science, Vol. 1 No. 4, pp. 240-246.
Lyster, S. and Arthur, S. (2007), 199 Pre-written employee performance appraisals: the
complete guide to successful employee evaluations and documentation, Ocala: Atlantic
Publishing Group, pp. 316.
Marras, J. P. (2012), Administration of the remuneration, (2.nd), So Paulo: Pearson
Education.
Medeiros, E. D., Gouveia, V. V., Gusmo, E. E. S., Milfont, T. L. and Aquino, A.
A.(2012), Functionalist theory of human values: evidence of their suitability in
connection with Brazil, Mackenzie Administration Magazine, Vol. 13 No. 3, pp.18-44.
Meyer, J. P., Allen N. J. and Smith, C. (1993), Commitment to Organizations and
Occupations: Extension and Test of a Three-component Conceptualization, Journal of
Applied Psychology, Vol. 78, pp. 538-551.
Meyer J and Allen, N. (1997), Commitment in the Workplace: Theory, Research, and
Application, Sage Publications.
Meyer, J. P.and Herscovitch, L. (2001), Commitment in the workplace: toward a
general model, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 11, pp. 299-326.
Meyer, J., Becker, T. and Vandenberghe, C. (2004), Employee commitment and
motivation: a conceptual analysis and integrative model, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 89 No. 6, pp. 991-1007.
Mohamed, F., Taylor, G and Hassan, A.(2006), Affective commitment and intent to
quit: the impact of work and non-work related issues, Journal of Managerial Issues,
Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 512-529.
Mowday, R. T.(1998), Reflections on the study and relevance of organizational
commitment, Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 8 No. 4, pp. 387-401.
Murray, B., Gerhart, B. (1998), An empirical analysis of a skill-based pay program and
plant performance outcomes, Academy of Management Journal, Briarcliff Manor, Vol.
41 No. 1, pp. 68-78.
Park, S. M. and Word, J. (2012), Driven to service: intrinsic and extrinsic motivation
for public and nonprofit managers, Public Personnel Management, Vol. 41 No. 4, pp.
705-734.
Patall, E. A. (2012), The motivational complexity of choosing: a review of theory and
research. In: R. M. RYAN (nd.). Oxford handbook of human motivation. Oxford, UK:
Oxford University Press, p. 248-279.
15
Renko, M., Kroeck, K. and Bullough, A.(2012), Expectancy theory and nascent
entrepreneurship, Small Business Economics, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 667-684.
Rodrigues, J. M. (2006), Remuneration and powers: rhetoric or reality?, Journal of
business administration-RAE, Vol. 46, pp. 23-24.
Sagiv, L. and Schwartz, S. H. (1995), Value priorities and readness for out-group
social contact, Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, Vol. 69 No.3,pp. 437-448.
Saeid Aarabi, M., Devi Subramaniam, I. and Abu Baker Akeel, A. B. A.(2013),
Relationship between motivational factors and job performance of employees in
Malaysian Service Industry, Asian Social Science, Vol. 9 No. 9, pp. 301-310.
Schunk, D. H.and Usher, E. L. (2012), Social cognitive theory and motivation, In: R.
M. Ryan (Ed.), Oxford handbook of human motivation, Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press, pp. 13-27.
Schwartz, S. H. (1992), Universal in the content and structure of values: theoretical
advances and empirical tests in 20 countries, In: Zanna, M. P. (nd.), Advanced in
experimental social psychology, New York: Academic Press, pp. 1-65.

Schwartz, S. H. (1994), Are there universal aspects in the structure and contents of
human values?, Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 50 No. 4, pp. 19-45.
Schwartz, S. H. (1999),Theory of cultural values and some implications for work,
Applied Psychology An international review, Vol. 48 No. 1, pp. 23-47.
Schwartz, S. H. (2006), Basic human values: theory, measurement, and applications,
Revue Franaise de Sociologie, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 249-288.
Schwartz, S. H., Vecchione, M., Fischer, R., Ramos, A., Demirutku, K., Dirilen-Gumus,
O.,Cieciuch, J., Davidov, E., Beierlein, C., Verkasalo, M., Lnnqvist, J. E. and Konty,
M.(2012), Refining the theory of basic individual values, Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, Vol. 103 No. 4, pp. 663-668.
Schwartz, S.H. (2012), An Overview of the Schwartz Theory of Basic Values, On
line reading in Psychology and Culture, Vol.2 No.1. http://dx.doi.org/10.9707/2307-
0319.1116.
Simintiras, A., Watkins, A.,Ifie, K. and Georgakas, K.(2012), Individual and
contextual influences on the affective commitment of retail sales people, Journal of
Marketing Management, Vol. 28 No. 11-12, pp. 1377-1398.
Somers, M.; Birnbaum, D. (2000), Exploring the relationship between commitment
profiles and work attitudes, employee withdrawal, and job performance, Public
Personal Management, Vol. 29, No. 3, pp. 353-364.
Steers, R., Mowday, R. and Shapiro, D. (2004),The future of work motivation theory,
Academy of Management Review, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 379-387.
Stephens, R., Dawley, D. D. and Stephens, D. B. (2004), Commitment on the board: a
model of volunteer directors' levels of organizational commitment and self-reported
performance, Journal of Managerial Issues, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 483-504.
Taras, V,Steel, P. and Kirkman, B. L.(2011), Three decades of research on national
culture in the workplace: do the differences still make a difference? Organizational
Dynamics: Elsevier.
Vroom, V. H. (1964), Work and motivation. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Ward, J. H. (1963), Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function, Journal
of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 58 No. 301, pp. 236-244.
Yiannis, T., Ioannis, S. and Nikolaos, K. (2009), Performance management and
Reward, Computational Methods in Science and Engineering, Advances in
Computational Science, American Institute of Physics, Vol. 2, Cp.1148.
16
TABLE 1 Motivational types of Schwartz (1994)
High level of Motivational Abstract goals Individual value items
values Type
Self- Power Social status and prestige, control Social Power, Authority and
Enhancement and dominance over people and Wealth.
resources
Achievement Personal success through Success, capacity, ambition,

demonstrating competence influence on people and
according to social standards events.
Openness to Stimulation Excitement, novelty and challenge Boldness; varied, challenging

change in life and exciting life.
Self-direction Independent thought and action - Creativity, freedom, curiosity,

choose, create and explore independence, to choose their

own goals.
Self- Universalism Understanding, attention, tolerance Open mind, social justice,

Transcendence and protection for the welfare of world peace, fairness and
individuals. wisdom.
Nature Environmental protection Nature beauty, unity of

nature, protection of the
environment.
Benevolence Preservation and enhancement of Helpful, honest, forgiveness,

well-being of the individual who is loyalty and responsibility.
in frequent contact
Conservation Tradition Respect, commitment, and Respect for the traditions,

acceptance of customs and cultural humility, acceptance devotion
traditions or religious nature. and modesty.
Conformity Containment actions, inclinations Obedience, honor parents and

and impulses that may disturb or elders, self-discipline and
harm others and violate social politeness.
expectations and norms
Security Security, harmony and stability of National security, family

society, of relationships and of security, social order,
itself. cleaning, reciprocity of
favors.
None Hedonism Pleasure and sensual gratification of Gratification of desire,

itself pleasure in life, self-
indulgence.
Source: Torelli et al., 2012.

Table 2 -Dimensions of organizational commitment in the multidimensional model
Angle e Perry (1981, pp. 4)
Commitment value: commitment to support the organization's objectives.
Commitment to stay: commitment to retain the organization's members.
OReilly e Chatman (1986, pp. 493)
Compliance: instrumental commitment for specific extrinsic gains.
Identification: link based on the desire to remain member of the organization.
Internalization: involvement based on congruence between the values of the individual and the
organization.
Penley e Gould (1988)

Moral: acceptance and identification with the organization's goals (pp. 46).
Calculative: a commitment with the organization that is based on the stimuli received by the employee
to match contributions (pp. 46).
Alienative: a link to the organization that occurs when an employee perceives that rewards are
proportional to investment, even though he or she remains due to environmental pressures (pp. 48).
Meyer e Allen (1991, pp. 67)
Affective: emotional attachment, identification and involvement of the employee with the organization.
Continuance: an awareness of the costs associated with a possible organization resignation.
Normative: a sense of obligation to remain employed in the organization.
Mayer e Schoorman (1992, pp. 673)
Value: a belief and acceptance of the goals and values of the organization and a willingness to exert
considerable effort on behalf of the organization.
Continuance: the desire to remain member of the organization.
Jaros et al. (1993)
Affective: the degree to which an individual is psychologically involved with the organization through
feelings of loyalty, tenderness, enthusiasm, belonging, affection, pleasure, and so on (pp. 954).
Continuance: the degree to which an individual experiences a feeling of being stuck in a place due to the
high costs of his/her output (pp. 953).
Moral: the degree to which an individual is psychologically connected to the organization through the
internalisation of their goals, values and missions (pp. 955).
Source: Meyer and Herscovitch, 2001, pp. 304.

TABLE 3 -Structural Model - Brazil
Endogenous Exogebous C.I. - 95%* E.P. () P-value R
Reward Performance 0,365 [0,24; 0,56] 0,106 0,001 13,3%
Values -0,026 [-0,24; 0,32] 0,085 0,759
Motivation 45,5%
Reward 0,672 [0,57; 0,78] 0,085 0,000
Reward 0,628 [0,30; 0,82] 0,112 0,000
Commitment 48,0%
Motivation 0,092 [-0,13; 0,49] 0,112 0,413
Source: Research data. *Bootstrap validation; GoF = 48,2%
TABLE 4 - Structural Model - United States of America

Endogenous Exogenous C.I. - 95%* E.P. () P-value R
Reward Performance 0,483 [0,27; 0,67] 0,100 0,000 23,3%
Values -0,034 [-0,32; 0,28] 0,099 0,732
Motivation 30,5%
Reward 0,560 [0,36; 0,70] 0,099 0,000
Reward 0,661 [0,52; 0,81] 0,102 0,000
Commitment 44,6%
Motivation 0,012 [-0,15; 0,17] 0,102 0,904

Source: Research data. *Bootstrap validation; GoF = 49,6%
TABLE 5 - Structural Model - Mexico

Endogenous Exogenous C.I. - 95% E.P. () P-value R
Rewards Performance 0,272 [0,15; 0,41] 0,065 0,000 7,4%
Values 0,119 [0,04; 0,27] 0,061 0,051
Motivation 20,8%
Rewards 0,418 [0,30; 0,54] 0,061 0,000
Rewards 0,497 [0,35; 0,67] 0,057 0,000
Commitment 43,3%
Motivation 0,264 [0,12; 0,43] 0,057 0,000
Source: Research data.* Bootstrap validation; GoF = 39,5%
TABLE 6 - Contingency table between the groups formed by similarity in values between the
countries
Clusters Brazil USA Mexico
Cluster-1 10 16,9% 13 22,0% 36 61,0%
Cluster-2 24 27,6% 23 26,4% 40 46,0%
Cluster-3 4 8,9% 11 24,4% 30 66,7%
Cluster-4 29 44,6% 9 13,8% 27 41,5%
Cluster-5 6 9,2% 6 9,2% 53 81,5%
Cluster-6 6 10,3% 17 29,3% 35 60,3%
Source: Research data. P-value = 0,000 (Chi-square test)
TABLE 7- Profile of the groups

Group-1 Group-2 Group-3 Group-4 Group-5 Group-6
(n=59) (n=87) (n=45) (n=65) (n=65) (n=58)
Values
Avera C.I.- Avera C.I. - Avera C.I. - Avera C.I. - Avera C.I. - Avera C.I. -
ge 95% ge 95% ge 95% ge 95% ge 95% ge 95%
[8,93; [7,92; [4,04; [8,02; [4,55; [4,38;
9,17 8,20 4,53 8,52 4,95 4,86
Hedonism 9,39] 8,45] 4,98] 9,00] 5,37] 5,41]
Internal [9,13; [7,87; [7,51; [9,39; [8,64; [6,32;
9,34 8,06 7,87 9,52 8,84 6,76
Harmony 9,52] 8,24] 8,21] 9,65] 9,02] 7,13]
[8,97; [7,53; [7,77; [8,72; [8,85; [6,73;
9,19 7,76 8,02 8,98 9,03 7,17
Rationality 9,38] 7,98] 8,26] 9,20] 9,21] 7,61]
Family [8,66; [7,76; [7,37; [8,40; [8,38; [7,01;
9,00 8,03 7,73 8,69 8,63 7,44
attachment 9,29] 8,32] 8,09] 8,97] 8,89] 7,88]
[9,26; [8,19; [8,50; [9,20; [9,47; [7,78;
9,46 8,42 8,84 9,42 9,61 8,21
Challenge 9,63] 8,64] 9,17] 9,61] 9,73] 8,62]
[9,26; [7,79; [7,73; [9,45; [9,40; [6,85;
9,48 8,06 8,22 9,62 9,57 7,35
Benevolence 9,66] 8,33] 8,70] 9,76] 9,72] 7,83]
[8,91; [6,86; [5,4; [8,95; [8,15; [5,47;
9,11 7,14 5,86 9,22 8,43 5,91
Affection 9,30] 7,41] 6,28] 9,44] 8,69] 6,36]
[8,72; [6,38; [6,13; [8,93; [8,18; [4,84;
8,95 6,74 6,54 9,17 8,45 5,38
Affiliation 9,17] 7,11] 6,96] 9,40] 8,71] 5,89]
[8,78; [6,38; [6,93; [3,68; [6,23; [2,53;
9,03 6,72 7,42 4,19 6,82 2,93
Materialism 9,29] 7,09] 7,89] 4,69] 7,31] 3,33]
Source: Research data
TABLE 8 - Average and confidence interval of 95% for the average of the constructs
Commitment, Reward, Motivation, Performance and Value
General BRA EUA MEX

Constructs Avera C.I. - Avera C.I. - Avera C.I. - Avera C.I. -
ge 95% ge 95% ge 95% ge 95%
[7,51; [6,11; [6,73; [8,11;
7,70 6,48 7,20 8,32
Affective 7,90] 6,84] 7,67] 8,53]
[5,99; [4,47; [5,54; [6,52;
6,22 4,87 6,05 6,76
Commitm Instrumental 6,43] 5,32] 6,55] 6,98]
ent [6,37; [4,57; [5,83; [7,01;
6,60 4,99 6,33 7,27

Regulatory 6,84] 5,44] 6,81] 7,51]
[6,43; [4,27; [5,98; [7,18;
6,63 4,76 6,41 7,37
Professional 6,83] 5,24] 6,89] 7,53]
[5,97; [3,49; [5,54; [6,75;
6,24 3,99 6,17 7,07
Monetary 6,51] 4,53] 6,79] 7,39]
Reward
[7,37; [5,76; [6,94; [7,80;
7,57 6,34 7,46 8,05
Non-monetary 7,80] 6,90] 7,98] 8,28]
[8,26; [6,35; [8,12; [8,83;
Motivation 8,45 6,88 8,52 8,98
8,62] 7,38] 8,87] 9,15]
[8,31; [7,59; [7,73; [8,60;
8,45 7,93 8,11 8,75
Performa Goals achievement 8,58] 8,27] 8,47] 8,89]
nce Absence of [6,22; [5,95; [5,21; [6,46;
6,49 6,49 5,73 6,77
Compl./Conf. 6,75] 7,03] 6,24] 7,07]
[6,64; [7,82; [6,75; [5,94;
Hedonism 6,90 8,25 7,32 6,27
7,16] 8,66] 7,87] 6,60]
[8,28; [8,64; [7,55; [8,25;
8,42 8,89 7,95 8,42
Inner Harmony 8,55] 9,12] 8,36] 8,55]
[8,22; [7,69; [7,62; [8,46;
8,35 8,01 7,99 8,60
Rationality 8,49] 8,34] 8,33] 8,73]
[8,12; [7,40; [7,35; [8,52;
8,27 7,68 7,74 8,67
Family attachment 8,42] 7,98] 8,10] 8,81]
[8,85; [8,33; [8,08; [9,17;
Values 8,97 8,60 8,47 9,29
Challenge 9,09] 8,85] 8,78] 9,40]
[8,55; [8,33; [7,78; [8,76;
8,72 8,63 8,18 8,94
Benevolence 8,89] 8,92] 8,59] 9,10]
[7,51; [7,96; [6,54; [7,46;
7,68 8,31 7,03 7,70
Affection 7,88] 8,65] 7,53] 7,92]
[7,36; [7,80; [6,15; [7,40;
7,56 8,18 6,68 7,66
Affiliation 7,76] 8,52] 7,16] 7,87]
[5,91; [5,22; [5,63; [5,93;
Materialism 6,17 5,72 6,33 6,27
6,45] 6,23] 7,00] 6,61]
Source: Research data.
TABLE 9- Reliability, Convergent Validity e Dimensionality of the constructs
Constructs Items AVE CA DG KMO Dim
Second Order
Inner Harmony 4 0,548 0,697 0,760 0,693 1
Rationality 5 0,507 0,708 0,774 0,798 1
Family Attachment 2 0,662 0,449 0,702 0,500 1
Challenge 3 0,603 0,642 0,740 0,652 1
Value Benevolence 2 0,770 0,694 0,791 0,500 1
Affection 2 0,672 0,511 0,710 0,500 1
Affiliation 2 0,694 0,555 0,728 0,500 1
Hedonism 1 - - - - -
Materialism 1 - - - - -
Affective 6 0,652 0,883 0,875 0,889 1
Instrumental 4 0,513 0,676 0,737 0,698 1
Commitment
Regulatory 5 0,675 0,857 0,851 0,850 1
Professional 4 0,692 0,850 0,843 0,796 1
Monetary 5 0,749 0,916 0,895 0,842 1

Reward
Non-Monetary 6 0,702 0,913 0,893 0,889 1
Goals achievement 5 0,547 0,784 0,797 0,823 1
Performance
Absence of Complaints/Conflicts 3 0,577 0,632 0,722 0,624 1
First Order
Motivation 3 0,772 0,844 0,851 0,724 1
TABLE 10-Exploratory Factor Analysis for the constructs of first order of Commitment, Reward,
Motivation and Performance
Constructs F.L. Com. Weight
CA3 0,879 0,773 0,225
CA2 0,871 0,759 0,223
Affective CA5 0,850 0,722 0,217
Commitment CA4 0,832 0,692 0,213
CA1 0,827 0,684 0,211
CA6 0,530 0,281 0,136
CI1 0,804 0,647 0,392
Instrumental CI3 0,767 0,588 0,374
Commitment CI4 0,674 0,454 0,328
CI2 0,603 0,364 0,294
CN4 0,871 0,759 0,242
Commitment CN5 0,835 0,697 0,232
Regulatory CN1 0,832 0,693 0,232
Commitment CN2 0,787 0,619 0,219
CN6 0,780 0,608 0,217
CN3 0,468 0,219 0,130
CP6 0,884 0,782 0,319
CP5 0,874 0,763 0,315
Professional CP2 0,784 0,614 0,283
Commitment CP4 0,780 0,608 0,281
CP1 0,060 0,004 0,022
CP3 -0,049 0,002 -0,018
Rewards Monetary Rewards RP4 0,879 0,773 0,235
RP5 0,879 0,773 0,235
RP3 0,878 0,771 0,235
RP2 0,857 0,735 0,229
RP1 0,831 0,691 0,222
RNP2 0,871 0,759 0,207
RNP4 0,860 0,739 0,204
Non-monetary RNP1 0,845 0,714 0,201
Rewards RNP5 0,835 0,698 0,198
RNP3 0,818 0,669 0,194
RNP6 0,794 0,630 0,189
Mot1 0,899 0,809 0,389
Motivation Mot3 0,871 0,759 0,376
Mot2 0,864 0,747 0,373
AM5 0,826 0,682 0,302
AM4 0,767 0,588 0,280
Goals Achievement AM2 0,710 0,504 0,259
AM1 0,706 0,498 0,258

Performance
AM3 0,681 0,464 0,249
Absence of RC3 0,816 0,666 0,472
Complaints and RC2 0,753 0,566 0,435
Conflicts RC1 0,706 0,498 0,408
TABLE 11 - Exploratory Factor Analysis for the constructs of first order of Values
Constructs F.L. Com. Weight
V7 0,826 0,683 0,377
V6 0,791 0,626 0,361
Inner Harmony
V11 0,742 0,551 0,339
V3 0,577 0,333 0,263
V16 0,810 0,657 0,320
V18 0,795 0,631 0,313
Rationality V17 0,732 0,536 0,289
V19 0,719 0,517 0,283
V22 0,442 0,195 0,174
V2 0,814 0,662 0,615
Family attachment
V14 0,814 0,662 0,615
Value
V15 0,813 0,661 0,450
Challenge V8 0,767 0,588 0,424
V13 0,748 0,559 0,414
V10 0,877 0,770 0,570
Benevolence
V12 0,877 0,770 0,570
V4 0,820 0,672 0,610
Affection
V20 0,820 0,672 0,610
V5 0,833 0,694 0,600
Affiliation
V9 0,833 0,694 0,600
Hedonism V1 1,000 1,000 1,000
Materialism V20 1,000 1,000 1,000
TABLE 12 Measurement Model - Initial - General
Constructs Weight C.I. - 95%* F.L. Com.
Inner Harmony -0,055 [-0,26; 0,35] 0,399 0,159
Rationality 0,480 [-0,49; 0,59] 0,790 0,624
Family attachment 0,237 [-0,16; 0,42] 0,505 0,255
Challenge 0,305 [-0,26; 0,41] 0,780 0,608
Value Benevolence 0,223 [-0,24; 0,36] 0,653 0,427
Affection -0,144 [-0,36; 0,43] 0,297 0,088
Affiliation 0,029 [-0,12; 0,31] 0,333 0,111
Hedonism -0,419 [-0,67; 0,71] -0,275 0,076
Materialism 0,175 [-0,29; 0,38] 0,327 0,107
Goals achievement 0,997 [0,95; 1,00] -0,998 0,996
Performance
Absence of Comp./Confl. -0,064 [-0,26; 0,16] 0,080 0,006
Monetary 0,509 [0,48; 0,54] 0,936 0,876

Reward
Non-monetary 0,554 [0,52; 0,58] 0,946 0,896
Mot-1 0,387 [0,37; 0,41] 0,998 0,996
Motivation Mot-2 0,341 [0,32; 0,37] 0,907 0,822
Mot-3 0,343 [0,31; 0,37] 0,886 0,785
Affective 0,323 [0,3; 0,35] 0,875 0,766
Instrumental 0,223 [0,19; 0,25] 0,823 0,677
Commitment
Regulatory 0,306 [0,29; 0,33] 0,921 0,848
Professional 0,309 [0,27; 0,34] 0,814 0,663
Source Research data. * Bootstrap validation.
TABLE 13- Measurement Model - Final - General

Constructs Weight C.I. - 95%* F.L. Com.
Rationality 0,478 [0,34; 0,68] 0,882 0,778
Family Attachment 0,235 [0,02; 0,40] 0,623 0,388
Values
Challenge 0,304 [0,10; 0,45] 0,845 0,714
Benevolence 0,222 [0,03; 0,37] 0,791 0,625
AM-1 0,290 [0,22; 0,37] 0,726 0,527
AM-2 0,261 [0,19; 0,36] 0,713 0,508
Performance AM-3 0,219 [0,14; 0,28] 0,660 0,435
AM-4 0,292 [0,23; 0,37] 0,771 0,594
AM-5 0,286 [0,22; 0,34] 0,818 0,669
Monetary 0,507 [0,48; 0,53] 0,936 0,876
Reward
Non-Monetary 0,555 [0,53; 0,58] 0,947 0,896
Mot-1 0,387 [0,37; 0,41] 0,998 0,996
Motivation Mot-2 0,342 [0,31; 0,36] 0,907 0,822
Mot-3 0,343 [0,32; 0,37] 0,886 0,785
Affective 0,323 [0,30; 0,35] 0,875 0,766
Instrumental 0,223 [0,19; 0,25] 0,823 0,677
Commitment
Regulatory 0,306 [0,29; 0,33] 0,921 0,848
Professional 0,309 [0,28; 0,34] 0,814 0,663
Source Research data. * Bootstrap validation
TABLE 14 Validation of the Measurement Model - General
Discriminant Validation
Measurement Model Items C.A. D.G. 1av. 2av. AVE
1 2 3 4
1 Value 4 0,803 0,873 2,540 0,713 0,626
2 - Performance 5 0,791 0,857 2,742 0,716 0,547 0,083
3 - Reward 2 0,871 0,940 1,771 0,228 0,886 0,044 0,165
4 Motivation 3 0,922 0,951 2,600 0,393 0,867 0,030 0,163 0,348
5 - Commitment 4 0,882 0,919 2,960 0,483 0,739 0,151 0,185 0,482 0,284
ANNEX 1
Time approximately 15-20 minutes

What is the importance of the life values that I will say next? Please, answer according to the scale:
No matere 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A loto importance
Life Values What importance is in your life... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. Search more fun and enjoyment
2. To be more at home (be collected)
3. Be more free
4. Devote more like a true love
5. Have more friends (belonging to a group of friends)
6. Trying to be happier
7. Be more at peace with the people
8. Be bolder
9. Seek added security (against assaults etc.)
10. Be more polite with the people
11. Be more respected (at work and in life)
12. Do more good for people (be generous)
13. Seeking to learn more (seeking knowledge)
14. Dedicate yourself more with your Family
15. Be responsible for what you do
16. Be more obedient (to fulfill orders received)
17. Be more criative
18. Thinking ahead before acting ( to act logically and

rationally )
19. Be quicker in what you do
20. Search more true friendship
21. Thinking more on Money and the material goods
22. Be more religious (seek salvation in life)
23. Among the values, which is the main life value for you :
Please, understand the commitment at work is the commitment you have with your employer or with the
activity you exercise. Each of us agrees according to particular reasons. Rate the statements using the
following scalethe:
Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Fully agree
Commitment 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
0
24. This company deserves my loyalty.
25. I like to work in this company (I am emotionally

attached to it).
26. I feel like a house of person this company
27. I really feel the problems of the company as if they

were mine.
28. I feel a strong sense of belonging to the company
29. In the current situation, working in this company is

actually a necessity.
30. Even if I wanted would be very difficult for me to leave
this company now..
31. A negative consequence of leaving this company is the
lack of immediate employment alternatives.
32. If I left this company now, my life would be very
unstructured
33. I would be very happy if I worked in this company until
I retire
34. Today, working in this company is really a personal
desire.
35. I have a lot of gratitude for the company which
currently work
36. If I had not already devoted so much of me to this
company, I might consider the option of change
37. The company I work for has an immense personal
meaning for me.
38. I feel that I would not be right to leave the company
now, even if it was to my advantage.
39. I would feel guilty if I left the company now.
40. I would choose another profession if I my rates be the

same as today (to do anything)
41. I wish definitely keep the profession in which I work.
42. If I could do all it again, I would not choose to work in

my current profession.
43. Even though I had all the money I need, I would still
probably working in my current profession..
44. I really like my profession to drop it..
45. I want to work in this profession until retirement
Please rate the following statements using the scale. Select the option 'do not know or not apply' if the
situation does not correspond with your reality
Strongly Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Fully agree Do not know

or not apply
Satisfaction with wages and rewards received at work 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1

0
46. I am satisfied with my current salary.
47. I am satisfied with my last salary increase.
48. I am satisfied with the awards received by the goals

reached.
49. I am satisfied with the recognition received by my
performance.
50. I am satisfied with the way I am treated at work
51. I am satisfied with the freedom I have in my work

(autonomy)
52. I am satisfied with my relationships at work
53. I am satisfied with my professional growth.
54. I am satisfied with the learning that my job gives me.
55. I am satisfied with my benefits at the company.
56. In general, I am satisfied with the rewards I receive for

my professional performance.
Please, rate the following statement using the scale.
Strongly Desagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Fully agree
Work Motivation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
0
57. I have a great desire to do my job
58. I strive in my work beause with it, I realize what I am

in life.
59. I have a lof of energy to push myself at work.
Please, inform how often the statements below happened to you in the last 12 months. Use the following
scale. Select the option do not know or not apply if the situation doesnt correspond to your reality.
1 Dont know or not apply
Never 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Always
0
How often you.... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1

0
60. Realize that your work helped to improve this company
61. Fulfilled the tasks within the set deadlines
62. Takes the initiative to solve problems not defined or not

provided by your supervisor
63. Recognizes that is responsible for the results of their
work
64. Received to perform special tasks
65. Received complains for the work performance
66. It was directed by the supervisor to perform tasks in a

different manner
67. Had a professional conflicts at work
68. Produce more than your co-workers
69. Looking for your supervisor to ask questions about the

work
70. Show more quality than the co-workers
71. Does your tasks in a different way than was asked
72. Directs his co-workers on how to perform the job

properly
73. Which classification between 0-10 do you believe that your supervisor would assign for your current
performance: ______
FIGURE 1 Continuous Motivational Circle of 19 values
Source: Schwartz et al., 2012, pp. 7
FIGURE 2 - Hypothetical Structural Model

Source: Research original. Based on Armstrong (2007), Allen and Meyer (1990), Bastos (1993),
Camara (2006), Fedor et al.(2006), Jensen et al.(2007), Kamakura and Novak (1992), Lahiry
(1994),Liou (2008), Locke (2000),Meyer et al. (2004), Mohamed et al. (2006), Mowday (1998),
ODriscoll (1997),ODriscoll and Randall (1999), Randall (1987),Rego and Souto (2002),
Rokeach and Regan (1980), Somers and Birbaum (2000),Steel and Konic (2006),Steers et al.
(2004).
Values
GoF = 48,2%
= -0,026
= 0,092
Motivation Commitment
Performance
R=13,3% R=48,2%
= 0,628*
= 0,672* = 0,365*
Rewards
R=45,5%
FIGURE 3 Structural Model Brazil

Values
GoF = 49,6%
= -0,034
= 0,012
R=23,3% R=44,6% Performance
= 0,661*
= 0,560* = 0,483*
Rewards
R=30,5%
FIGURE 4 Structural Model USA

Values
GoF = 39,5%
= 0,119
=
0,264* Performance
R=7,4% R=43,3%
=
0,497*
= =
0,418* Rewards
0,272*
R=20,8%
FIGURE 5 Structural Model Mexico

FIGURE 6 - Dendrogram for group

FIGURE 7 Perceptual Map between the groups formed by similarity in values between
countries

Values Motivation

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Values Motivation

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Business Process Management Journal

Values, motivation, commitment, performance and rewards: analysis model

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

2.1 Human Values

aspects, ordered according to the degree of importance as guiding principles of life

The model of Schwartz, Vecchione, Fischer, Ramos, Demirutku, Dirilen-

efficiency of the employees, leads to the achievement of organizational objectives,

The thought that characterizes the affective commitment corresponds to desire.

2.5 The relationship between the constructs

the reflection about the importance of understanding the process of commitment

other company in the electronics industry, researched in Brazil.

4 Results and Discussion

In Brazil, the Structural Model was presented according to Figure 3.

4.2 United States of America

The Structural Model United States of America (FIGURE 4)

The Structural Model Mexico (FIGURE 5)

The Figure 7 points to Schwartzs theory (2012) in which it suggests the

In Table 7, it can be established the profile of each group. Therefore, it can be

In the analysis of the Measurement Model, the convergent validity, discriminant

the proposed Hypothetical Structural Model.

Bastos. A. V. B. (1993), "Organizational commitment: a balance of results and

experimental social psychology, New York: Academic Press, pp. 1-65.

Achievement Personal success through Success, capacity, ambition,

Openness to Stimulation Excitement, novelty and challenge Boldness; varied, challenging

Self-direction Independent thought and action - Creativity, freedom, curiosity,

choose, create and explore independence, to choose their

Self- Universalism Understanding, attention, tolerance Open mind, social justice,

Nature Environmental protection Nature beauty, unity of

Benevolence Preservation and enhancement of Helpful, honest, forgiveness,

Conservation Tradition Respect, commitment, and Respect for the traditions,

Conformity Containment actions, inclinations Obedience, honor parents and

Security Security, harmony and stability of National security, family

None Hedonism Pleasure and sensual gratification of Gratification of desire,

Source: Torelli et al., 2012.

Angle e Perry (1981, pp. 4)

Commitment value: commitment to support the organization's objectives.

Commitment to stay: commitment to retain the organization's members.

OReilly e Chatman (1986, pp. 493)

Compliance: instrumental commitment for specific extrinsic gains.

Identification: link based on the desire to remain member of the organization.

Penley e Gould (1988)

Meyer e Allen (1991, pp. 67)

Continuance: an awareness of the costs associated with a possible organization resignation.

Normative: a sense of obligation to remain employed in the organization.

Mayer e Schoorman (1992, pp. 673)

Continuance: the desire to remain member of the organization.

Jaros et al. (1993)

Source: Meyer and Herscovitch, 2001, pp. 304.

TABLE 4 - Structural Model - United States of America

Motivation 0,012 [-0,15; 0,17] 0,102 0,904

TABLE 5 - Structural Model - Mexico

TABLE 7- Profile of the groups

General BRA EUA MEX

6,60 4,99 6,33 7,27

Monetary 5 0,749 0,916 0,895 0,842 1

AM1 0,706 0,498 0,258

Monetary 0,509 [0,48; 0,54] 0,936 0,876

TABLE 13- Measurement Model - Final - General

Time approximately 15-20 minutes

No matere 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 A loto importance

Life Values What importance is in your life... 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. Search more fun and enjoyment

2. To be more at home (be collected)