Exploring the roles of self-determined motivation and perceived organizational support in organizational change

Huang, Rui-Ting Article Exploring the roles of self-determined motivation and perceived organizational support in organizational change European Journal of Management and Business Economics (EJM&BE) Provided in Cooperation with: European Academy of Management and Business Economics (AEDEM), Vigo (Pontevedra) Suggested Citation: Huang, Rui-Ting (2025) : Exploring the roles of self-determined motivation and perceived organizational support in organizational change, European Journal of Management and Business Economics (EJM&BE), ISSN 2444-8451, Emerald, Leeds, Vol. 34, Iss. 2, pp. 193-210, https://doi.org/10.1108/EJMBE-03-2022-0056 This Version is available at: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/325593 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your personal and scholarly purposes. You are not to copy documents for public or commercial purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. If the documents have been made available under an Open Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Exploring the roles of self-determined motivation and perceived organizational support in organizational change Rui-Ting Huang Department of Business Administration, National Chung Hsing University, Taichung, Taiwan Abstract Purpose –The primary purpose of this study is not only to examine the connections between self-determined motivation, attitudes toward change and participation in change, but also to explore the moderating impact of perceived organizational support on organizational change, and the mediating role of attitudes toward change in the link between perceived competence and participation in change. Design/methodology/approach –The data were collected from one semiconductor manufacturing company (study 1) and one logistics service company (study 2). Employees who experienced organizational change before were invited to finish the survey. The partial least squares-structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) technique and SPSS PROCESS (model 14) were utilized to analyze the data. Findings –The study findings indicated that the perceived autonomy and relatedness were positively connected with perceived competence, which in turn would lead to better attitude toward change. Additionally, it was found that the perceived competence and attitude toward change would positively predict participation in change. More importantly, perceived organizational support would reinforce the positive relationship between attitude toward change and participation in change. Originality/value –Although there are many organizational change reports, relatively little attention has been paid not only to the mediating role of attitudes toward change in the implication of organizational change but also to the moderating impact of perceived organizational support on the final success of organizational change. Keywords Attitudes toward change, Change management, Self-determination, Perceived organizational support, Organizational change Paper type Research paper Introduction Several researchers have placed much emphasis on the key role of self-determined motivation in previous research, probably due to its impact on role identity (G€ untert and Wehner, 2015), job satisfaction (Lam and Gurland, 2008), organizational outcomes (Gagn e and Deci, 2005), psychological well-being (Perreault et al., 2014), learning effectiveness and efficiency (Akbari et al., 2015). For example, an early report by Lam and Gurland (2008) suggested self-determined work motivation positively influences job satisfaction. Another recent review by G€ untert and Wehner (2015) found self-determined motivation positively predicts general role identity and Selfdetermined motivation 193 © Rui-Ting Huang. Published in European Journal of Management and Business Economics. Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and noncommercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/ legalcode This research was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST), Taiwan, under contract number MOST 109 2410 H 005 026. The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/2444-8494.htm Received 1 March 2022 Revised 5 August 2022 16 September 2022 Accepted 24 September 2022 European Journal of Management and Business Economics Vol. 34 No. 2, 2025 pp. 193-210 Emerald Publishing Limited e-ISSN: 2444-8494 p-ISSN: 2444-8451 DOI 10.1108/EJMBE-03-2022-0056 organization-specific role identity. In light of this, although some researchers have intensely concentrated on the pivotal role of self-determined motivation in organizations (Gagne et al., 2000;Sheldon et al.,2003;Shin and Jung, 2021), there is a lack of research looking into the impact of self-determined motivation on organizational change. Specifically, whether self-determined motivation, containing three innate psychological needs: perceived autonomy, perceived relatedness, and perceived competence, facilitates better attitude toward change and participation in change has not yet been fully explored in previous reports. In addition, recently, there has been growing interest in the roles of perceived organizational support and attitudes toward change in organizational studies, probably because perceived organizational support and attitudes toward change are closely associated with individual performance and organizational outcomes. For example, in a hospitality and tourism management report, Akgunduz and Sanli (2017) revealed perceived organizational support is positively related to job embeddedness, but negatively connected with turnover intention. In another vocational behavior study, Ocampo et al. (2018) showed perceived organizational support is closely related to career adaptability. With particular respect to the role of perceived organizational support in change participation, Fuchs and Prouska (2014) suggested perceived organizational support is one of the critical antecedents of change participation. More importantly, several reports revealed positive attitudes toward change play a key role in implementing successful organizational change (Drzensky et al., 2012;Ming-Chu and MengHsiu, 2015). Although there are many organizational change reports, relatively little attention has been paid not only to the mediating role of attitudes toward change in the implication of organizational change, but also to the moderating impact of perceived organizational support on the final success of organizational change. To close this research gap, the primary purpose of this study is not only to examine the connections between self-determined motivation, attitudes toward change and participation in change, but also to explore the moderating impact of perceived organizational support on organizational change, and the mediating role of attitudes toward change in the link between perceived competence and participation in change. In a nutshell, the significance of this study is closely and critically related to three major contributions. Specifically, one main contribution has been made by identifying the key relationship between self-determined motivation, attitudes toward change and participation in change. Another pivotal contribution is made by verifying the mediating role of attitudes toward change in the connection between perceived competence and participation. More importantly, the third major contribution is made by proving the moderating impact of perceived organizational support on the success of organizational change. The theoretical reflections and practical suggestions are provided to facilitate researchers and practitioners to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of organizational change. Literature review and hypothesis development Organizational change management and drivers of change Although there is no universal definition as to the concept of organizational change, Hussain et al. (2018) suggested “the organizational change explains the movement of an organization from the known (current state) state to the unknown (desired future state) state”(p. 123). Actually, successful organizational change is often very difficult, because change management is closely related not only to “the process of continually renewing an organization’s direction, structure, and capabilities to serve the ever-changing needs of external and internal customers”(Moran and Brightman, 2000, p. 66), but also to managing different people in organizations. With particular respect to managing people during change, Moran and Brightman (2000) identified three central drivers of organizational change, including purpose, identity and mastery. In the process of organizational change, purpose is important, mainly because “people are goal-oriented”(Moran and Brightman, 2000, p. 66). EJMBE 34,2 194 Specifically, the new vision and goal are regarded as key intangible forces motivating people to accomplish work requirements during change (Hussain et al., 2018). In addition, identity refers to personal identification with organizational change. Moran and Brightman (2000) revealed “Change that strikes at the core of a person’s sense of who they are will activate powerful motivations to return things to the status quo”(p. 67). In other words, whether people really identify and agree with organizational change plays a key role in determining the successful implementation of organizational change (Todnem, 2005). Finally, mastery is closely connected with personal competence and ability to deal with requirements of organizational changes. Moran and Brightman (2000) indicated since “survival depends on one’s ability to manage oneself and the environment effectively”(p. 67), it is critical to provide employees during change with training supports to help them handle possible changes and challenges in the future. Attitudes toward change and employee participation in organizational change Attitude, which is described as “a psychological tendency that is expressed by evaluating a particular entity with some degree of favor or disfavor”(Eagly and Chaiken, 1993, p. 1), is one of the key factors influencing behavior intention and actual behavior. An early review by Yadav and Pathak (2016) revealed attitudes toward buying green products play a key role in determining purchase intention. Another recent report by Minibas-Poussard et al. (2018) demonstrated that saving attitudes are key predictors of saving behavior. Additionally, Casal o and Escario (2018) showed environmental attitudes are key determinants of pro-environmental behavior. With particular respect to the role of attitudes toward change in organizational change, many studies have focused on the pivotal impact of employee attitudes toward change in organizational change, mainly because it has been shown to be closely connected with the successful implementation of organizational change (Ming-Chu and Meng-Hsiu, 2015). For example, Kwahk and Lee (2008) suggested “positive attitudes toward behavior –readiness for change –the extent to which organizational members hold positive views about the need for organizational change, as well as their belief that changes are likely to have positive implications for them and the organization”(p. 475). Additionally, Kwahk and Kim (2008) revealed the more positive attitudes toward change employees have, the less likely they are going to resist organizational change. In an early change management study, Drzensky et al. (2012) indicated beliefs and attitudes toward change played a key role in implementing successful organizational changes. In another management report, Ming-Chu and Meng-Hsiu (2015) added that employees’positive attitudes toward change should be one of the central elements propelling successful organizational change. Although numerous studies have explored organizational change, limited efforts have been devoted to examining the association between attitudes toward change and participation in change, which generally “refers to allowing employees to have input during the process of organizational change”(Chiang, 2010, p. 160). To clarify the link between these two variables, this study proposes the following hypothesis. H1. Attitudes toward change will have a positive influence on participation in change. Self-determined motivation, attitudes toward change and participation in change The self-determination theory (SDT), initially proposed by Deci and Ryan (1985), has been gradually applied to psychological research (Deci et al., 2001;Philippe and Vallerand, 2008), educational reports (Roca and Gagn e, 2008;Sørebø et al., 2009), aging studies (Custers et al., 2012), food research (Sch€ osler et al., 2014), information management reports (Lee et al., 2015), sport review (Brickell and Chatzisarantis, 2007), business research (Leung and Matanda, 2013) Selfdetermined motivation 195 and organizational studies (Kuvaas, 2009;Lam and Gurland, 2008;Gagn e and Deci, 2005). Nevertheless, there is still a lack of research examining the role of self-determined motivation in the implementation of organizational change. Previous studies suggested perceived competence, relatedness and autonomy, three intrinsic motivators, are central elements facilitating more positive learning achievement, affective commitment, information technology adoption, psychological well-being and organizational outcomes (Akbari et al., 2015; Baerdemaeker and Bruggeman, 2015;Deci et al., 2001;Gagn e and Deci, 2005;Lee et al., 2015; Vandenberghe and Panaccio, 2012). A work and stress report by Elst et al. (2012) showed the frustration of autonomy, competence and belongingness make emotional exhaustion worse. Additionally, in terms of the connections between perceived competence, user satisfaction, behavioral intention, learning achievement and organizational outcomes, it has been shown perceived competence, which refers to a requirement for “succeeding at optimally challenging tasks and attaining desired outcomes”(Deci et al., 2001, p. 931), is one of the key determinants of readiness for change (Kwahk and Lee, 2008), user satisfaction (Rezvani et al., 2017), behavioral intention (Khan et al., 2018) and learning outcomes (Akbari et al., 2015). Especially for implementing the enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems in organizations, Kwahk and Lee (2008) found perceived personal competence positively impacts readiness for change, which in turn leads to better perceived usefulness of ERP systems. More importantly, in regard to total quality management (TQM) implementation, Iqbal and Asrar-ul-Haq (2018) indicated individual attitudes toward change are closely linked to the successful implementation of organizational change. In the same vein, it is likely employees with higher levels of perceived competence have better attitudes toward change, which in turn will lead to more positive participation in change. Accordingly, this study proposes the following hypotheses. H2. Perceived competence will have a positive influence on attitudes toward change. H3. Perceived competence will have a positive influence on participation in change. H4. Attitudes toward change will mediate the link between perceived competence and participation in change. Connections between perceived autonomy, relatedness and competence In terms of the pivotal role of perceived relatedness in organizational outcomes, an early review by Gagn e and Deci (2005) suggested “the need for relatedness plays a central role in internalization of values and regulations”(p. 355). Another aging study by Custers et al. (2012) found residents of nursing homes regard perceived relatedness, which refers to a requirement for “a sense of mutual respect, caring, and reliance with others”(Deci et al., 2001, p. 931), as more important than perceived competence and autonomy, especially in caring relationships. Moreover, several reports indicated perceived relatedness plays a key role not only in reducing work strain (Cho and Yang, 2018), but also in predicting job outcomes (Lam and Gurland, 2008), organizational commitment and psychological well-being (Gagn e and Deci, 2005). With particular respect to the roles of perceived autonomy and relatedness in previous research, several researchers indicated a positive relationship between perceived autonomy, relatedness and competence. For example, an early review by Leung and Matanda (2013) demonstrated perceived autonomy, which refers to a requirement for “experiencing choice and feeling like the initiator of one’s own actions”(Deci et al., 2001 p. 931), is closely connected not only with better adoption of self-service technologies, but also with perceived competence (Huang et al., 2017). Another recent report by Martela and Riekki (2018) indicated perceived relatedness is positively associated with perceived competence. Based on previous suggestions, similarly, it is possible employees with higher levels of perceived autonomy EJMBE 34,2 196 and relatedness are likely to have more positive perceived competence. Consequently, this study proffers the following hypotheses. H5. Perceived autonomy will have a positive influence on perceived competence. H6. Perceived relatedness will have a positive influence on perceived competence Perceived organizational support Perceived organizational support, which refers to “the general belief that the organization cares for the contributions and welfare of its employees”(Akgunduz and Sanli, 2017, p. 119), has received much attention in previous research, mainly because it is closely linked to organizational performance. First, an early review by Baranik et al. (2010) demonstrated perceived organizational support is positively connected not only with job satisfaction but also with organizational commitment. Another recent study by Duan et al. (2019) suggested perceived organizational support is highly associated with organizational helping behaviors, which in turn leads to better employee workplace well-being. Second, Akgunduz and Sanli (2017) revealed perceived organizational support plays a key role in determining job embeddedness and turnover intention. Ocampo et al. (2018) added perceived organizational support positively predicts career adaptability. Third, in terms of the central impact of perceived organizational support on organizational change, several reports demonstrated perceived organizational support is one of the key elements propelling successful organizational change. For example, Neves (2009) showed lack of management support leads to failures in organizational change. Additionally, Fuchs and Prouska (2014) showed perceived organizational support and change participation play a key role in determining more positive change evaluation. With particular respect to the role of perceived organizational support in readiness for change, an early management review by Ming-Chu and Meng-Hsiu (2015) demonstrated perceived organizational support is positively connected to readiness for change. More importantly, another recent change management study by Gigliotti et al. (2019) indicated a positive relationship between perceived organizational support and change readiness. Moreover, in regard to the moderating role of perceived organizational support in prior research, several reports revealed perceived organizational support plays a moderating role in determining individual outcomes (Choi, 2020). For example, Wang et al. (2017) suggested perceived organizational support moderates the link between a person’s proactive personality and work engagement. Cheng and O-Yang (2018) indicated “furthermore, perceived organizational support moderates the relationships among job crafting, burnout, and satisfaction”(p. 78). In the context of organizational change, likewise, it is possible perceived organizational support plays a moderating role in determining the link between change attitudes and participation. More precisely, people with higher levels of perceived organizational support are likely to have a more positive connection between attitudes toward change and participation in change. Although there are numerous organizational change reports, limited efforts have been devoted to examining the moderating role of perceived organizational support in organizational change. Accordingly, to further understand the moderating impact of perceived organizational support on the connections between attitudes toward change and participation in change, this study proposes the following hypothesis (see Figure 1). H7. Perceived organizational support will moderate the link between attitudes toward change and participation in change. Specifically, people with higher levels of perceived organizational support will have a stronger relationship between attitudes toward change and participation in change. Selfdetermined motivation 197 Research methodology Demographic data for respondents for study 1 A total of 359 employees from one semiconductor manufacturing company took part in study 1. Excluding 7 missing data, 271 males and 81 females participated in this study. As shown in Table 1, married and single employees accounted for 204 and 142 of respondents, respectively, and the majority of employees held a bachelor’s degrees (n5253; 70%). Moreover, the mean and median ages of participants were 35.87 and 35, respectively. Finally, the mean tenure of participants was 6.03 (with standard deviation 55.59). Demographic data for respondents in the study 2 A total of 179 employees from one logistics service company participated in study 2. Excluding 2 missing data, 98 males and 79 females participated in study 2. As shown in Table 2, married and single employees accounted for 81 and 93 of the respondents, Demographics Items Number Percentage of respondents Gender Male 271 75 Female 81 23 Missing data 7 2 Marital status Married 204 57 Single 142 40 Missing data 13 3 Education High school 7 2 Bachelor 253 70 Master 79 22 Missing data 20 6 Age Mean age 35.87 Median 35 Standard deviation 7.887 Tenure Mean 6.030 Median 5 Standard deviation 5.59 Figure 1. Research framework of the study Table 1. Demographic data for respondents EJMBE 34,2 198 respectively, and the majority of employees held bachelor’s degrees (n5122; 68%). Moreover, the mean and median ages of participants were 33.97 and 33, respectively. Finally, the mean tenure of participants was 6.27 (with standard deviation 56.678). Data collection for study 1 and 2 The data were collected from one semiconductor manufacturing company in study 1, and from one logistics service company in study 2. More precisely, in study 1, employees who experienced changes during a merger were invited to finish the survey. In study 2, employees who experienced changes regarding implementing new information systems in an organization were requested to finish the survey. In order to allow participants to feel free to complete the survey, study 1 and 2 adopted both online surveys and paper-based surveys to collect the data. After incomplete surveys were screened out, this study finally acquired 359 useable data for study 1, and 179 useable data for study 2. Common method bias In order to probe into the existence of common method bias in these two studies (Podsakoff et al., 2003), the Harman’s single-factor test was used to examine whether there was any common method bias in the reports. Because the study findings revealed that one single factor in study 1 only explained 43.2% of total variances, and one single factor in study 2 only interpreted 42.3% of total variances, common method bias should not be considered a severe problem. Instrumentation We utilized 25 survey items, which were rated on a seven-point Likert scale, to investigate the impact of self-determined motivation and perceived organizational support on organizational change. As shown in Table 3, 12 items, which evaluated the constructs of perceived autonomy, competence and relatedness, were developed from Deci et al. (2001). Sample items of perceived autonomy, competence and relatedness were, “I feel like I can make a lot of input to decide how my job gets done”,“People at work tell me I am good at what I do”, and “I really like the people I work with”. Second, this study adopted four items from Chiang (2010) to evaluate the construct of attitude toward change. Sample items were, “The changes are needed and are for the better”, and “I am willing to support any further changes”. Additionally, six items, which examined the construct of perceived organizational support, Demographics Items Number Percentage of respondents Gender Male 98 55 Female 79 44 Missing data 2 1 Marital status Married 81 45 Single 93 52 Missing data 5 3 Education High school 8 5 Bachelor 122 68 Master 41 23 Missing data 8 4 Age Mean age 33.97 Median 33 Standard deviation 9.156 Tenure Mean 6.27 Median 3 Standard deviation 6.678 Table 2. Demographic data for respondents in the study 2 Selfdetermined motivation 199 Items Factor loading S1 S2 S1 S2 S1 S2 S1 S2 S1 S1 S1 S2 ATD1 0.87 0.85 ATD2 0.90 0.87 ATD3 0.90 0.86 ATD4 0.90 0.89 α 0.92 0.89 CR 0.94 0.92 AVE 0.80 0.75 VIF 1.44 1.18 PA1 0.86 0.85 PA2 0.88 0.83 PA3 0.88 0.87 PA4 0.86 0.86 α 0.89 0.88 CR 0.93 0.91 AVE 0.76 0.73 VIF 2.62 2.27 PC1 0.86 0.88 PC2 0.78 0.80 PC3 0.81 0.73 α 0.75 0.73 CR 0.86 0.85 AVE 0.67 0.65 VIF 1.95 2.11 PIC1 0.93 0.89 PIC2 0.93 0.91 PIC3 0.93 0.92 α 0.92 0.89 CR 0.95 0.93 AVE 0.86 0.82 VIF 1.36 1.39 POS1 0.87 0.84 POS2 0.90 0.92 POS3 0.88 0.92 POS4 0.77 0.71 POS5 0.84 0.85 POS6 0.84 0.85 α 0.93 0.92 CR 0.94 0.94 AVE 0.73 0.73 VIF 2.65 2.20 PR1 0.87 0.91 PR2 0.87 0.94 PR3 0.86 0.89 PR4 0.86 0.81 PR5 0.84 0.85 α 0.91 0.93 CR 0.94 0.94 AVE 0.74 0.78 VIF 1.73 1.69 Note(s): S1: study 1; S2: study 2; ATC: attitude toward change; PA: perceived autonomy; PC: perceived competence; PR: perceived relatedness; POS: perceived organizational support; PIC: participation in change; CR: composite reliability; AVE: average variance extracted; α : Cronbach’s alpha; VIF: variance inflation factors Table 3. Confirmatory factor analysis EJMBE 34,2 200 poor change management in the past are more likely to resist new changes”(Fuchs and Prouska, 2014, p. 361). Accordingly, it is important to pay more attention to the impact of perceived organizational support and self-determined motivation on organizational change. References Akbari, E., Pilot, A. and Simons, P.R.-J. (2015), “Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in foreign language learning through Facebook”,Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 48, pp. 126-134. Akgunduz, Y. and Sanli, S.C. (2017), “The effect of employee advocacy and perceived organizational support on job embeddedness and turnover intention in hotels”,Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Vol. 31, pp. 118-125. Baerdemaeker, J.D. and Bruggeman, W. (2015), “The impact of participation in strategic planning on managers’creation of budgetary slack: the mediating role of autonomous motivation and affective organisational commitment”,Management Accounting Research, Vol. 29, pp. 1-12. Baranik, L.E., Roling, E.A. and Eby, L.T. (2010), “Why does mentoring work? The role of perceived organizational support”,Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 76 No. 3, pp. 366-373. Brickell, T.A. and Chatzisarantis, N.L.D. (2007), “Using self-determination theory to examine the motivational correlates and predictive utility of spontaneous exercise implementation intentions”,Psychology of Sport and Exercise, Vol. 8 No. 5, pp. 758-770. Casal o, L.V. and Escario, J.-J. (2018), “Heterogeneity in the association between environmental attitudes and pro-environmental behavior: a multilevel regression approach”,Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 175, pp. 155-163. Cheng, J.-C. and O-Yang, Y. (2018), “Hotel employee job crafting, burnout, and satisfaction: the moderating role of perceived organizational support”,International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 72, pp. 78-85. Chiang, C.-F. (2010), “Perceived organizational change in the hotel industry: an implication of change schema”,International Journal of Hospitality Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 157-167. Cho, H.-T. and Yang, J.-S. (2018), “How perceptions of organizational politics influence self-determined motivation: the mediating role of work mood”,Asia Pacific Management Review, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 60-69. Choi, Y. (2020), “A study of the influence of workplace ostracism on employees’performance: moderating effect of perceived organizational support”,European Journal of Management and Business Economics, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 333-345, doi: 10.1108/EJMBE-09-2019-0159. Custers, A.F.J., Westerhof, G.J., Kuin, Y., Gerritsen, D.L. and Riksen-Walraven, J.M. (2012), “Relatedness, autonomy, and competence in the caring relationship: the perspective of nursing home residents”,Journal of Aging Studies, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 319-326. Deci, E.L. and Ryan, R.M. (1985), Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior, Plenum, New York. Deci, E.L., Ryan, R.M., Gagne, M., Leone, D., Usunov, J. and Kornazheva, B.P. (2001), “Need satisfaction, motivation, and well-being in the work organizations of a former eastern bloc country”,Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 27 No. 8, pp. 930-942. Drzensky, F., Egold, N. and van Dick, R. (2012), “Ready for a change? A longitudinal study of antecedents, consequences and contingencies of readiness for change”,Journal of Change Management, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 95-111. Duan, J., Wong, M. and Yue, Y. (2019), “Organizational helping behavior and its relationship with employee workplace well-being”,Career Development International, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 18-36. Eagly, A.H. and Chaiken, S. (1993), The Psychology of Attitudes, Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers, Orlando, FL. Eisenberger, R., Huntingon, R., Hutchison, S. and Sowa, D. (1986), “Perceived organizational support”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 71 No. 3, pp. 500-507. Selfdetermined motivation 207 Elst, T.V., Broecka, A.V.D., Wittea, H.D. and Cuyper, N.D. (2012), “The mediating role of frustration of psychological needs in the relationship between job insecurity and work-related well-being”, Work and Stress, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 252-271. Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable and measurement error”,Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 39-50. Fuchs, S. and Prouska, R. (2014), “Creating positive employee change evaluation: the role of different levels of organizational support and change participation”,Journal of Change Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 361-383. Gagn e, M. and Deci, E.L. (2005), “Self-determination theory and work motivation”,Journal of Organizational Behavior, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 331-362. Gagne, M., Koestner, R. and Zuckerman, M. (2000), “Facilitating acceptance of organizational change: the importance of self-determination”,Journal of Applied Social Psychology, Vol. 30 No. 9, pp. 1843-1852. Gigliotti, R., Vardaman, J., Marshall, D.R. and Gonzalez, K. (2019), “The role of perceived organizational support in individual change readiness”,Journal of Change Management, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 86-100. G€ untert, S.T. and Wehner, T. (2015), “The impact of self-determined motivation on volunteer role identities: a cross-lagged panel study”,Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 78, pp. 14-18. Hair, J.F., Risher, J.J., Sarstedt, M. and Ringle, C.M. (2019), “When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM”,European Business Review, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 2-24. Hayes, A.F. (2013), Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach, The Guilford Press, New York, NY. Henseler, J., Hubona, G. and Ray, P.A. (2016), “Using PLS path modeling in new technology research: updated guidelines”,Industrial Management and Data Systems, Vol. 116 No. 1, pp. 2-20. Hu, L.T. and Bentler, P.M. (1999), “Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives”,Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, Vol. 6 No. 1, pp. 1-55. Huang, R.-T., Sun, H.-S., Hsiao, C.-H. and Wang, C.-W. (2017), “Minimizing counterproductive work behaviors: the roles of self-determined motivation and perceived job insecurity in organizational change”,Journal of Organizational Change Management, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 15-26. Hussain, S.T., Lei, S., Akram, T., Haider, M.J., Hussain, S.H. and Ali, M. (2018), “Kurt Lewin’s change model: a critical review of the role of leadership and employee involvement in organizational change”,Journal of Innovation and Knowledge, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 123-127. Iqbal, A. and Asrar-ul-Haq, M. (2018), “Establishing relationship between TQM practices and employee performance: the mediating role of change readiness”,International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 203, pp. 62-68. Khan, I.U., Hameed, Z., Yu, Y., Islam, T., Sheikh, Z. and Khan, S.U. (2018), “Predicting the acceptance of MOOCs in a developing country: application of task-technology fit model, social motivation, and self-determination theory”,Telematics and Informatics, Vol. 35 No. 4, pp. 964-978. Kuvaas, B. (2009), “A test of hypotheses derived from self-determination theory among public sector employees”,Employee Relations, Vol. 31 Nos 1/2, pp. 39-56. Kwahk, K.-Y. and Kim, H.-W. (2008), “Managing readiness in enterprise systems-driven organizational change”,Behaviour and Information Technology, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 79-87. Kwahk, K.-Y. and Lee, J.-N. (2008), “The role of readiness for change in ERP implementation: theoretical bases and empirical validation”,Information and Management, Vol. 45 No. 7, pp. 474-481. Lam, C.F. and Gurland, S.T. (2008), “Self-determined work motivation predicts job outcomes, but what predicts self-determined work motivation?”,Journal of Research in Personality, Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 1109-1115. EJMBE 34,2 208 Lee, Y., Lee, J. and Hwang, Y. (2015), “Relating motivation to information and communication technology acceptance: self-determination theory perspective”,Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 51, pp. 418-428. Leung, L.S.K. and Matanda, M.J. (2013), “The impact of basic human needs on the use of retailing selfservice technologies: a study of self-determination theory”,Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 549-559. Martela, F. and Riekki, T.J.J. (2018), “Autonomy, competence, relatedness, and beneficence: a multicultural comparison of the four pathways to meaningful work”,Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 9, p. 1157. Ming-Chu, Y. and Meng-Hsiu, L. (2015), “Unlocking the black box: exploring the link between perceive organizational support and resistance to change”,Asia Pacific Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 177-183. Minibas-Poussard, J., Bingol, H.B. and Roland-Levy, C. (2018), “Behavioral control or income? An analysis of saving attitudes and behavior, credit card use and buying on installment”,Revue Europ eenne de Psychologie Appliqu ee, Vol. 68 No. 6, pp. 205-214. Moran, J.W. and Brightman, B.K. (2000), “Leading organizational change”,Journal of Workplace Learning, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 66-74. Neves, P. (2009), “Readiness for change: contributions for employee’s level of individual change and turnover intentions”,Journal of Change Management, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 215-231. Ocampo, A.C.G., Restubog, S.L.D., Liwag, M.E., Wang, L. and Petelczyc, C. (2018), “My spouse is my strength: interactive effects of perceived organizational and spousal support in predicting career adaptability and career outcomes”,Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 108, pp. 165-177. Perreault, D., Mask, L., Morgan, M. and Blanchard, C.M. (2014), “Internalizing emotions: selfdetermination as an antecedent of emotional intelligence”,Personality and Individual Differences, Vol. 64, pp. 1-6. Philippe, F.L. and Vallerand, R.J. (2008), “Actual environments do affect motivation and psychological adjustment: a test of self-determination theory in a natural setting”,Motivation and Emotion, Vol. 32 No. 2, pp. 81-89. Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, pp. 879-903. Rezvani, A., Khosravi, P. and Dong, L. (2017), “Motivating users toward continued usage of information systems: self-determination theory perspective”,Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 76, pp. 263-275. Roca, J.C. and Gagn e, M. (2008), “Understanding e-learning continuance intention in the workplace: a self-determination theory perspective”,Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 1585-1604. Sch€ osler, H., Boer, J.D. and Boersema, J.J. (2014), “Fostering more sustainable food choices: can SelfDetermination Theory help?”,Food Quality and Preference, Vol. 35, pp. 59-69. Sheldon, K.M., Turban, D.B., Brown, K.G., Barrick, M.R. and Judge, T.A. (2003), “Applying selfdetermination theory to organizational research”,Research in Personnel and Human Resources Management, Vol. 22, pp. 357-393. Shin, I. and Jung, H. (2021), “Differential roles of self-determined motivations in describing job crafting behavior and organizational change commitment”,Current Psychology, Vol. 40, pp. 3376-3385. Sørebø, Ø., Halvari, H., Gulli, V.F. and Kristiansen, R. (2009), “The role of self-determination theory in explaining teachers’motivation to continue to use e-learning technology”,Computers and Education, Vol. 53 No. 4, pp. 1177-1187. Todnem, R. (2005), “Organisational change management: a critical review”,Journal of Change Management, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 369-380. Selfdetermined motivation 209 Vandenberghe, C. and Panaccio, A. (2012), “Perceived sacrifice and few alternatives commitments: the motivational underpinnings of continuance commitment’s subdimensions”,Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 81 No. 1, pp. 59-72. Wang, Z., Zhang, J., Thomas, C.L., Yu, J. and Spitzmueller, C. (2017), “Explaining benefits of employee proactive personality: the role of engagement, team proactivity composition and perceived organizational support”,Journal of Vocational Behavior, Vol. 101, pp. 90-103. Yadav, R. and Pathak, G.S. (2016), “Young consumers’intention towards buying green products in a developing nation: extending the theory of planned behavior”,Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 135, pp. 732-739. About the author Dr Rui-Ting Huang is an associate professor at National Chung Hsing University, Taiwan. He received his PhD from Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge. His research interests focus on human resource development, mobile learning, and organizational learning. Rui-Ting Huang can be contacted at: [email protected] For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website: www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm Or contact us for further details: [email protected] EJMBE 34,2 210