The objective of this study is to evaluate the influence of the Public Service Motivation on job satisfaction. A Structural Equation’s Modeling was carried out in a Brazilian public university with 7,640 public servants. This study can be considered as a replication. The model that was tested showed that the influence between the PSM and job satisfaction is positive in the Brazilian context. The results showed that satisfaction is a PSM dependent variable and that the model can be used in mapping the importance that an individual give not only with the influence between the PSM and job satisfaction but also with each dimension from each construct directing assertively implement Human Resources policies.

Keywords: Public Service Motivation; PSM; Job Satisfaction; Structural Equation’s Modeling; Public University.

O objetivo deste estudo é avaliar a influência da Motivação de Serviço Público na satisfação no trabalho. Foi realizada uma Modelagem de Equações Estruturais em uma universidade pública brasileira com 7.640 servidores públicos. Este estudo pode ser considerado uma replicação. O modelo testado mostrou que a relação entre o PSM e a satisfação no trabalho é positiva no contexto brasileiro. Os resultados mostraram que a satisfação é uma variável dependente do PSM e que o modelo pode ser utilizado para mapear a importância que um indivíduo atribui não só com a relação entre o PSM e a satisfação no trabalho, mas também com cada dimensão de cada construto direcionando de maneira assertiva as políticas de Recursos Humanos.

Palavras-chave: Motivação do Serviço Público; PSM; Satisfação no Trabalho; Modelagem de Equações Estruturais; Universidade pública.

1 Introduction

The Public Service Motivation has received, during the last 30 years, growing attention from researchers and public administration professionals has become an international multidisciplinary and multi-sectoral theme (SCHOTT, 2019). This led to studies, especially those about the antecedents and results of Public Service Motivation, related to job satisfaction, performance and organizational commitment, with satisfaction being the most frequent correlation (RITZ, BREWER; NEUMANN, 2016). The theme of this study is composed of two constructs: The Public Service Motivation (PSM) and job satisfaction.

PSM is a specific pro-social motivation oriented towards society in general and the public interest and can be found in individuals linked to tasks and organizations focused on the public service, regardless of the area of activity or whether they are public servants (BALLART; RICO, 2018; VANDENABEELE, et al., 2018; RITZ, et al., 2020).

Similarly, job satisfaction also received attention from the researchers. For Siqueira and Gomide Jr. (2004), job satisfaction is the affective bond that the individual has with his or her work. Siqueira (2008) complements the definition, declaring that job satisfaction represents the totality of how much an individual has pleasurable experiences in the organizations’ context. The author goes further on when she affirms that the concept is multidimensional and that it can be divided into satisfaction with colleagues, salary, promotions, work, and leadership.

In a research carried out on the Taylor and Francis, Wiley, Sage and Spell’s platforms, related to the years of 2012 to 2021, studies were found in which the authors Vandenabeele (2014), Belle and Cantarelli (2015), Quratulain and Khan (2015), and Liu and Perry (2016), among others, suggest future researches that involve the constructs of PSM, satisfaction and Public Administration, to be expanded the other diverse areas of Public Administration. However, up to that moment, it was not possible to locate articles which were related, at the same time, with the referred constructs in the Brazilian universities.

The universities are now competing in a global market which, up to the end of the 20^th century, practically did not exist. According to Robert Cowen, with the advent of the “World Class University,” they became ranked, classified and competed with each other. The emphasis of the university work is now on economic indicators, leadership, and quantitative research. The institutions, which up to that moment, had professors, researchers, and employees dedicated to teaching and research work, faced a change in the way that work was structured: workers hired without any form of permanent link with the institution, short deadlines for activities and precarious conditions (MEC, 2015). Within this framework of changes in the environment of university organizations, is the target of this research.

Replication is a principle of science that confers reliability to research and validates internationally known results, but also prevents those researches without due conceptual and analytical rigor become a reference and perpetuate a misreading of reality (IOANNIDIS, 2005; BLOCK; KUCKERTZ, 2018). This study can be considered as a replication, since, according to the bibliometric research made in February 2021, there is only one that used the theoretical model of this study and in which data collection was carried out in the country. The study focusing on the Brazilian scenario (DUARTE; TEIXEIRA; SOUZA, 2019), which deals with the two central constructs of this research at the same time, represented PSM and job satisfaction as multidimensional, however, in the formulation of hypotheses, in the theoretical model and in the analysis of results, satisfaction was modeled as one-dimensional. In addition, the analysis method by Duarte, Teixeira and Souza (2019), regression analysis, differed from what was done in this work (structural equation modeling).

To promote high public performance, it is necessary to have organizational strategies and Human Resources (HR) policies to safeguard public values. HR strategies need to be developed in line with the organizational mission and be designed and implemented to cultivate the skills, motivations and opportunities of the public workforce by ensuring that the public mission is translated into appropriate products and outcomes for society. In fact, the extent to which public organizations and human resources work together will directly influence the creation of public value. Thus, the fuel for increased performance will come from the strengths, skills and abilities of the employees, which at the same time will determine the range of possible strategies (RIPOLL; RITZ, 2022).

Data was collected at a Brazilian federal university. It is classified as a governmental institution. The justification for such a choice is based on two points of view: academic and organizational. For the academic perspective, it is expected that the study will contribute to supply the locus about the theme in Brazil, thus expanding the research agenda of the constructs and giving robustness to the theme since academics have concentrated in developed countries, and the social and cultural differences need to be assessed on how generalizable the construction of PSM can be (LIU; et al., 2008). It is also expected to contribute to Human Resources Management in the course of research, expanding the original theoretical model of PSM (PERRY, 1996), by combining it with the multidimensional model of job satisfaction by Siqueira (2008), making it so a PSM model closer to the national context (VANDENABEELE, et al., 2014).

From the organizational point of view, the expectancy is that the results of this study can help to improve the public administration management functions, as the public servants are an important resource to determine the quality, effectiveness, and responsiveness for citizens, especially in periods when the public resources are scarce (VANDENABEELE; SKELCHER, 2015). Furthermore, according to Perry (2016) and Christensen et al., (2017), the management function of the public administration is disappearing due to the lack of research that focuses on the knowledge and solutions which can be used to help public administration’s practice.

The leading question and that will also be the main objective of this work is: what is the influence of the Public Service Motivation on job satisfaction, from the perspective of the employees of a Federal University in Brazil? Thus, to answer this question, the theoretical reference analyzes the studies that were performed and establishes the influence about the constructs that were researched.

2 Theoretical reference

2.1The Public Service Motivation Theory

The public service is frequently used as a synonym of government service that covers everyone that works in the public sector, but public service means much more than a place of employment, for it is a concept, an attitude, a sense of duty and even a sense of public morality (PERRY; WISE, 1990).

In the first article presenting the PSM as a theory, Perry and Wise (1990) conducted a theoretical review about public service motivation and postulated that the understanding of the public servants’ motives and the way to stimulate motivation were at a preliminary phase. The referred authors defined the Public Service Motivation – PSM, as an individual predisposition to respond to motivations based primarily or exclusively on public institutions, being that the motivations can be divided into three types:

Initially, Perry and Wise (1990) summarized the PSM into three prepositions: The greater the PSM of an individual; greater is the probability that he/she will seek to be part of a public organization. In public organizations, a PSM is positively related to the individual’s performance. And finally, public organizations that attract members with high levels of PSM are likely to be less dependent on material incentives to manage individual performance.

In 2010, Perry, Hondeghem and Wise reexamined the three original prepositions which had already been published about PSM up to that moment. It was possible to conclude that: It is necessary to be aware that the public service motives are not the only one in the selection-retention-attraction process. Individuals perform public services for rational reasons, self or instrumental interests. Empirical evidence shows that the researchers vary in their understanding about organizational incentives and there is yet no consensus as to whether public employees attribute less importance to organizational incentives than their colleagues of the private sector. And, the meaning of PSM varies and is less institutionalized in some countries than in others.

Several studies about the PSM theory have been undertaken but, in general, they are restricted to only one country. Kim and Vandenabeele (2010) state that as the academic research about PSM has grown and the geographic scope has expanded, scholars have questioned the conceptual composition and if the PSM’s dimensions are applicable globally. The findings demonstrate that although there is evidence of PSM in most of the countries, the construction has to be improved in a conceptual form and that there is a demand for researches that focus on practical applications. Complementing this reasoning, Perry (2016) affirms that there is still a necessity of applied research oriented to resolve the Public Administration’s problems and that this lack of practical research is bringing to an end the administrative function of the Public Administration.

Vandenabeele et al., (2014) and Christensen, et al., (2017) verified that the research about PSM proliferated in parallel with concerns about how to improve the performance of personnel in public service. For the theory to become more substantially valid, it is necessary to include contextual elements that influence the PSM, relating variables such as gender or age with the PSM, and the integration of the PSM theory with other perspective theories, including management and leadership.

Bozeman and Su (2014) and Schott et al., (2018) declare that, with the increasing popularity of the studies about the PSM, their central concepts have been continuously submitted to critical analysis, but these analyses are more focused in the construction of measures and models than on concepts and that there is still little understanding of what is to be motivated means for management practices. The authors propose that more careful analyzes be carried out, taking into account the disposition of the PSM’s environmental aspects and the use of configurations.

The PSM results in higher levels of organizational identification, leading to higher levels of performance at work because public servants perceive the destiny and the results of the organization as if it was theirs. Furthermore, the results are relevant when demonstrating that leadership is essential for the achievement of organizational objectives. However, although the association between PSM, performance at work and leadership has received more attention in recent years, there is limited knowledge about its effects on management practices (MIAO, et al., 2018; NHEDE, 2019).

To Measure of Public Service Motivation, Perry (1996) considered that three would be six dimensions linked to the PSM: attraction to the creation of public policies, commitment with the public interest, civic duty, social justice, self-sacrifice, and compassion. Using pre-tests and factorial analysis, the author perfected a tool for four dimensions: commitment with the public interest, compassion, self-sacrifice and attraction to the formulation of public policies, in a total of 24 assertions. All of the statements were answered using a five-point scale, in which 1 were classified poorly to 5 highly motivated. The dimensions were defined as:

This chapter listed some studies about the PSM theory, where the intention was to show briefly how the international studies about the theme are at the moment. Following, a description of Siqueira’s (2008) scale of job satisfaction and some of studies that used it.

The Scale of Job Satisfaction – SJS (Siqueira 2008): it is a multidimensional measure, created and validated in Brazil, and has as its objective to evaluate the degree of the worker’s satisfaction at work. The scale – with a score of 7 points, in which 1-totally dissatisfied to 7-totally satisfied with five dimensions were defined as:

Siqueira’s (2008) satisfaction model has been used in research in Brazil, providing a vision of the Brazilian reality about job satisfaction. Furthermore, it shows in a general manner and also by each dimension, how to structure the satisfaction of a group or individual, providing subsidies for the managers to obtain better results from their teams.

Traldi and Fiuza (2012), Demo et al., (2013) highlighted that research about job satisfaction had been successfully carried out in the area of Organizational Psychology. Considering that, the Personnel Management policies are predictors of organizational commitment and job satisfaction at work, the highest percentage of job satisfaction is linked to the leadership, to the colleagues and the nature of work.

The managers should have a constant concern in maintaining high levels of performance at work and, for this to occur, job satisfaction is an important variable, which is structured mainly in interpersonal relationships. The relationship with the colleagues and the superiors is the one that propitiation the most gratifying and pleasurable feelings, contributing to organizational satisfaction and commitment. Thus for the satisfaction to occur, the leadership, especially the transformational, has a significant role (VESPASIANO; MENDES, 2017; PAIVA, et al., 2017; DOMINGUES, et al., 2018).

The studies about job satisfaction, as a rule, are designed to allow a reflection about the motives that lead an individual to work, their aspirations, interactions and behaviors in the working environment (ANDRADE, et al., 2017). Financial aspects (salary and promotions) have not shown to be highly significant for job satisfaction, despite having presented positive results in the studies (VESPASIANO; MENDES, 2017). It is understood, therefore, that the organizations should invest in HR policies that focus on the positive perception about salaries and promotions, since, according to Paiva et al., (2017) and Bizarria et al., (2018) satisfied workers tend to present positive attitudes with relation to colleagues, to the organization and a greater organizational commitment.

The Professional activities are influenced by several factors, such as the work rhythm, the pressure for results, the relationship between the team and the working structure. According to Almeida et al. (2018), there is a negative and statistically correlation between occupational stress and job satisfaction and their dimension. For the authors, the relationships are classified as moderate and negative, demonstrating that the higher the occupational stress, lower is job satisfaction. However, it is not possible to say that there is an association between the high level of satisfaction and the low level of occupational stress.

2.3The Influence of the Motivation (PSM) and job satisfaction

Initially, this study was to propose the influence of the PSM’s four dimensions (PERRY; WISE, 1990) and Siqueira’s (2008) job satisfaction model of five dimensions, using the internationally adopted model to analyze the influence between the PSM and job satisfaction. The several models that were found treated the job satisfaction as a unidimensional construct when relating it with the PSM (LIU, et al., 2008; VANDENABEELE, et al., 2012; HOMBERG, et al., 2015), differing, therefore, from Siqueira’s (2008) multidimensional model. The correlation between PSM and job satisfaction is a constant in studies about public administration, particularly in the area of people management. In studies with the European civil servants Vandenabeele (2009), Vandenabeele et al., (2012) correlated PSM and job satisfaction. The authors concluded that the correlation has a positive influence. However, in Vandenabeele (2009), the self-sacrifice did not adapt in the proposed model and in Vandenabeele’s et al. (2012) model, the same occurred with compassion.

Similar studies were carried out by Kaipeng, et al., (2014), Zhu, et al., (2014) and Liu and Perry (2016) in China. Results indicate that the PSM is a strong predictor of job satisfaction.

Other researches also confirm the positive influence between PSM and job satisfaction. Also, some other suggestions were raised. The first concern is with the managers who aim to increase job satisfaction, for they should emphasize on the response to self-sacrifice and the commitment to the public interest. Another suggestion is that organizations should have internal policies that public servants can understand the impact of their work on the society since this understanding will produce more satisfaction than the work itself (BREAUGH, et al., 2017). Andersen and Kjeldsen (2010) and Kjeldsen and Hansen (2018) tested whether the influence between the PSM and job satisfaction differs between the public and private sectors. The results showed that the PSM is positively associated with job satisfaction, but that the association is stronger in the public sector.

In order to study the validity of the influence PSM-job satisfaction, the following hypothesis was proposed:

H1: Public Service Motivation has a positive influence with job satisfaction.

3 Method

This work is characterized as a quantitative survey research, and is registered and approved in the Research Ethics Committee of the “Fundação Mineira de Educação e Cultura, Brasil” (Foundation of Education and Culture of Minas Gerais State – Brazil), under the number CAAE 80230617.2.0000.5155.

For data collection, 7,460 questionnaires were sent online, through the institutional e-mail, exclusively to the servers in effective exercise on the date of sending the questionnaires (3,074 professors and 4,386 administrative technicians) over the period of March and June of 2018, divided into three parts: with 24 questions for the Public Service Motivation Scale (PERRY, 1996), 25 questions for the Job Satisfaction Scale (SIQUEIRA, 2008), and a socio-demographic questionnaire with 7 questions. Of this total, 655 questionnaires were answered (207 professors and 448 administrative technicians). The version of Perry's questionnaire (1996) that was used, in Portuguese, it was the version validated in Brazil by Buiatti and Shinyashiki (2011). According to the authors cited as a source for this work, the PSM construct is formative Job Satisfaction is reflexive.

In relation to the technique of data analysis, a multivariate analysis was performed, divided into confirmatory factorial analysis and structural equation modeling (SEM). This type of procedure aims to evaluate how this influence happened between the two constructs (job satisfaction and PSM), testing the constructs validity and allowing, in this manner, to verify if the data that was collected show evidence that they actually behave like the model that was idealized and proposed (HAIR, et al., 2014).

For this stage of analysis, it was considered that both the PSM as satisfaction were multidimensional constructs of second order, in which the PSM was the independent variable and satisfaction the dependent. Furthermore, according to Hair et al. (2014), the use of second-order constructs contributes to improving the model that is being studied with the objective of it being more parsimonious and helps in the development of the theory. For the analysis and modeling, the software was used SMARTPLS version 3.1.

4 Data, Hypothesis Testing and Results

For a better understanding of the model, it is important to describe the population that was studied: 7460 questionnaires were sent by e-mail to the public servants of the university. Of this total, 655 responses were received. 60% of the respondents were female, 39% were male and 1% chose not to be categorized into conventional gender options (male or female). 35.5% of respondents are in the age group between 31 and 40 years and 26.6% between 41 and 50 years, being, therefore, the two largest concentrations of respondents.

Respondents have Higher Education (11%), Specialization (30%), Master's (17%), Doctorate (21%), or Post-Doctoral (15%). As for the positions held, 39% of the interviewees are professors, 4% are administrative technicians at basic level, 34% are administrative technicians at medium level and 23% are administrative technicians at higher levels. It is noteworthy that 81% of the survey participants do not have management positions in which they receive an additional salary for that.

As part of the analysis, some verifications are performed, including the missing data, outliers, normality, and linearity. There was no missing data since the online questionnaire made it mandatory to answer all the questions. According to Hair et al. (2014), the outliers can distort the study’s estimates, as they are standard disparate responses concerning the variables standard, being necessary evaluation and treatment of these cases, before proceeding with the analysis. Thus, it was verified if the responses originated from individuals that do not belong to the population of interest, such as students, outsource staff, and retired public servants. Concurrently, the multivariate cases were identified, using Mahalanobis’ (D²) distance method divided by the number of degrees of freedom (which is equal to the number of variables in the multivariate regression). In this study, no multivariate outliers were found.

In social science studies, there is a premise that the variables follow a normal distribution. Hair et al., (2014) state that the data that is being studied to evaluate if they behave according to the theoretical distribution that was studied – that was done in this stage. Of the total of 49 variables (each one represents an assertion), 31 presented significant asymmetry, that is, high averages. Thus, the analyses of the normal parameters of asymmetry and kurtosis show that an impressive part of the variables presents deviations from normality. However, the magnitude of the deviations is not worrisome, having only a few indicators that present values greater than 1 in absolute terms. Even so, the deviations suggest the application of a robust estimation to the deviation of normality, such as the PLS estimation.

With the aim of evaluating and discussing the conditions and assumptions required in this study, as well as evaluating possible limitations and cautions in interpreting the results, applications such as SMARTPLS and LVPLS.

The techniques on which the correlation analyzes are supported by the premise that the influence between the variables are linear, considering the Pearson coefficient as an index of the degree of linear adjustment between the variables. Thus, in the topic, this behavior was analyzed, and the linearity of the influence of indicators was tested using the significance of this Pearson estimation.

In the matrix that contained 1,176 non-redundant correlations, a total of 845 (72%) of the estimates were positive, significant, and greater than 0.08. Other 2 (0.17%) were negative, significant, and inferior to -0.08. Thus, a total of 847 correlations were significant at the 5% two-tailed level, which attests considerable adherence to the linearity of the proposed indicators.

In sequence, a redundancy and multicollinearity analysis was performed. According to Kline (2005), there is a potential for database redundancy when high correlations occur between the variables. In order to prevent this, it should be analyzed if there are any correlation greater than 0.90 in absolute terms, but this did not occur for the variables. All the indicators present inflation measures of variance (tolerance and VIF) below the limits of 10.

For the factorial analysis stage, the quality of the measurement was first verified through the dimensionality evaluation of measurements, by applying the exploratory factorial analysis with the extraction of the main components (GERBING; ANDERSON, 1988). In this case, the assumption that the number of extracted factors with self-values greater than 1 corresponds to the number of dimensions that exist in each scale, was applied. The results show that the constructs presented only one dimension with a KMO measurement greater than 0.70 (with an acceptable minimum of 0.60) (Table 1).

Indicator	KMO	Percentage of Explained Variance
The attraction for the formulation of public policies	0.61	55.70%
Self-sacrifice	0.88	45.29%
Commitment with the public interest	0.72	47.17%
Compassion	0.87	43.06%
Satisfaction with the leadership	0.90	82.13%
Satisfaction with the colleagues	0.87	74.76%
Satisfaction with the promotions	0.87	69.52%
Satisfaction with the salary	0.90	79.94%

Notes: This table shows the value of KMO. All were accepted values for the current research.

It is possible to notice in Table I that, in a general form, after the debugging of dimensional solutions that were obtained, it was possible to obtain a good adequacy analysis for the Job Satisfaction Scale, with the explained variance by the factors between 69.52% and 83.13%, KMO measurements of the sample’s adequacy between 0.87 and 0.90 and significant sphericity tests of Bartllet, demonstrating the existence of favorable conditions to apply the AFE (HAIR, et al., 2014). The PSM Scale presented an extracted variance lower than the desire for the “Attraction for the formulation of public policies' ' (55.70%) and lower than the acceptable for the other dimensions.

It can be observed that the conditions for the application of the AFE are acceptable, with a considerable percentage of the constructs extracted variance, which reinforces the unidimensionality of the measurements. Therefore, it was preferred to maintain the indicators whose commonalities were below the level of 0.40, for they can still reach the convergent validity in the next stages. For such, the convergent validity method suggested by Bagozzi and Phillips (1991) was applied. This proposal seeks to verify the convergent validity, by means of an evaluation of the construct’s factorial significance at a level of 1%. Furthermore, it is possible to verify if the indicators can explain at least 40% of the indicators’ variance so that a minimum value of 0.63 should be obtained for the square of standardized factor loads.

In order to treat the model, an estimation of partial least squares was used, whose robustness to deviations from normality is evident. It should also be noted that the constructs whose dimensionality indicated two factors were operationalized as factors of second order, according to the approach proposed by (HAIR, et al., 2014). In this approach, the indicators of the dimensions of a factor of second order are inserted as indicators of the highest order construct (second order). Most of the final indicators obtained adequate levels of reliability, for all of them, have a significant load at the level of 1% (value T>2.23). Furthermore, the factorial loads are above the suggested level of 0.50 (Table 2).

Notes: 1) factor regression weight for the construct; 2) Estimate error; 3) t-value of the regression estimate

Indicator	Weight	Error	T Value
AFPP_01 <- Attraction	0.74	0.03	28.72
AFPP_02 <- Attraction	0.72	0.03	25.35
AFPP_03 <- Attraction	0.78	0.02	36.84
AUTO_01 <- Self-sacrifice	0.57	0.04	14.83
AUTO_02 <- Self-sacrifice	0.69	0.03	26.08
AUTO_03 <- Self-sacrifice	0.70	0.03	23.46
AUTO_04 <- Self-sacrifice	0.72	0.02	31.19
AUTO_05 <- Self-sacrifice	0.60	0.03	17.80
AUTO_06 <- Self-sacrifice	0.70	0.02	28.95
AUTO_07 <- Self-sacrifice	0.71	0.03	26.30
AUTO_08 <- Self-sacrifice	0.71	0.03	26.46
CIP_01 <- Commitment	0.72	0.02	30.78
CIP_02 <- Commitment	0.67	0.03	24.26
CIP_03 <- Commitment	0.67	0.04	18.53
CIP_04 <- Commitment	0.60	0.04	15.38
CIP_05 <- Commitment	0.73	0.03	29.07
COMP_01 <- Compassion	0.65	0.04	17.90
COMP_02 <- Compassion	0.59	0.04	14.63
COMP_03 <- Compassion	0.63	0.04	17.79
COMP_04 <- Compassion	0.55	0.04	14.21
COMP_05 <- Compassion	0.75	0.02	33.57
COMP_06 <- Compassion	0.64	0.03	23.49
COMP_07 <- Compassion	0.71	0.03	28.33
COMP_08 <- Compassion	0.69	0.03	23.66
MED_AFPP <- Public Service Motivation	0.70	0.03	23.84
MED_AUTO <- Public Service Motivation	0.85	0.01	70.29
MED_CIP <- Public Service Motivation	0.89	0.01	92.55
MED_COMP <- Public Service Motivation	0.88	0.01	78.19
MED_SATCHEF <- Job Satisfaction	0.78	0.02	35.24
MED_SATCOL <- Job Satisfaction	0.76	0.03	26.68
MED_SATPROM <- Job Satisfaction	0.81	0.01	55.97
MED_SATSAL <- Job Satisfaction	0.69	0.03	22.20
MED_SATTRAB <- Job Satisfaction	0.81	0.02	38.72
SATCHEF_01 <- With leadership	0.86	0.01	60.60
SATCHEF_02 <- With leadership	0.89	0.01	86.52
SATCHEF_03 <- With leadership	0.93	0.01	120.32
SATCHEF_04 <- With leadership	0.94	0.01	140.77
SATCHEF_05 <- With leadership	0.91	0.01	85.22
SATCOL_01 <- With colleagues	0.80	0.02	45.94
SATCOL_02 <- With colleagues	0.90	0.01	89.91
SATCOL_03 <- With colleagues	0.89	0.01	73.67
SATCOL_04 <- With colleagues	0.84	0.02	47.82
SATCOL_05 <- With colleagues	0.88	0.01	72.00
SATPROM_01 <- With promotions	0.80	0.02	40.56
SATPROM_02 <- With promotions	0.74	0.02	35.52
SATPROM_03 <- With promotions	0.85	0.01	60.78
SATPROM_04 <- With promotions	0.89	0.01	83.21
SATPROM_05 <- With promotions	0.87	0.01	79.91
SATSAL_01 <- With salary	0.89	0.01	73.72
SATSAL_02 <- With salary	0.90	0.01	83.66
SATSAL_03 <- With salary	0.85	0.01	60.35
SATSAL_04 <- With salary	0.91	0.01	99.96
SATSAL_05 <- With salary	0.92	0.01	100.49
SATTRAB_01 <- With the nature of work	0.82	0.02	36.98
SATTRAB_02 <- With the nature of work	0.83	0.02	52.38
SATTRAB_03 <- With the nature of work	0.78	0.03	30.92
SATTRAB_04 <- With the nature of work	0.67	0.03	21.33
SATTRAB_05 <- With the nature of work	0.81	0.02	42.68

For the analysis of the discriminant variable, the method suggested by Fornell and Larcker (1981) was used, which consists in comparing the average variance extracted from the constructs with a shared variance between the theoretical constructs (R2 obtained by means of the correlation of the estimated scores in the PLS), and when the shared variance between the constructs exceeds the internally explained variance (of the indicators), there is evidence of discriminant validity. For all the main factors (disregarding the dimensions of factors of second order with their dimension of first order) evidence was obtained of discriminant validity, as it can be seen in Table 2. It refers to the PSM construct formed by its dimensions and the job satisfaction construct reflecting its dimensions. Thus, based on the proposed methods, it is possible to attest the discriminant validity of all the construct pairs of the model, proving that they measure different aspects of the phenomena of interest (HAIR, et al., 2014) (Table 3).

Table 3 – Evaluation of the discriminant validity and overall quality of the measurement

Notes: The diagonal is the AVE itself (it means how much each construct explains itself), to facilitate the visualization. Above the diagonal are the correlations between the constructs. Below are the high squared correlations. Composite Reliability (CR with cut-off ≥ 0.70); Percentage of Explained Variance (AVE with cut-off point ≥ 0.50); Cronbach’s Alpha (CA with cut-off point com ≥ 0.80).

Evaluating the reliability of a scale is an attempt to estimate the variance percentual of this scale that is free of random errors. Usually, the Cronbach’s Alpha is used to estimate the scale's reliability, but this step only measures error-free variance that occurs in one the only moment of the measurement, being, therefore, considered a measure of internal consistency. The values greater than 0.8 suggest that the scales have adequate consistency, but limits up to 0.6 can be accepted for studies that are treating pioneering scaling applications (NUNNALLY; BERNSTEIN, 1994). The dimensions of self-sacrifice (0.46), commitment with the public interest (0.43) and compassion (0.42) did not reach the necessary minimum in the AVE. “The percentage of variance criterion is an approach based on the achievement of a specified cumulative percentage of the total variance extracted by successive factors. The goal

is to ensure practical significance for the given factors by ensuring that they explain at least a specified amount of variance. In the social sciences, where information is generally less accurate, it is not uncommon to consider a solution that explains 60% of the total variance (and in some cases even less) to be satisfactory” (HAIR, et al., 2014, p.114). In this sense those values were accepted.

4.1 The test of the structural model

This section presents the structural model test that was done by applying modeling technique of structural equations, given its potentiality to test interrelation measuring models between the constructs in a single approach, as also considering the impact of the measurement’s errors in the estimates (FORNELL; LARCKER, 1981; PODSAKOFF, et al., 2003).

As shown, the study’s data does not follow a normal distribution, the reason why its applicability in this study would be limited. Furthermore, in the limit, the ideal sample to test this model using the traditional structural approach would be of 1,176 cases (number of non-redundant elements in the covariance matrix). For this reason, a Partial Least Squares – PLS estimation was considered as an alternative (HAENLEIN; KAPLAN, 2004). The method requires a minimum sample of 10 to 5 times of the construct’s indicator block with the highest number of independent variables (HAIR, et al., 2014). This will allow a test with a minimum of 55 responses, being an ideal level of 220 answers. Thus, the model’s test was completed using the PLS approach. The structural model that was tested can be seen below:

In terms of the hypotheses that were tested, the weights, standard error, T-tests, significance, and the results of hypotheses’ tests are presented in sequence (Table 4).

Note – 1 β is the standardized weight; 2 T is the value of t; 3 E.P.(β) is the standard error; 4 I.C.-95% is the confidence interval given by β ± 1.96* E.P.(β); 5 p-value is the significance of T for the sample of 302 cases, for a two-tailed test, and 6 R² is the R squared. R²

As indicative of the general predictive power of the model, the GoF was calculated, which indicated that 47.76% of the general variability of the data is explained by the proposed predictive model.

Thus, the hypothesis H1 (Public Service Motivation → Job satisfaction) was supported by the model, indicating that the PSM has a positive influence (beta, β 0.23, confidence interval, I.C. [0.13;0.33] and significative (p-value = 0.00) with job satisfaction, that is, the more motivated the server is, the more satisfied he will be at work. The positive influence was also found in the studies of Kaipeng, et al., (2014), Zhu, et al., (2014), Homberg, et al., (2015), Liu and Perry (2016), Breaugh, et al., (2017), Kjeldsen and Hansen (2018).

The positions of Vandenabeele (2009) and Vandenabeele et al., (2012) were not confirmed, since, in the theoretical model that was adopted in this research, all the PSM’s dimensions were positively related to job satisfaction. However, since the model was not able to explain completely the PSM’s influence on job satisfaction from the perspective of the University public servants, it is suggested that other constructs should be added to the model, such as demotivation and turnover, and have a more advanced analysis, with the objective of reaching a predictive power of 100% or close to that.

Duarte, Teixeira and Souza (2019) proposed, as a suggestion for future studies, that models be tested in which professors and administrative technicians had the levels of PSM and job satisfaction analyzed, in particular each dimension of the constructs, to verify if there are significant differences in these models. In order to obtain a higher predictive power, tests were carried out with models using only professors, only administrative technicians, a direct model in which all the dimensions were related directly to each other and, finally, a model in which the four PSM dimensions were treated as a construct of first order and were directly related to job satisfaction, also as a construct of first order. This last model was found in international research that relates the PSM with job satisfaction. The studies that were used as a theoretical reference, satisfaction is treated as a one-dimensional concept, and thus, the international model did not show itself to be adequate for this research. Here it should be noted that no control model obtained an explanation by the structural modeling and none has confirmed the hypothesis, showing that the proposed model, although with a moderate explanation, is adequate.

5 Conclusions

This study had the objective of analyzing the influence of Public Service Motivation on job satisfaction, from the perspective of the public servants of the Federal University in Brazil. The results showed a positive (β 0.23) and significativa influence that the Public Service Motivation and job satisfaction since the PSM is positively related to job satisfaction, which was confirmed by the proposed hypothesis.

Regarding to the academic contributions of this work, the applicability of PSM in a Brazilian federal public organization - public university - was demonstrated, thus helping to fill the initially identified research locus, contributing to the expansion of the research agenda, reinforcing the generalization of concept of PSM by combining it with a Latin American model of public administration and also with a national scale for measuring job satisfaction.

A new correlation model was validated between Public Service Motivation and job satisfaction, in which both constructs were treated as being of the first order, but taking into account the dimensions that each one of them has. With this model, it is expected that the studies, which are related to the PSM, will have a larger scope of models to be applied and replicated, since, up to then, no model existed that related the PSM and job satisfaction using Siqueira’s (2008) theoretical model, seeking, in this manner, to adapt to Brazilian studies. By creating and employing a new theoretical model, professionals, students, and researchers of Public Administration will have another tool that will allow the verification of how the PSM and the job satisfaction, together, affect the working attitude of each individual.

A limitation of the research that can be considered, is that it was carried out with only one type of federal institution (University), only one category of federal public servers (education servants), only performing quantitative analyses, and also because it is non-probabilistic and transversal. Furthermore, a proportional sample of respondents was not obtained, taking into account the number of public servants of each campus.

The test of this research’s structural model partially explained the influence of the PSM on job satisfaction, thus, for future studies it is suggested that other constructs should be added, in which the influence of the PSM on job satisfaction may be tested, as also the demotivation and the organizational citizenship behavior (OCB) in an advanced model.

As seen previously, the PSM and job satisfaction have a positive correlation. Thus, it is also suggested, as a future study, to test if the effects of daily bureaucratic practices (Red Tape) interfere in the relationship and in which of these two constructs the daily bureaucratic practices have more significant influence (be it positive or negative).

Not only the organization researched, but also the Brazilian Federal Public Administration, specifically public educational institutions, which have outsourced employees that perform the same administrative functions as the public servants. For this reason, it is also recommended for future studies, the use of the same model that was used in this research to test the influence of Public Service Motivation with job satisfaction, using this group as a sample, but also perform a comparative analysis between the public servants and outsourced workers.

References

ALMEIDA, D. M. et al. Policiais Militares do estado do Rio Grande do Sul: relação entre Satisfação no Trabalho e Estresse Ocupacional. Administração Pública e Gestão Social v. 10, p. 55-65, 2018.

ANDERSEN, L. B.; KJELDSEN, A. M. How Public Service Motivation Affects Job Satisfaction: A Question of Employment Sector or ‘Public Service Jobs’. In: EGPA CONFERENCE, 32., 2010, Toulouse. Proceedings… Available in: https://soc.kuleuven.be/io/egpa/HRM/toulouse/Andersen&Kjeldsen2010.pdf. Accessed 22 Nov 2018.

ANDRADE, C. Percepções dos colaboradores sobre as medidas organizacionais de conciliação da vida profissional e familiar. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Inovação, v. 4, n. 3, p. 46-63, 2017.

BAGOZZI, R. P.; YI, Y.; PHILLIPS, L. W. Assessing Construct Validity in Organizational Research. Administrative Science Quarterly, v. 36, nº 3, p. 421, 1991.

BALLART, X.; RICO, G. ‘Public or nonprofit? Career preferences and dimensions of public service motivation’, Public Administration, v. 96, nº 2, p. 404–420, 2018.

BELLE, N.; CANTARELLI, P. Monetary Incentives, Motivation, and Job Effort in the Public Sector: An Experimental Study With Italian Government Executives. Review of Public Personnel Administration, v. 35, nº 2, p. 99-123, 2015.

BIZARRIA, F. A. et al. Análise estrutural de relações entre motivação, satisfação e sugestões. BASE – Revista de Administração e Contabilidade da Unisinos, v. 15, p. 82-94, 2018.

BLOCK, J.; KUCKERTZ, A. Seven principles of effective replication studies: strengthening evidence base of management research. Manag Rev Q, v. 68, p. 355–359, 2018.

BOZEMAN, B.; SU, X. Public Service Motivation Concepts and Theory: A Critique. Public Administration Review, v. 75, nº 5, p. 700-710, 2014.

BREAUGH, J. et al. Work Motivation and Public Service Motivation: Disentangling Varieties of Motivation and Job Satisfaction. Public Management Review, v. 20, nº 10, p. 1423-1443, 2017.

BUIATTI, C. L.; SHINYASHIKI, G. T. Gestão de RH no Setor Público: Validação da Escala de PSM – Public Service Motivation. Iberoamerican Journal of Industrial Engineering, v. 3, nº 5, p. 118–139, 2011.

CHRISTENSEN, R. et al. Public Service Motivation Research: Lessons for Practice. Public Administration Review, v. 77, nº 4, p. 529-542, 2017.

DEMO, G. et al. Políticas De Gestão De Pessoas, Comprometimento Organizacional E Satisfação No Trabalho Na Livraria Cultura. Revista Alcance, v. 20, n. 2, p. 237–254, 2013.

DOMINGUES, J. et al. Inteligência emocional do funcionário como substituto da liderança transformacional. Revista Ciências Administrativas, [S. l.], v. 24, n. 3, 2019.

DUARTE, R. L.; TEIXEIRA, A.; SOUSA, L. G. A Relação entre a Motivação e a Satisfação no Trabalho dos Servidores Públicos. Revista de Carreiras e Pessoas, v. 9, n. 3, p. 393-413, 2019.

FORNELL, C.; LARCKER, D. F. Evaluating Structural Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, v. 18, nº 1, p. 39, Feb. 1981.

GERBING, D. W.; ANDERSON, J. C. An Updated Paradigm for Scale Development Incorporating Unidimensionality and Its Assessment. Journal of Marketing Research, v. 25, nº 2, p. 186, May 1988.

HAENLEIN, M.; KAPLAN, A. M. A Beginner’s Guide to Partial Least Squares Analysis. Understanding Statistics, v. 3, nº 4, p. 283-297, 2004.

HAIR JR., J. F. et al. Multivariate Data Analysis. 7^th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education, 2014.

HOMBERG, F.; MCCARTHY, D.; TABVUMA, V. A Meta-Analysis of the Relationship between Public Service Motivation and Job Satisfaction. Public Administration Review, v. 75, nº 5, p. 641-779, 2015.

IOANNIDIS, J. P. A. Why Most Published Research Findings Are False. PLoS Medicine, v. 2, n. 8, p. e124, 30 ago. 2005.

KAIPENG, G.; JUN, M.; XUEFEI, D. Research on the Impact of Public Service Motivation on Job Satisfaction: Taking the Chinese Civil Servants for Example. In: International Conference on Public Management, 2014. Proceedings… [S.l.]: Atlantis Press, 2014. Available in: http://download.atlantis-press.com/php/download_paper.php?id=13392. Accessed 10 Nov 2017.

KIM, S.; VANDENABEELE, W. A Strategy for Building Public Service Motivation. Research Internationally. Public Administration Review, v. 70, nº 5, p. 701-709, 2010.

KJELDSEN, A. M.; HANSEN, J. R. Sector Differences in the Public Service Motivation – Job Satisfaction Relationship: Exploring the Role of Organizational Characteristics. Review of Public Personnel Administration, v. 38, nº 1, p. 24-48, 2018.

KLINE, R. B. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 2^nd ed. New York: The Guilford Press, 2005.

LIU, B.; TANG, N.; ZHU, X. Public Service Motivation and Job Satisfaction in China: An Investigation of Generalisability and Instrumentality. International Journal of Manpower, v. 29, nº 8, p. 684-699, 2008.

LIU, B.; PERRY, J. L. The Psychological Mechanisms of Public Service Motivation: A Two-Wave Examination. Review of Public Personnel Administration, v. 36, nº 1, p. 4-30, 2016.

MEC/CAPES. (2015). Conferencistas problematizam transformações do ensino superior. Seminário internacional. Available in: http://www.capes.gov.br/sala-de-imprensa/noticias/7525-conferencistas-estrangeiros-problematizam-transformacoes-do-ensino-superior. Acessed 22 Mar 2019.

MIAO, Q. et al. Public service motivation and performance: The role of organizational identification. Public Money & Management, v. 39, n. 3, p. 1-9, 2018.

NHEDE, N. T. The role of leadership in fostering public service motivation in post-conflict states. International Journal of Management Practice, v. 12, n. 1, p. 81–93, 2019.

NUNNALLY, J. C.; BERNSTEIN, I. H. Psychometric theory. New Delhi: Tata Mcgraw-Hill Ed, 1994.

PAIVA, L. E. B. et al. Percepção da influência das políticas e práticas de recursos humanos na satisfação com o trabalho. Revista Pensamento Contemporâneo em Administração, v. 11, n. 1, p. 55, 11 abr. 2017.

PERRY, J. L. Antecedents of Public Service Motivation. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, v. 2, p. 181-197, 1997.

PERRY, J. L. Is Public Administration Vanishing? Public Administration Review. v. 76, p. 211-212, 2016.

PERRY, J. L.; WISE, L. R. The Motivational Bases of Public Service. Public Administration Review, v. 50, p. 363-373, 1990.

PERRY, J. L., HONDEGHEM, A.; WISE, L. R. Revisiting the Motivational Bases of Public Service: Twenty Years of Research and an Agenda for the Future. Public Administration Review, v. 70, p. 681-690, 2010.

PODSAKOFF, P. M. et al. Common Method Biases in Behavioral Research: A Critical Review of the Literature and Recommended Remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, v. 88, nº 5, p. 879-903, 2003.

QURATULAIN, S.; KHAN, A. K. Red Tape, Resigned Satisfaction, Public Service Motivation, and Negative Employee Attitudes and Behaviors: Testing a Model of Moderated Mediation. Review of Public Personnel Administration, v. 35, nº 4, p. 307-332, 2015.

RIPOLL, G.; RITZ, A. Public Service Motivation and Human Resource Management. In: STEIJN, B.; KNIES. E. (Org). Research Handbook on HRM in the Public Sector, Edward Elgar, p. 245-259, 2022.

RITZ, A.; BREWER, G. A.; NEUMANN, O. Public Service Motivation: A Systematic Literature Review and Outlook. Public Administration Review, v. 76, n. 3, p. 414–426, 4 jan. 2016.

RITZ, A. et al. Public service motivation and prosocial motivation: two sides of the same coin? Public Management Review, p. 1–25, 2 abr. 2020.

SCHOTT, C. Reality Shock and Public Service Motivation. Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance, p. 1–4, 2019.

SCHOTT, C.; STEEN, T.; VAN KLEEF, D. D. Reality Shock and Public Service Motivation: A Longitudinal, Qualitative Study Among Dutch Veterinary Inspectors. International Journal of Public Administration, v. 42, n. 6, p. 468–481, 19 jun. 2018.

SIQUEIRA, M. M. M. Satisfação no trabalho. In: SIQUEIRA, M. M. M. (Org.). Medidas do comportamento organizacional: ferramentas de diagnóstico e de gestão. Porto Alegre: Artmed, p. 265-273, 2008.

SIQUEIRA, M. M. M.; GOMIDE JR., S. Vínculos do indivíduo com o trabalho e com a organização. In: ZANELU, J. C.; BORGES-ANDRADE, J. E; BASTOS, A. V B. (Org.). Psicologia, organizações e trabalho no Brasil. Porto Alegre: Artmed, p. 300-328, 2004.

TRALDI, M. F.; FIUZA, G. Comprometimento, bem-estar e satisfação dos professores de administração de uma universidade federal. REAd, v. 72, p. 290-316, 2012.

VANDENABEELE, W. The mediating effect of job satisfaction and organizational commitment on self-reported performance: more robust evidence of the PSM – performance relationship. International Review of Administrative Sciences, v. 75, nº 1, p. 11-34, 2009.

VANDENABEELE, W. Explaining Public Service Motivation: The Role of Leadership and Basic Needs Satisfaction. Review of Public Personnel Administration, v. 34, nº 2, p. 153-173, 2014.

VANDENABEELE, W.; SKELCHER, C. Review: Public service motivation – practical problems, scientific evidence and the role of a research community. Public Money & Management, v. 35, nº 5, p. 321-328, 2015.

VANDENABEELE, W.; BREWER, G.A.; RITZ, A. Past, Present, and Future of Public Service Motivation Research. Public Administration Review, v. 92, nº 4, p. 779-789, 2014.

VANDENABEELE, W. et al. Public Service Motivation and Job Satisfaction in Various European Countries: A Tale of Caution and Hope. In: TRIA. G.; VALOTTI, G. (Ed.). Reforming the Public Sector: How to Achieve better Transparency, Service, and Leadership. Washington D. C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2012. p. 68-95.

VANDENABEELE, W.; RITZ, A.; NEUMANN, O. Public Service Motivation: State of the Art and Conceptual Cleanup. The Palgrave Handbook of Public Administration and Management in Europe, p. 261–278, 2018.

VESPASIANO, C. S.; MENDES, A. C. B. Bem-estar no trabalho, comprometimento e satisfação de servidores técnico-administrativos com sua atividade. Práticas em Gestão Pública Universitária, v. 1, n. 1, p. 81–101, 26 maio 2017.

ZHU, C.; WU, C.; YAN, M. Evidence of Public Service Motivation and Job Satisfaction of Public Sector Employees in China. Business and Public Administration Studies, v. 8, nº 1, p. 34-47, 2014.

	11	22	33	44	55	66	77	88	99	110	111
PSM	0.69	0.70	0.85	0.89	0.88	0.23	0.16	0.08	0.11	0.27	0.24
Attraction	0.49	0.56	0.42	0.52	0.51	0.12	0.08	0.04	0.06	0.12	0.14
Self-sacrifice	0.73	0.18	0.46	0.70	0.68	0.20	0.13	0.04	0.10	0.28	0.20
Commitment	0.80	0.27	0.50	0.46	0.72	0.27	0.19	0.15	0.14	0.29	0.25
Compassion	0.78	0.26	0.47	0.52	0.42	0.16	0.13	0.03	0.07	0.20	0.18
Job Satisfaction	0.05	0.01	0.04	0.07	0.03	0.59	0.76	0.69	0.78	0.81	0.81
With colleagues	0.02	0.01	0.02	0.04	0.02	0.58	0.74	0.32	0.64	0.54	0.43
With salary	0.01	0.00	0.00	0.02	0.00	0.47	0.11	0.80	0.33	0.44	0.62
With leadership	0.01	0.00	0.01	0.02	0.01	0.61	0.41	0.11	0.82	0.53	0.49
With the nature of work	0.07	0.02	0.08	0.09	0.04	0.65	0.29	0.19	0.28	0.61	0.58
With promotions	0.06	0.02	0.04	0.06	0.03	0.66	0.18	0.38	0.24	0.34	0.69
AVE	0.69	0.56	0.46	0.46	0.42	0.59	0.74	0.80	0.82	0.61	0.69
CC	0.90	0.79	0.87	0.81	0.85	0.88	0.93	0.95	0.96	0.89	0.92
AC	0.85	0.60	0.83	0.71	0.80	0.83	0.91	0.94	0.94	0.84	0.89

Endogenous	Exogenous	β	T	E.P.(β)²	I.C.-95%	Valor-p	R²
PSM	Job satisfaction	0.23	4.36	0.05	0.13 ↔ 0.33	0.00	0.05

The influence of Public Service Motivation on job satisfaction

A influência da Motivação de Serviço Público na satisfação no trabalho

1 Introduction