Enriching the research theme of managerial intellectual learning (MIL) with an agile literature review on the self-determination theory

 

Working paper: jh-2021-03-14-a (https://josephho33.blogspot.com/2021/03/enriching-research-theme-of-managerial.html)

Enriching the research theme of managerial intellectual learning (MIL) with an agile literature review on the self-determination theory

 JOSEPH KIM-KEUNG HO

Independent Trainer

Hong Kong, China

Dated: March 14, 2021

 

 

Abstract: Performing literature review in an agile way is a suitable intellectual learning and research method for students and researchers with a busy pace of life profile. This article presents an account on how it is done to meet the task aim of “enhancing intellectual comprehension on the research theme of managerial intellectual learning (MIL) by reviewing the literature of self-determination theory in an agile way”. Concrete literature review result was obtained and then employed to examine the managerial intellectual learning theme, notably on the MIL process model. The article extols the value of the agile literature review as a method for managerial intellectual learning and management research purposes.

Key words: agile literature review, managerial intellectual learning (MIL), self-determination theory.

 

Introduction

Literature review is widely practiced in tertiary education. As a lecturer on various management subjects in business management degree programmes, this writer has come up with two research topics, namely, the agile literature review approach (Ho, 2018a; 2018b) and the managerial intellectual learning, (Ho, 2014; 2021) both related with the literature review topic. This article falls within these research themes of the writer. Specifically, it presents an account of performing an agile literature review on the academic subject of self-determination theory in order to enrich intellectual comprehension on the research topic of managerial intellectual learning. The next section covers the nature of the agile literature review and review findings by the writer on the self-determination theory. After that, the writer discusses how the managerial intellectual learning research theme, notably on the managerial intellectual learning process model, can be more richly comprehended.

An agile literature review on the self-determination theory

An agile literature review embraces a nimble, evolutionary and responsive way to conduct literature review (Ho, 2018a; 2018b). This is in contrast to the comprehensive and vigorous orientation of the mainstream academic literature review as explained in research methods textbooks. An agile approach is considered to be more in sync with the busy pace of life of practising managers as managerial intellectual learners. Such is the typical learning profile of many of the writer’s MBA students.

The agile literature review exercise is an important technique in the broader agile literature review approach (ALRA) research domain. The exercise was conducted from March 11-13, 2021. The literature search was done by using the elibrary facilities of two U.K. universities as well as Google Scholar. The academic theme is self-determination theory. The result on it is presented in Table 1, with the ideas grouped into three categories.

Table 1:  A set of gathered academic ideas related to the self-determination theory, grouped in three categories

Categories	Academic ideas of the self-determination theory
Category 1: nature of self-determination theory (idea 1.1)	“A fundamental feature of SDT [self-determination theory] is basic psychological needs theory. This theory contends that humans have an innate set of psychological needs. Through interactions with the social environment, these needs are either fulfilled, leading to growth and psychological wellbeing, or they are thwarted, leading to psychological illbeing (Ryan & Deci, 2002). SDT considers the needs to be innate and universal—that is, a fundamental aspect of the human psyche—rather than acquired from the social or cultural environment” (Evans, 2015).
Category 1: nature of self-determination theory (idea 1.2)	“Self-determination theory is a theory of motivation and self-regulation, which proposes that personally-relevant goals are more internally motivated (versus external) and are thus more likely to be obtained than goals set due to some external pressure (Ryan & Deci, 2000; Ryan, Kuhl, & Deci, 1997; Sheldon & Elliot, 1999)” (Denneson, Ono, Trevino, Kenyon and Dobscha, 2020)
Category 1: nature of self-determination theory (idea 1.3)	“While the theory [self-determination theory (SDT)] has gone through a number of refinements over the years (e.g., Deci, 1975, 1980; Deci & Ryan, 1980, 1985, 1991, 2000, 2008), the major emphasis on the role of the dialectic between the person and the environment in the satisfaction of the major psychological needs has remained. It should be underscored that in SDT, it is postulated that it is not the environment per se that matters, but rather what it means functionally in terms of supporting people’s psychological needs” (Vallerand and Pelletier, 2008).
Category 1: nature of self-determination theory (idea 1.4)	“One of the key postulates from SDT is that motivation varies in kind, and the most self-determined types of motivation lead to the most adaptive outcomes. Thus, if we are to understand motivational outcomes, we need to go beyond a focus on motivational quantity (i.e., high levels of motivation) and take into consideration the quality of motivation (i.e., the presence or absence of self-determined forms of motivation, such as intrinsic motivation and integrated and identified regulations)” (Vallerand and Pelletier, 2008).
Category 1: nature of self-determination theory (idea 1.5)	“Whereas many historical and contemporary theories of motivation have treated motivation primarily as a unitary concept, focussing on the overall amount of motivation that people have for particular behaviours or activities, SDT [self-determination theory] began by differentiating types of motivation. The initial idea was that the type or quality of a person’s motivation would be more important than the total amount of motivation for predicting many important outcomes such as psychological health and well-being, effective performance, creative problem solving, and deep or conceptual learning” (Deci and Ryan, 2008).
Category 1: nature of self-determination theory (idea 1.6)	“Self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985, 1991) is an organismic-dialectical theory that views human beings as proactive organisms whose natural or intrinsic functioning can be either facilitated or impeded by the social context. Like other organismic theories (e.g., Hartmann & Loewenstein, 1962; Schafer, 1968), the self-determination approach (Deci & Ryan, 1991; Ryan, 1993) views internalization as the process of transforming external regulations into internal regulations and, when the process functions optimally, integrating those regulations into one's sense of self” (Deci, Eghrari, Patrick, and Leone, 1994).
Category 1: nature of self-determination theory (idea 1.7)	“The Self-determination Theory is actually a metatheory comprising three sub-theories that seek to explain human motivation and behaviour based on individual differences in motivational orientations, contextual influences on motivation, and interpersonal perceptions” (Hagger and Chatzisarantis, 2008).
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.1)	“Internal pressures are characterized by concerns with approval, image management, and self-esteem maintenance: The person “must” do well to feel okay and secure. …. Such forms of defensive self-regulation represent low-quality forms of motivation; like external pressure, these internal pressures lead one to focus on appearance and credit, rather than valuing one’s work for its own sake or embracing company goals” (Rigby and Ryan, 2018).
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.2)	“External pressure in both negative (such as punishment) and positive (such as rewards) forms may be quite effective in motivating short-term behavior. However, such pressure inevitably backfires: Individuals who feel externally pressured perform more poorly, often taking the shortest route to any goal assigned to them. They also have lower well-being and are at greater risk of disengaging when rewards or punishments are not salient” (Rigby and Ryan, 2018).
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.3)	“… high-quality motivation is evident when one pursues goals and values that are personally meaningful. …. Regardless of whether it is enjoyable, when an activity is understood as important and authentically valued, one is more fully aligned and “on board” with what must be done” (Rigby and Ryan, 2018).
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.4)	“Autonomy support can be defined as the active support of the person’s capacity to be self-initiating and autonomous (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Much research has shown that autonomy support leads to self-determined forms of motivation (e.g., for reviews, see Deci & Ryan, 2000; Mageau & Vallerand, 2003; Reeve, 2002; Vallerand, 1997)” (Vallerand and Pelletier, 2008).
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.5)	“Autonomous motivation comprises both intrinsic motivation and the types of extrinsic motivation in which people have identified with an activity’s value and ideally will have integrated it into their sense of self. When people are autonomously motivated, they experience volition, or a self-endorsement of their actions. Controlled motivation, in contrast, consists of both external regulation, in which one’s behaviour is a function of external contingencies of reward or punishment, and introjected regulation, in which the regulation of action has been partially internalized and is energized by factors such as an approval motive, avoidance of shame, contingent self-esteem, and ego-involvements” (Deci and Ryan, 2008).
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.6)	““SDT has always maintained that the development of integrated, autonomous functioning depends on awareness. Recently SDT researchers have begun to incorporate that idea through studies of mindfulness, defined as an open awareness and interested attention to what is happening within and around oneself (Brown & Ryan, 2003). Mindfulness has been associated with autonomous motivation and with a variety of positive psychological and behavioural outcomes” (Deci and Ryan, 2008).
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.7)	““An important aspect of motivation concerns the energization of people’s psychological processes and behaviors. Within SDT, the energy for action comes either directly or indirectly from basic psychological needs, and we have been particularly interested in the concept of vitality, which is the energy that is available to the self—that is, the energy that is exhilarating and empowering, that allows people to act more autonomously and persist more at important activities” (Deci and Ryan, 2008).
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.8)	“Integration …. refers to internalization in which the person identifies with the value of an activity and accepts full responsibility for doing it. The regulatory process is said to be integrated with one's self (Deci & Ryan, 1991), so the regulator and regulatee are not separate, even in the metaphorical sense. As such, one's behavior emanates from one's self; it is self-determined” (Deci, Eghrari, Patrick, and Leone, 1994).
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.9)	“Whereas many theories on the self view that which is “inside the person” as “self,” self-determination theory focuses on what is functionally motivating the behavior, and recognizes that although many behaviors originate from within the person, they do not all equally reflect core-self involvement” (Knee, Hadden, Porter, and Rodriguez, 2013).
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.10)	“According to self-determination theory (Deci & Ryan, 1985b, 2000, 2008), being self-determined means that one’s actions are relatively autonomous, freely chosen, and fully endorsed by the person rather than coerced or pressured by external forces or internal expectations. This definition emphasizes authenticity of choices and behaviours that are congruent with one’s needs, a mindful, reflective awareness of those needs, and the capacity of one’s social environment to support them” (Knee, Hadden, Porter, and Rodriguez, 2013).
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.11)	Self-determination theory specifies three basic psychological needs (i.e. autonomy, competence, and relatedness) that provide the basis for motivation and development (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2000); these are the contextual conditions that facilitate internal motivation and help people integrate their behaviour into their everyday lives and their sense of self” (Denneson, Ono, Trevino, Kenyon and Dobscha, 2020)
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.12)	“… autonomy refers to the sense that one’s actions are the result of their own volition, competence is the belief in one’s ability to affect change and achieve desired outcomes, and relatedness is the extent to which one feels a connection with others. Self-integration of behaviours occurs when externally-motivated behaviours (i.e. behaviours regulated by an external force) become integrated into one’s ‘sense of self’, that is, they contribute to one’s overall evaluation of the self (Ryan & Deci, 2000)” (Denneson, Ono, Trevino, Kenyon and Dobscha, 2020).
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.13)	“With regard to personal goals, the theory [self-determination theory] suggests that goal pursuit will be successful when individuals feel autonomous about their goals (Sheldon 2014), and when they feel their autonomy is supported by important people in their lives (Williams et al. 2006)” (Moore, Holding, Hope, Harvey, Powers, Zuroff and Koestner, 2018).
Category 2: ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (idea 2.14)	It [self-determination theory] proposes that the satisfaction of the three needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness promotes self-determination, which in turn brings about positive outcomes. In other words, a person tends to become self-determined when experiencing a sense of agency (perceiving options in a given situation), capability (being confident to carry out a task), and relatedness (connecting with others), while engaging in daily behaviours” (Hsu, Wang and Levesque-Bristol, 2019).
Category 3: application considerations of self-determination theory (idea 3.1)	“SDT is an advantageous perspective for music education researchers in several ways. First, it is a framework that has considerable breadth and can explain a wide range of behaviour and therefore a framework that may explain the breadth of behaviours and factors of interest in studying motivation for music learning” (Evans, 2015).
Category 3: application considerations of self-determination theory (idea 3.2)	“Initial research on the effects of rewards and intrinsic motivation on behaviour led to the development of the Cognitive Evaluation Theory - the first sub-theory of the Self-determination Theory. The theory hypothesises that an individual performing a behaviour for external contingencies, such as money or fame, will persist provided the reward is omnipresent. The withdrawal of the reward probably results in desistance. This is known as the ‘undermining effect’, and occurs because the administration of the reward significantly lowers the levels of intrinsic motivation” (Hagger and Chatzisarantis, 2008).
Category 3: application considerations of self-determination theory (idea 3.3)	““As a macrotheory of human motivation, self-determination theory (SDT) addresses such basic issues as personality development, self-regulation, universal psychological needs, life goals and aspirations, energy and vitality, nonconscious processes, the relations of culture to motivation, and the impact of social environments on motivation, affect, behavior, and wellbeing. Further, the theory has been applied to issues within a wide range of life domains” (Deci and Ryan, 2008).

 

Referring to Table 1, the agile literature review findings are a number of academic ideas from the self-determination theory literature, grouped into 3 categories, namely, category 1 (nature of self-determination theory), category 2 (ingredient concepts of self-determination theory) and category 3 (application considerations of self-determination theory). A brief summary of the findings is as follows:

On the nature of self-determination theory (category 1), the self-determination theory is primarily attentive to (i) an individual’s psychological needs, (ii) the motivation (internal and external; motivation quality and quantity; self-determined forms of motivation) on personally relevant goals, as well as (iii) the dialectic between the person and the environment in main psychological needs satisfaction.

On the ingredient concepts of self-determination theory (category 2), the self-determination theory makes use of a number of analytical concepts, the main ones of which are: (i) internal and external pressures, (ii) high-quality motivation, (iii) autonomy and autonomy support, (iv) autonomous and controlled motivation, (v) vitality and the energization of psychological processes and behaviour, (vi) integration and internalization, (vii) core-self involvement, (viii) self-determined and (ix) the needs of autonomy, competence and relatedness.

On the application consideration of self-determination theory (category 3), the self-determination theory is able to explain a broad range of behavioural topics related to personality development, life goals and the impact of social environments on these behavioural topics.

These ideas on the self-determination theory can be employed to the study of managerial intellectual learning (MIL), the psychological needs and motivation involved in MIL and the social impacts on MIL. The next section will take a closer look at it.

 

Enriching the managerial intellectual learning (MIL) process model with the self-determination theory literature

The research topic of managerial intellectual learning (MIL) was proposed by this writer (see Ho, 2014; 2021) to study how an individual intellectual learner in the business management field can make use of critical systems thinking and the multi-perspective, systems-based (MPSB) research lens to participate in this learning to fulfil his/her life-goal to become a scholar-practitioner. Ho (2014) comes up with a process model on MIL that identifies the factors involved in MIL. It comprises the MIL capability building mechanism (MILCBM), the external environmental factors, the practice-based and MPSB research-based learning process involved. The MIL process model is shown in Figure 1.

 

(re: Ho, 2014)

With reference to the MIL process model, the self-determination theory ideas, being as individual-centered as the MIL process, is quite useful to enrich comprehension of the MIL process model. In particular, the self-determined theory ideas on (i) personally-relevant goals, (ii) motivation, (iii) the social impacts on an individual as well as his/her behaviour (in our case on managerial intellectual learning and (iv) autonomy support can be related to the specific components of the MIL process model. Specifically, ideas on (i) and (ii) can be related to the MILCBM (re: Figure 1); ideas on (iii) is related to “work and non-work influences, supports and constraints (re: Figure 1), and ideas on (iv) is relevant to the study of “infrastructural support” (re: Figure 1). In short, the self-determination theory literature goes a long way to flesh out the MIL process model.

Concluding remarks

Researching on topics such as the managerial intellectual learning necessarily requires literature review. The review can be done in an agile way with concrete result as this article has illustrated. The agile way to do literature review is especially useful to busy managers pursuing the life-goal of becoming competent scholar-practitioners. The agile literature review method (and the broader agile literature review approach) is in consonance with the managerial intellectual process of learners (e.g. part-time MBA students) who have a busy pace of life.

 

References

Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. 2008. “Self-Determination Theory: A Macrotheory of Human Motivation, Development, and Health” Canadian Psychology 49(3): 182–185.

Deci, E.L., Eghrari, H., Patrick, B.C., and Leone, D.R. 1994. “Facilitating Internationalization: The Self-Determination Theory Perspective” Journal of Personality 62(1) March: 119-142.

Denneson, L.M., Ono, S.S., Trevino, A,Y., Kenyon, E. and Dobscha, S.K. 2020. “The applicability of self-determination theory to health coaching: a qualitative analysis of patient experiences” Coaching: An International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice 13:2, 163-175, DOI: 10.1080/17521882.2019.1673457.

Evans, P. 2015. “Self-determination theory: An approach to motivation in music education” Musicae Scientiae 19(1): 65–83.

Hagger, M. and Chatzisarantis, N. 2008. “Self-determination Theory and the psychology of exercise” International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology 1(1): 79-103, DOI: 10.1080/17509840701827437.

Ho, J.K.K. 2014. “An empirical study on managerial intellectual learning (MIL) and managerial intellectual learning capability-building mechanism (MILCBM)” European Academic Research 2(8) November: 10564-10577.

Ho, J.K.K. 2018a. “Research Note: On the Agile Literature Review Approach for Practising Managers: A Proposal” Systems Research and Behavioral Science 35: 341-348, Wiley.

Ho, J.K.K. 2018b. “Some further conceptual clarification of the recently proposed agile literature review approach (ALRA)” European Academic Research 5(12), March: 6313-6328.

Ho, J.K.K. 2021. “An updated account of the research theme status of managerial intellectual learning (MIL)” Joseph KK Ho e-resources March 4 (url address:  https://josephho33.blogspot.com/2021/03/an-updated-account-of-research-theme.html).

Hsu, H.C.K., Wang, C.V. and Levesque-Bristol, C. 2019. “Reexamining the impact of self-determination theory on learning outcomes in the online learning environment” Education and Information Technologies 24: 2159–2174.

Knee, C.R., Hadden, B.W., Porter, B. and Rodriguez, L.M. 2013. “Self-Determination Theory and Romantic Relationship Processes” Personality and Social Psychology Review 17(4): 307–324.

Moore, E. Holding, A.C., Hope, N.H., Harvey, B., Powers, T.A., Zuroff, D. and Koestner, R. 2018. “Perfectionism and the pursuit of personal goals: A self-determination theory analysis” Motiv Emot 42:37–49.

Rigby, C.S. and Ryan, R.M. 2018. “Self-Determination Theory in Human Resource Development: New Directions and Practical Considerations” Advances in Developing Human Resources 20(2): 133–147.

Vallerand, R.J. and Pelletier, L.G. 2008. “Reflections on Self-Determination Theory” Canadian Psychology 49(3): 257–262.