The effect of motivational tools on the productivity of staff architects in developing countries: the case of Turkey

Figures & data

Figure 1. Questionnaire items and relationship with the hypotheses.

Table 1. Findings on the demographic characteristics of the participants.

		Private sector		Public sector
		N	%	N	%
Gender	Female	43	76,78	60	78,95
	Male	13	23,22	16	21,05
Age	22–27	19	33,92	10	13,16
	28–33	28	50,0	19	25,0
	34–39	6	10,72	26	34,21
	40–45	3	5,36	10	13,16
	+46	0	0	11	14,47
Marital status	Single	32	57,14	29	38,16
	Married	24	42,86	47	61,84
Educational status	Bachelor degree	44	78,57	56	73,68
	Master degree	9	16,07	19	25,0
	PhD	3	5,36	1	1,32
Experience in the construction sector	1–5 years	34	60,71	15	19,74
	6–10 years	12	21,43	17	22,37
	11–15 years	5	8,93	21	27,63
	16–20 years	4	7,14	15	19,74
	21–25 years	1	1,79	3	3,94
	+25 years	0	0	5	6,58
Total		56	100	76	100

Table 2. Comparison of staff architects` perceptions about the existence of psychosocial motivational tools, and organizational and managerial motivational tools.

Tool	Question		Sector	Mean	p
Psycho-social	Q5	Image, vision, and overall atmosphere of the workplace	Public sector	1,28	0,001
			Private sector	1,56
	Q6	The general attitude of the managers toward employees	Public sector	1,25	0,009
			Private sector	1,47
Organizational and managerial	Q11	Authority, responsibility, and independence in work	Public sector	1,28	0,020
			Private sector	1,49
	Q15	Merit and justice in promotions	Public sector	1,43	0,001
			Private sector	1,71
	Q16	Educational opportunities provided by the management, and development opportunities	Public sector	1,70	0,003
			Private sector	1,43
	Q17	Working hours	Public sector	1,41	0,00
			Private sector	1,10
	Q18	Holidays, and off days provided by the management	Public sector	1,39	0,00
			Private sector	1,10

*P value< 0.05.

Table 3. Correlation analysis of participants` perceptions regarding the relationship between motivation and productivity.

		Private Sector		Public Sector
Q	Motivational Tools	Correlation coefficient	Strength	Correlation coefficient	Strength
	Economical Tools
Q1	Salary	0,612	Moderate correlation	0,276	Weak correlation
Q2	Fairness of salary	0,587	Moderate correlation	0,748	Strong correlation
Q3	Compensating overwork with economic rewards	0,473	Moderate correlation	0,598	Moderate correlation
Q4	Insurance, health, job security, and retirement conditions	0,479	Moderate correlation	0,725	Strong correlation
	Psycho-social Tools
Q5	Image, vision, and general appearance of the workplace	0,724	Strong correlation	0,815	Strong correlation
Q6	The general attitude of the managers toward employees	0,895	Strong correlation	0,889	Strong correlation
Q7	Appreciation, praise, and acknowledgment	0,926	Very strong correlation	0,803	Strong correlation
Q8	Enjoyment and satisfaction with the work	0,962	Very strong correlation	0,871	Strong correlation
Q9	Social activities such as sports, travel, and entertainment provided by the management	0,851	Strong correlation	0,806	Strong correlation
Q10	Healthy communication with colleagues	0,857	Strong correlation	0,585	Moderate correlation
	Organizational and managerial tools
Q11	Authority, responsibility, and independence in work	0,698	Moderate correlation	0,892	Strong correlation
Q12	Easy access to information and documents related to work	0,825	Strong correlation	0,747	Strong correlation
Q13	Participation in decision-making processes and freedom of expressing opinions in the organization	0,773	Strong correlation	0,758	Strong correlation
Q14	The opportunity for promotion in the workplace	0,710	Strong correlation	0,927	Very strong correlation
Q15	Merit and justice in promotions	0,784	Strong correlation	0,904	Very strong correlation
Q16	Educational opportunities provided by the management, and development opportunities	0,649	Moderate correlation	0,874	Strong correlation
Q17	Working hours	0,743	Strong correlation	0,623	Moderate correlation
Q18	Holidays, and off days provided by the management	0,870	Strong correlation	0,923	Very strong correlation
Q19	Workplace equipment	0,680	Moderate correlation	0,820	Strong correlation
Q20	Management’s sensitivity to employees’ problems	0,652	Moderate correlation	0,810	Strong correlation

Table 4. The effect of motivational tools Q7 and Q8 on the productivity variable of private sector employees.

		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients
Q	Model	B	Std Error	Beta	t	Sig. (p)
	(Constant)	144	165		873	387
Q7	Motivation	959	036	963	26,326	000
	(Constant)	165	117		1,410	164
Q8	Motivation	963	026	981	37,412	000

Table 5. The effect of motivational tools Q14, Q15, and Q18 on the productivity variable of public sector employees.

		Unstandardized Coefficients		Standardized Coefficients
Q	Model	B	Std Error	Beta	t	Sig. (p)
	(Constant)	-,047	140		-,334	739
Q14	Motivation	999	032	963	30,960	000
	(Constant)	311	168		1,856	067
Q15	Motivation	926	036	948	25,581	000
	(Constant)	551	140		3,940	000
Q18	Motivation	883	029	961	29,947	000

Figure 2. The existence of motivational tools and their restrictors.