Self-Determined Theory

969 Words4 Pages
Self-Determined Theory
Instead of bargaining between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation, Deci et al. (1999) expanded the focus by the argument of internalization process of shifting the extrinsic behaviour to intrinsic value. Self-Determined Theory (it is referred as SDT hereafter) suggested that a self-determined individual has motivation completely internalized. SDT defines intrinsic and extrinsic causes of motivation and their respective roles in social and cognitive development and in individual differences. Most importantly, SDT focuses on the degree to which individual’s sense of initiative is affected by social and cultural factors, in addition to his well-being and the quality of his performance. In order to have effective functioning
…show more content…
Identified regulation of behaviour, is one form of autonomous motivation, which describes employees are motivated to behaviour change when they identify its value and importance (Ryan et. al., 2008). Identification is fostered when employees provided the relevant safety knowledge and understand the rationales for safety behaviour change, without applying any external controls and pressures that undermine the motivation. The most autonomous in the internalization continuum, integrated regulation, defines that employees not only values safety behaviour, but has also associated it into its lifestyle patterns and central beliefs. According to SDT, full internalization or integration can be cultivated by supporting employees as they find difficulties and obstacles to behaviour change, and helping them identify consistent behaviour to health (Ryan et. al., 2008). Thereafter, employees are able to perform safety behaviours effectively and subsequently maintaining them in long term…show more content…
Behaviour change is not an innately motivated activity and many times employees may feel challenge to change especially when they have not understood the rationales or witness the consequences of the behaviours. SDT suggests that internalization is facilitated when employees are provided the skills and tools for behaviour change, and is supported or assisted when employees face challenges along the process (Deci & Ryan, 1985). As employees are supported, the behaviour change can be effortless and subsequently assist mastery of safety behaviour. Having said that, employees who are in higher autonomous motivation would be more willing to behave safely, and they are most motivated to learn the skills and be competent in performing safety behaviour (Markland et. al., 2005). In oppose to Bandura’s (1989) self-efficacy theory, SDT argues that without safety motivation or autonomous, competency alone is not sufficient to ensure safety
Open Document