ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res.

9(08), 729-738

Journal Homepage: - www.journalijar.com

Article DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/13322

DOI URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/13322

RESEARCH ARTICLE
SATISFACTION ON MOTIVATIONS AND ORGANIZATIONAL COMMITMENT IN THE PUBLIC
UNIVERSITIES OF TIGRAY REGIONAL STATE, ETHIOPIA

Dr. K. Senthilkumar1 and Mr. Meseret Meresa2

1. Asst. Professor, Management Department, Adigrat University Post Box No 50 Adigrat Ethiopia.
2. Dean, College of Business and Economics, Adigrat University Post Box No 50, Adigrat, Ethiopia.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………....
Manuscript Info Abstract
……………………. ………………………………………………………………
Manuscript History Motivating the employees both intrinsically and extrinsically in order
Received: 25 June 2021 to enhance the commitment of the employees is appreciable and the
Final Accepted: 28 July 2021 need of the day. However the satisfaction level of employees
Published: August 2021 especially the teachers towards the motivation and its contribution to
build the commitment have not yet been studied in Public Universities
Key words:-
Motivational Factors, Intrinsic in Tigray Regional State In an attempt to bridge the gap, the study
Motivation, Extrinsic Motivation, attempts to find the satisfaction of the employees towards the intrinsic
Satisfaction and Organizational and extrinsic motivation existing at their universities. The study has
Commitment
also found the commitment level of the employees and its relationship
with the motivation. Required primary cross sectional data has been
collected from 371 employees of the Public Universities in Tigrai
regional state of Ethiopia. Using SPSS software the collected data is
analyzed. Descriptive statistical tools such as mean, standard deviation
and variance have been applied to describe the level of satisfaction
among the employees towards the intrinsic and extrinsic motivation.
The correlation statistics has also been applied to find the relationship
between motivation and organizational commitment. The study has
found an apparent positive correlation between motivation and
organizational commitment. The results on the satisfaction level of the
employees highlights that the intrinsic motivation is at the upper level.
There is a scope to enrich extrinsic motivation. Hence the universities
should focus more on the extrinsic motivation to have better
committed employees.

Copy Right, IJAR, 2021,. All rights reserved.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………....
Introduction:-
Motivation is the fuel that drives people towards accomplishing their goals and objectives. In fact, without this fuel
human beings would be inactive, leading to a routine and unproductive life. Motivational factors are enhancing
employee's Commitment to their organization for organizational growth and development. Public higher education is
a rapidly expanding part of Ethiopia’s higher education system. Public higher institutions in Ethiopia are growing at a
faster rate. Higher education has faced a remarkable growth in Ethiopia in the last two decades. However there are
issues in terms of quality and improvement in higher education. In other words, the quality of higher education is the
one among the challenges of higher education in Ethiopia, which may be caused by many factors. The one important
factor for that is according to Ayenachew A. Woldegiyorgis (2013) motivational level of the academicians. In today’s
competitive environment employers can make a competitive advantage only by means of employees. Employers do

Corresponding Author:- Dr. K.Senthilkumar 729

Address:- Asst. Professor, Management Department, Adigrat University Post Box No 50 Adigrat
Ethiopia .
.
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 9(08), 729-738

understand a motivated employee will contribute more to the organizations significantly to the organizations
betterment. This is more so in the case of developing countries like Ethiopia). In this scenario a study towards the
satisfaction of employees toward the motivation presented to them and to find their organizational commitment has
got its own importance to trigger up the performance of the organizations. Motivation is an important factor that
builds the commitment (Hanke Korpershoek, 2016). Though motivation is of two ways such as intrinsic and extrinsic,
it is not so clear to say to an individual which kind of motivation highly influences his/her commitment. And also it is
observed by Ryan & Dec (2000) that all individuals cannot be motivated by the same activities since the needs and
wants of individuals in terms of motivation differ significantly. When assessing the effectiveness of these
motivations towards the commitment and work outcomes many researchers favor intrinsic motivation (Nasri &
Charfeddine, 2012). However when a separable outcome is focused, extrinsic motivation pertains (Ryan & Deci,
2000). Hence to build the commitment among the employees, it is important for an organization to understand
whether their employees are satisfied with their intrinsic and extrinsic motivations practiced in their organizations.
Investigating the factors either intrinsic or extrinsic motivation does contribute to the commitment of employees is
also essential to an organization for their action plans. Satisfied and committed employees contribute their full
potential to the betterment of the organization. Organizations may attain competitive advantage by means of
committed employees. According to Meyer and Allen (1993) organizational commitment is a leading factor in the
achievement of many organizations. With regard to the commitment level of the teachers in the public Universities of
Tigray regional state in Ethiopia is yet to be explored. Though there are many factors lead to organizational
commitment this study among the factors studied exclusively focuses on the satisfaction of employees towards the
organisations' motivations both in intrinsic and extrinsic dimensions, Further it studies the commitment level of the
employees (teachers) and its relationship with the employees’ satisfaction in the motivations at their workplaces in
case of Public Universities in Tigray Regional State of Ethiopia.

Literature Review:-
In 1998 Pinder explained motivation as a set of energetic forces which might originate from an individual inner mind
as well as by the external forces. In fact motivation is essential to initiate a work. For some people it comes from
themselves whereas for some others external forces are required to do that. It is not only required to initial stages of
any work but it prolongs its importance during the process to in all the aspects of a work such as determining and
giving direction to the work. It also influences in determining the quality and output of the work and duration of the
work execution process (Pinder, 1998). Deci and Ryan (1980) developed Self-determination theory of motivation in
which they identified three important kinds of motivations such as amotivation (absence of intentional regulation),
extrinsic motivation and intrinsic motivation.. Amotivationas occurs in the absence of internal regulations. Extrinsic
and intrinsic motivations respectively come for external and internal mind sources. Ryan and Deci (2000)
differentiated intrinsic and extrinsic motivations in such a way that intrinsic motivation originates from doing
inherently interesting things and extrinsic motivation originates from targeting a separable outcome. Thomas &
Velthouse (1990) stated that positively valued experiences which are arised directly out of the work tasks by an
individual employee are termed as intrinsic motivations. Intrinsic motivation comes from an individual’s own
commitment and intrinsic motivation does not anticipate any specific external outcomes Ryan and Deci (2000).
According to Giancola (2014) intrinsic motivation originated from the work task which is inherent by its nature
whereas external motivation originated from the other persons related to the work. Interesting works, feeling of
involvement, supervisors help with personal problems, appreciation and career development are some of the sources
that build intrinsic motivations (Wong S, Siu V &T sang N, 1999). . Extrinsic motivation can be explained as the
motivations that are apart from the work itself such as reward, recognition, and benefits (Amabile, Hill, Hennessey &
Tighe, 1994). Mahaney and Lederer (2006) advocated that status, recognition, praise from superiors and co-workers,
personal satisfaction and feelings of self esteem are the tools of intrinsic motivations. According to Upchurch and
Severt (2009) the variables that stimulate external motivations are job security, salary, tactful discipline and good
working conditions. Mahaney and Lederer (2006) advocated that tools such as pay, fringe benefits, job security,
promotions, private office space and the social climate are the tools for external motivations. The motivations used
vary according to the nature of the employees. According to Ryan and Deci (2000) employees who are open and
cognitive intrinsic motivation are suitable. Many scholars indicated that employees’ behaviour can be influenced by
intrinsic motivations (Grabner and Speckbacher, 2009; Asha and Uma Warrier, 2017; & Yundong H, 2015). External
motivation can also lead to employees’ behavioral changes. Dwivedula, Ravikiran, & Müller, R. (2011) advocated
that external motivation is a good tool to bring in the expected behavioral changes among the employees. However
Suhaiel Amdan et al (2016) in their research found that extrinsic motivation did not moderate the relationship
between office environments.

730
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 9(08), 729-738

According to Anderson and Weitz (1992), “Commitment is a long term relational perspective that encourages parties
to resist the short term benefits offered by other companies in favor of the benefits associated with remaining in a
relationship”, Meyer and Herscovitch (2001) stated that commitment is “a force that binds an individual to a course
of action of relevance to one or more targets”.According to Biljana Dordevic (2004) commitment of employees is
crucial since it is a predictor of employee’s performance, absenteeism and other behaviors. According to Balfour DL,
Wechsler B (1996) to foucus on organisational performance, organizational commitment is an appropriate tool.
Employee commitment is one predominating factor of organizational performance (Shirashetti, 2012). Kim WG,
Leong JK & Lee YK (2005) have stated that companies that pay more attention towards commitment may recognize
long-term benefits of corporate success, loyalty, productivity, and employee retention. The relationship between
commitment of employees and high performance is studied and ensured by Edralin (2008), Savaneviciene &
Stankeviciute (2011). Amir Sohail, Robina Safdar, Salma Saleem, Samara Ansar & M. Azeem (2014) have found a
positive relationship between Work Motivation and Organizational Commitment. Salim, M., Kamarudin, H., &
Kadir, have found (2010) the contributing factors in building organizational commitment. They found job
satisfaction; job involvement and perceived organizational support are the factors affecting organizational
commitment. Lida Gholizade, Irvan Masoudi, Mohammad Reza Maleki , Afsoon Aeenparast , Mehdi Barzegar (
2014) have also found positive relationships between job satisfaction, job motivation and organizational commitment.
Hanke Korpershoek (2016) found motivation builds the commitment of the employees significantly. Yeni Rahmawati
and Norhasni Zainal Abiddin (2015) have found a moderate positive correlation between overall motivation and
organizational commitment. Selma Altindis (2011) has found Continuance commitment had a remarkable effect on
extrinsic motivation. Meyer J, Becker T, Vandenberghe C (2004) have also signified that commitment is one
component of motivation. According to Johnson RE, Chang CH & Yang LQ (2010) commitment is a motivational
phenomenon. Kim et al. (2005) have also explored that job satisfaction; motivation, morale and organisational
commitment are interrelated. De Silva and Yamao (2006) stated that motivation level and creativity of the
employees.can be improved by organizational commitment. Mong-Chien Hsu and Kao-Mao Chen (2012) have found
higher the level of job satisfaction with the higher organization commitment level. Though motivation and
commitment are considered distinct, the similarities between them were highlighted by Meyer et al. (2004). Hence
motivation, job satisfaction and organisational commitment are inter related and interdependent. Motivation being an
essential part of management can not be generalised. Mullins (2007) indicates that multiple motivation systems are
being practiced in organizations to satisfy the employees. Fauziah Wan, Y. & Tan Shen, K. (2013) have found
significant differences between Gen X and Gen Y employees in intrinsic motivations. Yet in terms of both intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation factors, Aslı Beyhan Acar (2014) did not find any significant differences between Gen X
and Gen Y employees. Vincent, Nithila & Paul, Anjali (2018) argued that organizations face problems with regard to
motivations. The literature reviewed indicated that clarity is required in terms of the focal point of the organisations
motivational practices and commitment i.e. whether the intrinsic motivation or the extrinsic motivation does
contribute more to the organizational commitment of the employees is not studied yet. Specifically the relationship
between satisfaction of employees on motivativations and their organisational commitment among the employees of
public universities in Tigray region of Ethiopia has got the attention and interest of the researchers since it will give
clear directions to the universities towards the focal point of their motivation. Hence this study attempts to decipher
the relationship of intrinsic, extrinsic motivation and overall motivation level with the organizational commitment of
the employees.

Conceptual Framework
The researchers attempt to bring out the relationship between intrinsic, extrinsic motivation and overall motivation
level with the organizational commitment of the employees. Hence it is hypothesized that the satisfaction of
employees towards the motivations presented to them has a positive co relationship with their organizational
commitment. The variables derived from the vast reviews of literatures to measure the satisfaction of the employees
towards the intrinsic motivations are Type of work, Autonomy in the work, Scope for competition and achievement,
Recognition of the work, Contribution to the stakeholders, Pride in the work, Opportunities to learn and grow,
Relationship with supervisors, Relationship with co workers and Equity in treatment. The variables derived from the
vast reviews of literatures to measure the satisfaction of the employees towards the extrinsic motivations are salary
offered, fringe benefits, job security, employee’s welfare, in house training opportunities, post-employment security,
compensation at par with the industries, grants, rewards for work excellence and new forms of motivation like tour
packages. The model of Allen and Meyor (1999) has been adapted to measure organisational commitment of the
employees. Accordingly the variables included to measure the organisational commitment are Affective
Component, Continuance Component and Normative Component of the organisational Commitment.

731
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 9(08), 729-738

Satisfaction towards the Intrinsic factors

Type of work
Autonomy in the work
Scope for competition
Recognition of the work
Pride in the work
Contribution to the stakeholders
Opportunities to learn and grow
Relationship with supervisors
Relationship with coworkers
Equity in treatment Organizational Commitment
Affective
Continuance
Satisfaction towrads the Extrinsic factors Normative
Salary
Fringe benefits
Job security
Employee’s welfare
In house training opportunities
Opportunity for training
Post-employment security
Equity in compensation with the industries
Grants
Rewards for work excellence
New forms like tour packages

Figure 1:- Satisfaction in motivation and Organisational Commitment.

Objectives of study:-
1. To assess the satisfaction level of employees towards intrinsic motivation
2. To assess the satisfaction level of employees towards extrinsic motivation
3. To assess the employees’ commitment towards the organization
4. To investigate the relationship between satisfaction in motivation and organizational commitment

Methodology:-
The study has applied descriptive research design to describe the variables under study. The target population of the
study is academic staff of a public university in Ethiopia. The total population of this study is 4266. i.e the total
number of academic staff in the public universities of Tigray Regional State of Ethiopia namely Mekelle university,
Axum university and Adigrat University. The sample was determined by using the formula derived by Wotson J
(2001). The formulae is

Where : n = sample size

N = number of people in the population

732
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 9(08), 729-738

P = estimated variance in population, as a decimal

A = Precision desired, expressed as a decimal
Z = confidence level
R = Estimated Response rate, as a decimal

The study has applied descriptive research design to describe the variables under study. The target population of the
study is academic staff of a public university in Ethiopia. The total population of this study is 4266. i.e the total
number of academic staff in the public universities of Tigray Regional State of Ethiopia namely Mekelle university,
Axum university and Adigrat University. The sample was determined by using the formula derived by Wotson J
(2001). The formulae is Applying the mentioned formula (Precision 0.05, Variance 0.5 and at 95% Confidence
level) the sample size was calculated as 371. A well structured questionnaire was designed to measure the
satisfaction level of employees towards the intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation offered by using Likert
five point scale as well the organizational commitment of the employees was measured using the scale constructed
by Allen and Meyor (1999). Then the instrument was validated for the construct and the content by the experts in
the field. The primary data was collected during 2018 summer using the questionnaire designed from 371 samples
i.e the academic staff of the public universities in Tigrai Regional state of Ethiopia by simple random sampling
method. Interviews from the concerned bodies (members of the academic staff of the three University of Tigray
regional states) were also conducted to obtain the appropriate data required.. In addition to this, secondary data has
been collected from different sources such as documents, other research findings, and reports, in order to support
the primary data. The software SPSS Version 20 was used to analyze the data. The reliability of the data was tested
using cronbach's alpha which was above 0.9 for all variables. The descriptive statistical tools such as percentages
and frequencies were used to analyze the demographics of the respondents. To describe the satisfaction level of the
employees towards the intrinsic and extrinsic motivation the descriptive statistics viz mean and standard deviation
have been used. To test the relationship between motivation and organizational commitment correlation statistics
have been applied. The resultant statistics have been tabulated and discussed in the following sections.

Results:-
The demographic characteristics of the respondents are exhibited in the table 1.
Table 1:- Demographic characteristics of the respondents.
S.N0 Characteristics Frequency Percentage
1 Gender
Male 232 64.5
Female 129 35.5
2 Age
26-35 Years 283 78.4
More than 35 years 78 21.6
3 Academic Rank
Lecturer 279 77
Assistant Professor 66 18
Associate Professor 16 5
4 Experience in the current University
2-5 years 246 68.1
6-10 years 99 27.4
More than 10 years 11 4.4
Total 361 100

The table indicating the demographic characteristics of the respondents reveals interesting facts about the
respondents. The universities in Tigrai regional state of Ethiopia have more male members (64.5 percent). 78.4
percent of the respondents are at the age between 26 -35 years which indicates the workforce of the universities is
young. Many of them are lecturers (77 percent). Most (68.1 percent) of the respondents have less experience (less
than five years).

Intrinsic motivational factors and satisfaction

As mentioned in the methodology, on Likert five point scale the satisfaction of the employees towards the intrinsic
motivational factors are measured. The results show that the employees are satisfied (mean score 3.17) with the

733
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 9(08), 729-738

type of the work they engage. However the high standard deviation (1.41) depicts the inconsistency with the data. It
is a fact that all different kinds of jobs may not be interesting. There is a scope for competition and the employees
enjoy the completion since it leads to achievement which is deduced from the mean score 3.02. The environment
regarding the relationship of employees with the supervisor and the coworkers is not bad which can be deduced
from mean scores 2.89 and 2.85 respectively. The equity treatment on the employees is ensured by the mean score
3.06. There is autonomy in the work (mean score 2.6) and the employees pride themselves on their work. (Mean
score 2.56). The employees do not feel their work is recognized (deduced from the mean score 2.45) and they do
not feel their contribution towards the stakeholders is not recognized (deduced from the mean score). There are less
opportunities to grow which can be understood from the lowest mean score 2.41.

Table 2:- Intrinsic motivational factors and satisfaction of the employees.

Descriptions Mean Std. Error Std. Deviation Variance
Type of work 3.1676 .07396 1.41107 1.991
Autonomy in the work 2.6044 .05342 1.01915 1.039
Scope for competition and 3.0220 .06715 1.28117 1.641
achievement
Recognition of the work 2.4588 .05573 1.06326 1.131
Contribution to the stakeholders 2.4423 .05950 1.13520 1.289
Pride in the work 2.5604 .05924 1.13019 1.277
Opportunities to learn and grow 2.4148 .06263 1.19498 1.428
Relationship with supervisor 2.8984 .06269 1.19600 1.430
Relationship with co workers 2.8599 .06544 1.24853 1.559
Equity in treatment 3.0604 .06456 1.23166 1.517

Extrinsic Motivational factors and satisfaction

With regard to the satisfaction of the employees towards the extrinsic motivational factors of the employees, it is
relatively less than the intrinsic motion since all the mean scores of the factors of extrinsic motivation under study is
less than 2.5 out of 5 except the variable salary. This indicates the employees are moderately satisfied with the
salary. However the compensation provided is not at par with the other institutions which is deduced from the mean
score 1.98. They are not motivated highly by the variables such as employees’ welfare, in house training
opportunities, post-employment security and the grants which are inferred from the mean scores which are all
around 1.9. Yet the organizations try to satisfy the employees by means of fringe benefits, job security, rewards and
other new forms of extrinsic motivation which can be inferred from the scores of the factors ranging from 2 to 2.5.
Yet in overall inference it can be said that the employees are not satisfied by the extrinsic factors of motivation.

Table 3:- Extrinsic Motivational factors and satisfaction of the employees.

Descriptions Mean Std. Error Std. Deviation Variance
Salary 2.5247 .05802 1.10692 1.225
Fringe benefits 2.4643 .05628 1.07377 1.153
Job security 2.3874 .05380 1.02635 1.053
Employee’s welfare 1.9011 .04388 .83722 .701
In house training opportunities 1.9945 .04701 .89687 .804
Post-employment security 1.9176 .04665 .88999 .792
Equity in compensation with the 1.9890 .06959 1.32777 1.763
industries
Grants 1.8462 .04886 .93211 .869
Rewards for work excellence 2.2005 .06288 1.19959 1.439
New forms like tour packages 2.2500 .06116 1.16686 1.362

Satisfaction towards Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivations

To compare the level of satisfaction of employees towards the intrinsic and extrinsic motivations of the universities, t’ test
has been conducted and the results are tabulated in table 4.

Table 4:- Satisfaction towards Intrinsic and Extrinsic motivations.

Descriptions Mean Std. Levene's Test t-test for Equality of Means

734
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 9(08), 729-738

Deviation for Equality of

Variances
F Sig. t df Sig. Mean Std. Error
(2- Difference Difference
tailed)
Intrinsic 2.65 .537 50.622 .000 15.717 728 .000 .519 .033
Motivation
Extrinsic 2.13 .332
Motivation

The results clearly imply that the employees of public universities of Tigray regional state are highly motivated by
intrinsic factors than the extrinsic factors which can easily be inferred from the mean statistics of the two factors
studied which are 2.65 and 2.13 respectively. Statistically the difference is observed by the t test conducted to check
the equality for the means. The mean difference is found as 0.513 which is statistically significant which is ensured
by the significant value 0.00. Hence it can be said that the extrinsic motivation for the employees is not equal with
that of intrinsic motivation. Though intrinsic motivation is at optimum level care should be taken to motivate the
employees in terms of extrinsic factors.

Organizational commitment of the employees

The organizational commitment of the employees has been measured with three components such as Affective
Commitment, Continuance Commitment and Normative Commitment as indicated by Allen and Meyor (1999).
Three statements for each component are selected from the Allen and Meyor (1999) scale of organizational
commitment measurement instrument and measured on a five point Likert scale. The results of the descriptive
statistics of the statements of are tabled in Table 5.

Table 5:- Organizational commitment of the employees.

Organizational Descriptions Mean Std. Std. Variance
commitment Error Deviation
Components
Affective Component I would be very happy to spend 2.6758 .05683 1.08426 1.176
the rest of my career in this
organization.
I really feel as if this 2.0165 .04469 .85264 .727
organization’s problems are my
own.
This organization has a great deal 2.0165 .04732 .90286 .815
of personal meaning for me.
Continuance It would be very hard for me to 3.0879 .06171 1.17737 1.386
Component leave my job at this organization
right now even if I wanted to.
I believe I have too few options to 3.4010 .05757 1.09828 1.206
consider leaving this organization.
One of the major reasons I 4.4038 .05962 1.13744 1.294
continue to work for this
organization is that leaving would
require considerable personal
sacrifice
Normative Component I would feel guilty if I left this 2.0577 .05319 1.01475 1.030
organization now.
This organization deserves my 2.2885 .06290 1.19999 1.440
loyalty.
I would not leave my organization 2.3984 .06966 1.32910 1.766
right now because of my sense of
obligation to it.
Mean Organizational Commitment 2.705

735
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 9(08), 729-738

The results depict clearly that the employees have commitment to the work due to the continuance component of
the commitment. I.e they are committed to the work due to not having other options which can be inferred from the
mean scores observed for the continuance component which are considerably high (all the scores are more than
three). The affective and normative components of organizational commitment of the employees is at less than the
moderate level which can be understood easily from the mean scores which do range from 2 to 2.5 for all the
statements of the components. Overall the organizational commitment of the employees is at moderate level which
is realized by the mean of the mean scores 2.705.

Relationship among Motivational Factors and Employee commitment

This section presents results of the multiple correlations analysis. The correlation test has been done to find the
correlations among the variables satisfaction on intrinsic factors of motivation, satisfaction on extrinsic factors of
motivation, overall satisfaction and organisational commitment.

Table 6:- Relationship among Motivational Factors and Organizational Commitment.

Descriptions Satisfaction Satisfaction Overall Organizational
in Extrinsic in Intrinsic satisfaction Commitment
Factors Factors in
Motivation
Satisfaction in Pearson Correlation 1
Extrinsic Sig. (2-tailed)
Factors
Satisfaction in Pearson Correlation -0.078
Intrinsic Factors Sig. (2-tailed) 0.343
Employee Pearson Correlation 0.467** 0.216** 0.153 1
Commitment Sig. (2-tailed) 0.001 0.008 0.003

Table 6 shows the results of a correlation test which concerns the relationship between employee commitment and
the motivational factors such as extrinsic factor and intrinsic factor. A significant positive correlation 0.467 (Sig=
0.001, P < 0.05) has been observed between satisfaction in extrinsic factors of motivation and overall employee
commitment. Suhaiel Amdan et al (2016) also found considerable impact of extrinsic factors on employees’
commitment. Though positive correlations have been observed between satisfaction in intrinsic factors and
employee commitment (0.216), when comparing the correlation statistics extrinsic factors play a dominant and
significant role in establishing the employee commitment. There is a slight negative correlation between (-.078)
satisfaction level of employees in intrinsic and extrinsic factors of motivation. It reflects the fact those who are
materialistic may not be influenced highly by the intrinsic factors of motivation. Here a less positive correlation
exists (0.153) between satisfaction of employees in overall motivation and the employee’s commitment towards the
organization. Hence the results depict motivation play a minimal role in establishing organizational commitment. In
other words though the employees are not satisfied much with the motivations they are committed to their work.

Discussions:-
The study is to find the relationship between satisfaction of employees towards the motivation received and their
organisational commitment in the public universities in Tigray region of Ethiopia. It is obvious that motivation is
one among the instruments that are applied by the organisations to improve organisational commitment and
performance. Highly motivated employees are the sources of success in many organizations. The motivation comes
from self (internally) either by intrinsic motivations or by extrinsic motivations depending on individual employees,
situations and the organisational culture. The results of this study also reveal the same fact. Extrinsic motivational
factors are dominant in building the organisational commitment which has moderate positive correlation with the
organisational commitment. Though the results show high intrinsic motivations exists in the universities under study
it has only less relationship with organisational commitment. It is due to the fact from the results that the employees
(teachers) do not feel that their work is recognized and they do not feel their contributions to the stakeholders of the
Universities. Especially in teaching career only less opportunities exits to grow exponentially. But they are highly
attracted towards extrinsic motivation and hence it builds organisational commitment. The inconsistent data (high
standard deviations) in case of many variables also highlights the fact the same kind of motivation can not be
suitable to all individuals since individuals are unique by nature. The study has also found a minimum positive
correlation between satisfaction towards the motivation and organizational commitment. It shows the satisfied

736
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 9(08), 729-738

employees in terms of the motivations received will be committed to their work and organisations. Introspection of
the results obtained show clear directions to the universities under study. The Universities must focus on
strengthening the extrinsic motivations through which the Universities can build highly committed teachers. The
results also bring out the need for new research to explore the tools that build organisational commitment among the
employees. I, e though motivation is a tool for establishing organisational commitment there other unexplored
factors do exist and to be answered.

Limitations:-
This study finds the relationship between satisfaction of employees towards the motivation and their organisational
commitment. The variables considered to measure the satisfaction of employees towards the intrinsic and extrinsic
motivations are limited and there may be some extraneous motivations which may also cause this result. Moderating
factors which may affect the relationship have not been considered. This may also affect the results. Since the study
is limited to the Universities in Tigray region of Ethiopia, the results can not be generalised.

Conclusion:-
Due to the contributions of teachers to the society they are highly recognised. Yet the focus on how they can be
motivated to build the organisational commitment has not got its importance as well. This study explores extrinsic
factors of motivation play a dominant role among them in building organisational commitment. Hence more focus
should be made on this issue to have a better society.

References:-
1. A.S. Shirashetti (2012). Prospects and Problems of MSMEs in India, International Journal of Multidiciplinary
and Academic Research, 1(2),1-7.
2. Allen, N. J. & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective, continuance and
normativecommitment to the organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18.
3. Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A., & Tighe, E. M. (1994). The Work Preference Inventory:
Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(5),
950-967.
4. Amir Sohail, Robina Safdar, Salma Saleem, Samara Ansar & M. Azeem (2014). Effect of Work Motivation and
Organizational Commitment onJob Satisfaction: (A Case of Education Industry in Pakistan) Global Journal of
Management and Business Research: A Administration and Management. Volume 14 Issue 6, 41-45.
5. Anderson, E. and Weitz, B. (1992). The Use of Pledges to Build and Sustain Commitment in Distribution
Channels. Journal of Marketing Research, 29, 21-26.
6. Asha & Dr Uma Warrier (2017). A Study on the effect of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Employee Motivation on
Organisational Commitment with respect to IT Sector. IOSR Journal of Business and Management. 19(11), 01-
05.
7. Aslı Beyhan Acar (2014), Do Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation Factors Differ for Generation X and Generation
Y?, International Journal of Business and Social Science 5(5), 12-20.
8. Ayenachew A. Woldegiyorgis (2013). Challenges of the Academic Profession in Ethiopian Public Universities,
'Extending Boundaries' , the INIE Annual Conference, 17 -18 June, 2013, Lisbon, Portugal
9. Balfour DL, Wechsler B. (1996,). Organizational commitment: Antecedents and outcomes in public
organizations. Pub Prod Manag Rev 19(3):256-77.
10. Biljana Dordevic (2004). Employee Commitment in Times of Radical Organisational Changes. Economics and
Organisation, 2(2), 111-117.
11. Curtis CR, Upchurch RS, Severt DE (2009). Employee motivation and organizational commitment: a
comparison of tipped and no tipped restaurant employees. Int. J. Hosp. Tourism Adm., 10: 253-269.
12. De Silva DAM, Yamao M (2006). The involvement of female labor in seafood processing in Sri Lanka: Impact
of organizational fairness, organizational commitment and supervisor evaluation on employee commitment. In
Choo PS, Hall SJ, Williams MJ (eds.) Global Symposium on Gender and Fisheries. Seventh Asian Fisheries
Forum, 1-2 December, 2004, Penang, Malaysia, pp. 103-114.
13. Dwivedula, Ravikiran, & Müller, R. (2011), Work Motivation as a Determinant of Organizational and
Professional Commitment in Case of Temporary Organizations: Theoretical Perspectives, International
Research Network for Organizing by Projects IRNOP 10, University of Quebec, Montreal, 1-27
14. Edralin, D. M. (2008). Innovative Human Resource Management (HRM) Practices as Predictors of Employee
Job Involvement and OrganizationalCommitment. Asian Journal of Technology Innovation, 16, 67–81.

737
ISSN: 2320-5407 Int. J. Adv. Res. 9(08), 729-738

15. Edward L Deci and Richard M Ryan. (1980). The empirical exploration of intrinsic motivational processes.
Advances in experimental social psychology 13, 39–80.
16. Fauziah Wan, Y. & Tan Shen, K. (2013), Generation Differences in Work Motivation: From Developing
Country Perspective. International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences, 2 (4), 97-103.
17. George L. & Sabapathy T. (2011). Work Motivation of Teachers: Relationship with Organizational Commitment,
Canadian Social Science, 7(1), 90-99.
18. Giancola, F. L. (2014). Should HR Professionals Devote More Time to Intrinsic Rewards? Compensation &
Benefits Review, 46(1), 25-31.
19. Grabner, I., & Speckbacher, G. (2009). How to control creative work: the role of intrinsic motivation and task
programmability for control system design. Journal of Economics and Business, 1-38.
20. Hanke Korpershoek (2016). Relationships among motivation, commitment, cognitive capacities, and
achievement in secondary education. Frontline Learning Research 4(3), 28-43.
21. Johnson RE, Chang CH, Yang LQ (2010). Commitment and motivation at work: The relevance of employee
identity and regulatory focus. Acad. Manag. Rev., 35: 226-245.
22. Kim WG, Leong JK, Lee YK (2005). Effect of service orientation on job satisfaction, organizational
commitment, and intention of leaving in a casual dining chain restaurant. Hosp. Manage., 24: 171-193.
23. Lida Gholizade, Irvan Masoudi , Mohammad Reza Maleki , Afsoon Aeenparast , Mehdi Barzegar (2014). The
Relationship between Job Satisfaction, Job Motivation, and Organizational Commitment in the Healthcare
Workers: a Structural Equation Modeling Study, International Journal of Hospital Research. 3(3),139-144.
24. Mahaney CR, Lederer AL (2006). The effect of intrinsic and extrinsic rewards for developers on information
systems project success. Proj. Manage. J., 37, 42-54.
25. Meyer J, Becker T, Vandenberghe C (2004). Employee commitment and motivation: A conceptual analysis and
integrative model. J. Appl. Psy., 89, 991-1007.
26. Meyer JP, Herscovitch L (2001). Commitment in the workplace: Toward a general model. Hum. Resour.
Manage. Rev., 11, 299-326.
27. Mong-Chien Hsu and Kao-Mao Chen ( 2012), A study on the relationship among Self-Motivation,
Organizational Commitment and Job Satisfaction of University faculty members in Taiwan, International
Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 3(3), 74- 81.
28. Mullins, L. (2009), Management and Organizational Behavior, 5th Edition. Portsmouth: Pitman Publishing.
29. Nasri, W. & Charfeddine, L. (2012). Motivating salespeople to contribute to marketing intelligence activities:
An expectancy theory approach. International Journal of Marketing Studies, 4(1), 168.
30. Pinder CC (1998). Work Motivation in Organizational Behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
31. Ryan, R. M. & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivations: Classic Definitions and New Directions.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 2000(25), 54-67.
32. Salim, M., Kamarudin, H., & Kadir, M. B. A. (2010). Factorsaffecting organizational commitment among lec-
turers in higher educational institution in Malaysia.Retrieved on 5th June 2019 from http://e-
library.unw.ac.id/images/jurnal/4e5e0cd9c876e8652f3e7ad21908b474.pdf
33. Savaneviciene, A.,&Stankeviciute, Z. (2011).Human resource management practices linkage with
organizational commitment and job satisfaction. Economics and Management, 16, 921–928.
34. Selma Altindis (2011), Job motivation and organizational commitment among the health professionals: A
questionnaire survey, African Journal of Business Management. 5(21), 8601-8609.
35. Suhaiel Amdan, Ramlee Abdul Rahman, Siti Asiah Md. Shahid, Saridan Abu Bakar, Masrur Mohd Khir and
Nur Atiqah Rochin Demong ( 2016), The Role of Extrinsic Motivation on the Relationship between Office
Environment and Organisational Commitment, Procedia Economics and Finance 37, 164 – 169.
36. Thomas, K. B., & Velthouse, B. A. (1990). Cognition elements of empowerment: an "interpretive" model of
intrinsic task motivation. Academy of Management Review, 15, 666-681.
37. Vincent, Nithila & Paul, Anjali. (2018). Employee motivation and retention: issues and challenges in startup
companies. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts. 6(1), 2050 – 2056.
38. Wong S, Siu V, T sang N (1999). The impact of demographic factors on Hong Kong hotel employees’ choice of
job-related motivators. Int. J. Contemp. Hosp. Manage., 11: 230-241.
39. Yeni Rahmawati and Norhasni Zainal Abiddin (2015), Relationship between Motivation and Organizational
Commitment among Scout Volunteers in East Kalimantan, Journal of Social Science Studies.
40. Yundong H, 2015 Impact of Intrinsic Motivation on Organizational Commitment: Empirical Evidences from
China, International Business and Management 11(3), 31-44.

738