This document provides a literature review and background for a study examining the impact of performance appraisals on intrinsic employee motivation in a public sector organization. The study will apply stewardship theory, which posits that employee motivation is intrinsic and goals are aligned with the organization. Prior research found intrinsic motivation is more important for public sector employees. The study aims to contribute to the field of management control by examining how a key control mechanism, performance appraisals, relates to intrinsic motivation. Hypotheses will be developed and tested through research in a public organization to determine if results confirm stewardship theory perspectives.

1. Evaluating management control: the impact of performance
appraisal on intrinsic employee motivation
Marc Haakma
S 2184869
A Master's Thesis submitted to the University of Groningen - Faculty of Economics and Business, in partial fulfilment of
the requirements for the degree of MSc Business Administration: Organizational and Management Control.
Thesis supervisor: B. van der Kolk, MSc.
Second assessor: A. R. Abbassi, MSc.
Abstract
Firm performance is the general focus of a manager. However, this requires getting the most out of
employees, as they are at the core of the organisation. Motivation plays a significant role in this process.
This paper examines the effect of performance appraisal as a management control mechanism on intrinsic
employee motivation. Applying stewardship theory, it was found that informality and positive or negative
feedback in performance appraisals increase intrinsic motivation; this effect is strengthened by frequency.
Use of data collected for this study is regulated by a strict nondisclosure agreement, which requires the
researcher to protect the company's identity and its proprietary information.
Keywords: intrinsic motivation, management control mechanisms, performance appraisal, public sector, stewardship theory
1. Introduction
Employees are at the core of an organisation;
after all, employees physically represent an
organisation and carry out its mission, and thus,
give an organisation the essential opportunity to
exist. It is therefore of importance to managers,
that employees feel appreciated and are driven to
perform their job. In other words, employee
motivation should be regarded as a key factor in
determining long-term employer success levels
(Kovach, 1995). The field of employee
motivation, however, is complex. In its general
sense, motivation is already a difficult concept to
define, as demonstrated by Kleinginna and
Kleinginna (1981) in a laborious attempt to reach
a consensual definition. Furthermore, much
research has been conducted on what drives
employee motivation specifically, which again
reflects the complexity of the term.

2. 2
Rather than investigating which specific
factors drive employee motivation, this study will
focus on the prevailing organisational relation
between managers and employees, by
emphasising the role management control.
Managers are in charge of making decisions for
coping with change, and even though firm
performance is the general focus of a manager,
they must also consider how employees will be
affected (Turner Parish et al., 2008). This is where
the field of management control will be included
in the research, by focusing on a particular
management control mechanism that has a
potential influence on employee motivation:
performance appraisal. However, for the
particular relation described above, the field of
management control misses the concrete grips
that give managers insight into what the impact
of performance appraisal is on employee
motivation. It is however a case that entails a
large degree of managerial relevance and
importance for organisations, as performance
appraisals can be considered as one of the most
important human resource practices (Cardinal,
2001; Boswell and Boudreau, 2002).
The field of employee motivation has
provided many different views over the years,
resulting in numerous theories that all adopt a
specific perspective in addressing employee
motivation. The stewardship theory will be used
in this research, which can be regarded as a
relatively novel theory of motivation that focuses
on the self-development desires and intrinsic
motivation of employees (Donaldson and Davis,
1991). Little empirical research has been
conducted regarding stewardship theory; it will
therefore benefit from this research, as it will test
the views of this theory in a practical setting.
Furthermore, the research will be conducted in a
public sector organisation; it is believed that
public sector employees are more intrinsically
motivated than private sector employees, and
show a high level of commitment to their
organisation (Dilulio, 1994). Therefore, this
research fits well with stewardship theory.
The main theoretical objective of this
research is to contribute to the field of
management control by examining the relation
between performance appraisal and intrinsic
motivation in an organisation. The research does
not focus on identifying key tasks that are
associated with management control, but rather,
focuses on the effects of performance
appraisal— a significant management control
mechanism— on employee motivation. This
mechanism is widely recognised and has been
studied in considerable detail in management
control literature, but nevertheless is still believed
to provide a fruitful opportunity for studying the
relationship between management control and
intrinsic motivation in an organisational
environment, and therefore, maintaining the
relevance between management control and its
context (Chenhall, 2003; Hage and Aiken, 1967;
Otley, 1994; Pugh et al., 1969). The stewardship
theory of motivation will be used to maintain a
close connection with this literature field. This
theory is believed to further solidify the basis for
this research, and the legitimacy of this theory in
practical situations will be tested further.
Subsequently, the following research question is
formulated in the present research:
What is the relation between performance
appraisal and intrinsic employee motivation
in a public sector organisation?

3. 3
Prior literature will be used to discuss the
stewardship theory, and its role in the present
study. Based on this, hypotheses will be
formulated on the effect that performance
appraisal has on employee motivation.
Consequently, research will be conducted to
verify these hypotheses in a practical setting. It is
then analysed whether the examined case
demonstrates a confirmation to the formulated
hypotheses. Potential observed deviations from
the stewardship theory perspective will
subsequently attempted to be explained.
The remainder of this paper is structured
as follows. Section 2 comprises a literature
review, which discusses the background of the
research problem by reviewing relevant prior
literature to provide a legitimate basis on which
the present research is built and hypotheses are
formulated. Consequently, this section will
address the gap in the literature that this research
will attempt to fill. Section 3 elucidates the data-
gathering process and the research method used
in this paper. Section 4 introduces the research
setting and presents the findings of the research,
which section 5 critically reflects upon by
analysing and relating these findings to prior
research. Section 6 then reflects on this research
in its entirety, by readdressing the research
question, the research implications and the
limitations of this research.
2. Literature review
2.1. Employee motivation
Motivation can be defined as “the willingness to
exert high levels of effort toward organisational
goals, conditioned by the effort's ability to satisfy
some individual need” (Robbins, 1991). Based on
this, it can be argued that an unsatisfied need
creates a tension for employees, which can be
acted upon and consequently relieved by an
employee through the exertion of effort (Rainlall,
2004). The research on employee motivation is
abundant; a large amount of research has been
conducted on employee motivation in an attempt
to indicate its effects. It is assumed that employee
motivation is a crucial factor in organisational
performance through this characteristic exertion
of effort (Griffin, 1990; Robbins, 1991; Kovach,
1995), which in turn makes employee motivation
a valuable and sought after concept for managers.
In addition to the effects, it is believed
that the drivers of employee motivation are also
of great practical importance to managers. These
drivers will lead to the effects that will impact the
organisation in a manner for which the manager
is responsible, which consequently seems to offer
an opportunity for management to influence
employee motivation levels. Moreover, the
primary objective of employee motivation
research has not been to learn about how certain
employee behaviour occurs, but rather to learn
how to motivate employees so that they will
perform the responsibilities and tasks assigned by
the organisation (Wright, 2001). Wiley (1997) for
instance, examined what motivates employees by
conducting a multi-industry survey and found
that good wages, full appreciation for work done,
job security, promotion and growth in the
organisation, and interesting work were the top
five factors that motivated employees in their
jobs. A similar list can be extracted from Kovach
(1995), in which he discusses a survey that
presented interesting work, full appreciation of
work done, feeling of being in on things, job

4. 4
security and good wages as the five most desired
factors that contribute to employee motivation.
Often, research on employee motivation
is conducted on the basis of an underlying
motivation theory. Along with the amount of
research conducted on employee motivation, the
number of theories that are used in this field can
also be characterised as abundant. To provide a
theoretical foundation for this discussion, this
section will draw from this extensive range of
employee motivation theories. Although a
synthesis of employee motivation theories lies
beyond the scope of the present research, a brief
overview of a number of dominant theories is
presented below to provide a foundation that
theoretically solidifies the way employee
motivation is to be perceived, and, consequently,
to obtain a rudimentary understanding of
employee motivation.
The two-factor theory on motivation
states that factors leading to job satisfaction are
separate and distinct from the factors that lead to
job dissatisfaction, and assumes a neutral ground
between satisfaction and dissatisfaction.
Moreover, the theory distinguishes between
motivators, which arise from intrinsic job
conditions and lead to job satisfaction, and
hygiene factors, which are of an extrinsic nature
and lead to job dissatisfaction when they are
absent. Thus, hygiene factors are necessary to
maintain job satisfaction, but do not lead to
increases in job satisfaction (Hackman and
Oldham, 1976; Herzberg et al., 1959; Herzberg,
1966). It is stated that, in order to increase job
satisfaction and consequently motivation, the
intrinsic aspect of the job should be emphasised
through job enrichment (Herzberg, 1986).
Another well-known employee motivation theory
is the expectancy theory developed by Vroom
(1964). The expectancy theory takes a different
approach in that it does not provide specific
employee motivation suggestions. Rather, it
suggests that employees believe there are
relationships between work effort, achieved
performance and the rewards they receive from
their effort and performance (Vroom, 1964). It
follows that this theory focuses on selfish
individuals that want to maximise satisfaction,
referring to extrinsic and intrinsic values which
management must discover. While the preceding
two theories provide unprejudiced support for
extrinsic influences, self-determination theory
seems to focus primarily on intrinsic sources of
motivation. It suggests that self-determination
and intrinsic motivation are triggered through the
presence of competence, relatedness and
autonomy (Deci and Ryan, 2002).
To summarise, regardless of which
theory is followed, it seems that there are specific
factors that should be considered by management
when focusing on employee motivation. In short,
it can be stated that these theories focus on either
an intrinsic, extrinsic or mixed approach, much in
the same way as the drivers of motivation
described above can be characterised by either an
intrinsic or extrinsic nature. However, it can be
argued that using such a theory in this research
may result in an inaccurate, ambiguous
perspective on motivation, when the selected
theory does not suit the scope and setting of the
research. Therefore, an employee motivation
theory that provides a good fit with the present
research setting must be identified.

5. 5
2.2. Employee motivation in the public sector
It can be stated that research regarding specific
characteristics of employee motivation in the
public sector plays a subordinate role in the field
of employee motivation; in spite of the fact that
the motivation of employees is of great
importance to public sector organisations, less
attention is paid to this sector by public sector
scholars (Frey et al., 2013; Wright, 2001).
However, the observation that motivation
literature tends to concentrate too much on
industrial and business organisation employees in
the private sector is not new, but rather stems
from several decades ago (Perry and Porter,
1982). As this study focuses on the public sector,
progress will be made regarding this issue.
Prior literature provides evidence that
differences exist between public and private
sector employees, in particular with respect to
their motivation (Buelens and Van den Broeck,
2007; Frey et al.,2013). Specifically, there is a
broad consensus that intrinsic motivation
provides the main drive for public sector
employees, through motivation by aspects such
as self-development opportunities, recognition,
autonomy and learning opportunities. This
notions contrasts extrinsic motivation focus of
private sector employees through financial
rewards, prestige and status (Buelens and Van
den Broeck, 2007; Houston, 2000). Consequently,
it can be argued that self-interest theories are not
sufficient for analysing motivation in the public
sector, as this does not fit well with the public
sector research setting. This generates a notable
point of consideration, as a deviation from the
dominant agency theory in the management
control literature must be made; the agency
theory assumes that managers are self-interested
actors that rationally maximise their own personal
economic gain (Donaldson and Davis, 1991), and
therefore suits the description of a self-interest
theory. Alternately, a different theory must be
adopted, to avoid compromising the values that
prevail in public sector motivation.
2.3. Stewardship theory
An alternative theory is stewardship theory,
which provides a different model of human
behaviour, which assumes these managers are not
agents motivated by individual goals and personal
gain, but rather stewards whose motives are
aligned with the principals' objectives (Davis et
al., 1997). In other words, it states that managers'
goals are in line with the organisational goals,
thus, it assumes goal congruence. Even in cases
that are characterised by goal incongruence,
managers will prefer to pursue organisational
goals instead of individual goals (Corbey, 2010).
This more altruistic perspective further
assumes that an employee's motivation is of an
intrinsic nature, which counterbalances the
agency theory focus on extrinsic motivation. This
perspective is regarded as appropriate for this
study, as it acknowledges the importance of
intrinsic motivation in the public sector and
accordingly suits the present research setting.
Therefore, this study will adopt the stewardship
theory.
Although stewardship theory focuses on
intrinsic motivation, it is important to recognise
the approach this research takes regarding the
interplay between extrinsic and intrinsic
motivation. While this research places a clear
focus on intrinsic motivation, it is believed that
intrinsic motivation does not yield an absence of
extrinsic factors (Covington and Müeller, 2001;

6. 6
Kauffman et al., 2011). Thus, this research
deviates from a potentially problematic
continuum-view of intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation, and assumes that a balance of
intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is attainable,
with the proportions of intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation varying across employees and
organisations. Therefore, a dichotomous nature
of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation is not
supported in this research, as the two types of
motivation are not believed to be jointly
exhaustive nor mutually exclusive (Covington and
Müeller, 2001). Nevertheless, this research
focuses on intrinsic motivation, in accordance
with the abovementioned fit with the public
sector research setting.
It must also be noted that this research
will apply the stewardship theory on a different
hierarchical relationship within an organisation
than is described above, namely the manager and
the manager's subordinates. Not only does this
provide a fruitful opportunity to expand on
current stewardship theory knowledge and thus
place it in a wider perspective, it also paves the
way for analysing the relationship between
management control and employee motivation
from a different theoretical perspective, therefore
fitting well with the current research setting.
2.4. Management control
Management control is concerned with
coordination, resource allocation, motivation, and
performance measurement (Maciariello and
Kirby, 1994). Anthony and Govindarajan (2007)
defined management control as the “process by
which managers influence other members of the
organisation to implement the organisation’s
strategies”. Guided by these definitions, it
becomes clear that employee motivation plays a
key role in management control practices;
exploring the attitudes that employees hold
concerning motivational factors allows the
creation of an environment that fosters employee
motivation (Wiley, 1997). However, it can be
stated that further classification of such practices
is needed, so that the selection of specific
management control mechanisms is theoretically
solidified.
The field of management control
provides a classical trichotomy of control classes:
input, output and behaviour controls (Ouchi,
1979; Rockness and Shields, 1984). Input
controls regulate the antecedent conditions of
performance, and assess whether individuals suit
the organization, regarding internalised norms
and professional standards (Cardinal, 2001; Frey
et al., 2013). Although input control increases the
variety of ideas produced and exposure to
scientific knowledge, it is also more demanding as
it is not observable (Cardinal, 2001; Frey et al.,
2013). Therefore, concerning the present research
setting, a focus on input control is regarded as a
suboptimal decision. As output control
concentrates on assigning a value to the realised
output, these control mechanisms are not
deemed to fit well with the public sector, which is
central to this research, as public service could be
characterised by output ambiguity (Burgess and
Ratto, 2003). Moreover, a high degree of
interdependence exists among tasks, which
impedes the attribution of outputs to individuals
(Frey et al., 2013). Due to the fact that output
ambiguity prevents the existence of a reliable and
valid measure of the desired outputs, a focus is
placed on behaviour control, following the
framework of Ouchi (1979). Behaviour control

7. 7
focuses on the monitoring of employee
behaviour in the process that leads to output, and
regulates how the work should be done through
the use of rules and procedures (Cardinal, 2001;
Ouchi, 1979; Rockness and Shields, 1984).
However, behaviour control has been
predominantly viewed as a mechanism that
hampers creativity and fosters employee
dissatisfaction, and could lead to rigidity and a
decrease in flexibility (Adler and Borys, 1996;
Cardinal, 2001). Therefore, a focus on adaptation
to changing environments seems to be necessary
(Frey, 2013). However, as control is necessary in
an organisation, it is prudent to make an effort to
understand what sorts of behaviour control
mechanisms are effective, particularly in settings
that are affected by significant changes. Guided
by this reasoning, the present research will focus
on behaviour control, as it is believed that this
type of control provides a relevant and important
point of focus regarding management control.
Close attention will be paid to the way
performance appraisal affects the level of
employee motivation within the organisation.
2.5. Hypothesis development
Performance appraisals are a means to carry out
the monitoring function of behaviour control,
and can be considered one of the most important
human resource practices (Cardinal, 2001;
Boswell and Boudreau, 2002). The effect of
performance appraisal on motivation, however, is
not straightforward. Employees could perceive
frequent performance appraisal as threatening,
which could consequently cause their behaviour
to become safer and more routine-based
(Burgelman and Sayles, 1988; Cardinal, 2001).
However, it could also be argued that
performance appraisal is necessary for employees,
as this feedback provides the information that is
needed to make a judgement on the employee's
competence, which is indicated as a focal point
by intrinsic motivation (Deci, 1975; Hackman
and Oldham, 1976; Ilgen et al., 1979 ). Guided by
the latter line of reasoning and in line with
stewardship theory, it is expected that employees
will interpret the performance appraisals as
contributing to their self-development and thus
intrinsic motivation (Buelens and Van den
Broeck, 2007; Davis et al., 1997; Houston, 2000).
To enhance the tangibility of the
performance appraisal control mechanism, the
measure will be investigated on the basis of the
construct of feedback richness, to represent
several performance appraisal characteristics.
More importantly, this procedure allows for
variance to be measured, which consequently
enhances the transparency of the conclusions of
this research. A feedback-rich environment can
be defined as a performance appraisal
environment where employees receive specific,
frequent and positive feedback (Kinicki et al.,
2004). Kinicki et al. (2004) find that a feedback-
rich environment is positively related to the
perceived accuracy of performance appraisals.
This accuracy notion can subsequently be
connected to employee motivation in terms of
implications, as prior research found that rich
feedback enhances performance through an
increase in motivation (Roberson and Stewart,
2006; Taylor et al., 1995). The present study will
elaborate on the frequency and positive nature
characteristics of a feedback-rich environment by
placing a nuance on the positive motivation effect
of performance appraisal through a focus on
intrinsic motivation. Moreover, it will include

8. 8
negative feedback, arguing that negative feedback
in performance appraisals also yields a positive
effect on intrinsic motivation. In line with
stewardship theory, it can argued that employees
value negative feedback, in a sense that they can
reflect on it and use it as a self-development
opportunity. To further develop the variance
measurement process, the effect of performance
appraisal on intrinsic motivation will also be
judged on the basis of a distinction between
formal and informal performance appraisal. Prior
literature states that generally, employees perceive
a more informal, more reciprocal nature of
performance appraisal as preferable (Pearce and
Porter, 1986). This notion seems to reserve a
central role for employee perception, on which
this study will focus. Moreover, in line with
Kinicki et al.'s (2004) feedback-rich environment
notion, it can be stated that informal
performance appraisals are desired more for
intrinsic motivation, due to a higher degree of
feedback specificity, through spontaneity and
greater relevance and recency of the feedback.
However, in line with stewardship theory, it
assumed that formal performance appraisals also
yield a positive effect, given that they also provide
learning and self-development opportunities
(Buelens and Van den Broeck, 2007; Davis et al.,
1997; Houston, 2000). Notwithstanding this, it is
still expected that informal performance
appraisals have a stronger positive effect on
intrinsic motivation than formal performance
appraisals.
Based on this literature review, the
following hypotheses are formulated:
H1: A high frequency of performance
appraisals has a positive impact on intrinsic
employee motivation.
H2a: Positive feedback in performance
appraisals has a positive impact on intrinsic
employee motivation.
H2b: Negative feedback in performance
appraisals has a positive impact on intrinsic
employee motivation.
H3a: Formal performance appraisals have a
positive impact on intrinsic employee
motivation.
H3b: Informal performance appraisals have
a larger positive impact on intrinsic employee
motivation than formal performance appraisals
have.
A critical note regarding these hypotheses must
be made. Although the hypotheses are in line
with the stewardship theory perspective, an
implicit requirement must be met. Management
controls should be used in a behavioural way that
satisfies employees' intrinsic desires; an intrinsic
approach should be adopted rather than an
extrinsic approach (Van der Kolk, 2013). If the
latter approach is adopted, this may have
counterproductive effects on intrinsic motivation,
as employees are assumed to desire an intrinsic
approach. This statement also clarifies the role of
perception in this research; employees form
opinions on the basis of which these hypotheses
will be verified.
In summary, this section has
demonstrated that a fruitful contribution can be
made to prior literature, regarding the relation
between performance appraisal and intrinsic
motivation. This has resulted in the formulation
of five hypotheses. Specifically, it is argued that
performance appraisals have a positive impact on
motivation of employees, as employees will
perceive them as contributing to their

9. 9
development, consequently increasing their
intrinsic motivation. This positive relation is
included in five hypotheses, covering positive
feedback and negative feedback in performance
appraisals, formal and informal performance
appraisals and the frequency of performance
appraisal. It follows that this distinction should
be clearly maintained in the execution of this
research, to provide optimal results. This matter
will be discussed in depth in the following
section.
3. Methodology
3.1. Research design
In this research, a theory testing approach will be
adopted; stewardship theory will serve as a
foundation to identify the effect of performance
appraisal on intrinsic motivation. Theory testing
is an appropriate approach in view of the present
theoretical gap that is to be filled, guided by the
formulated hypotheses that is derived from
relevant prior literature. In order to verify these
hypotheses, a case study is conducted.
Furthermore, an interpretive approach
predominates this qualitative research, as the
present research is based on a wide array of
perceptions of individuals (Hopper and Powell,
1985). Therefore, the subjective nature of the
social world is emphasised in this research, as it
attempts to understand it primarily from the
frame of reference of those being studied, rather
than assuming an independent reality that might
exist external to them (Hopper and Powell, 1985;
Laing, 1967).
3.2. Data collection
To examine the nature of the relationship
between performance appraisal as a management
control mechanism and intrinsic motivation in
this particular case, thirteen semi-structured
interviews will be conducted among employees,
serving as the primary data collection method.
The interviews will be conducted at Omrop
Fryslân, the regional radio and television
broadcasting organisation of Friesland, a
province of the Netherlands. The research setting
will be further elaborated upon in the findings
chapter that follows this chapter. As the unit of
analysis in this research is the individual, the
research focuses on the perception of
respondents, in collecting data concerning the
formulated hypotheses. Therefore, the semi-
structured interview is believed to be a suitable
instrument, as it possesses qualities that
emphasise this aspect of the research, through the
facilitation of probing respondents for more
information and the exploration of new themes
(Louise Barriball and While, 1994). Moreover,
interviews are regarded as an important
instrument in a case study approach (Yin, 2013).
The employee satisfaction survey, which
has recently been conducted at Omrop Fryslân by
an external consultancy bureau, will serve as the
secondary data collection method of this study.
This report provides an insight into the
organisation-wide views and opinions of
employees, which are relevant to the management
control and employee motivation concepts
studied in this research. Of the 205 distributed
questionnaires that were sent out to Omrop
Fryslân's employees, 142 were returned. These
questionnaires were all virtually complete and
thus usable, which equates to a response rate of

10. 10
69,3%. Notwithstanding the fact that this survey
could be regarded as an internally initiated
investigation effort, therefore being subjected to
organisational legitimacy and pressure, this
response rate is argued to be favourable given the
length and depth of the survey.
The interview content is included in the
appendix, and is structured as follows. Following
the introductory questions, performance appraisal
will be discussed in relation with intrinsic
motivation, following a two-stage structure. The
first stage focuses on indicating how strong the
mechanism is in terms of presence and influence
on respondents, and is based on the following
data sources. Performance appraisal is assessed as
the extent to which behaviour is measured and
evaluated, and was based on empirical work by
Abbey (1982) and Kinicki et al. (2004). The
second sub-stages of the interview concerns the
link between the given behaviour control
mechanism and employee motivation. Given the
semi-structured nature of the conducted
interviews, the second sub-stage is less structured
than the first stage, consequently providing the
opportunity to provoke discussion about and
exploration of the topics. In these sub-stages, the
focus is placed on critical values of the
stewardship theory.
In addition, two key components of
organisational structure will be briefly discussed,
in an effort to map the structure of the
organisation, following the same two-stage
structure. Centralisation is assessed as the extent
to which decision-making authority is
concentrated in the organisation, and was based
on empirical work by Aiken and Hage (1968),
Dewar et al. (1980) and Khandwalla (1974).
Formalisation is assessed as the extent to which
behavioural procedures and rules are explicitly
formulated, and was based on empirical work by
Aiken and Hage (1968), Desphande and Zaltman
(1982), Dewar and Werbel (1979) and Hall
(1968).
3.3. Data analysis
The primary data gathering instrument will
produce a large amount of textual data, which
implicitly involves a great responsibility for the
researcher, as the researcher must ensure that the
gathered information is collected in a clear and
unbiased manner. To assist and to provide
convenience in this matter, a recording device
will be used in cases in which the given
respondent agrees and the attention of both
parties is not breached (Yin, 2013). Consequently,
the interviews can be transcribed and coded
efficiently and effectively after they have been
conducted.
In addition, a major challenge of the
semi-structured interview based research process
is to attain credibility, which holds that the
research must be reliable and valid (Brink, 1991).
Regarding reliability, this study adopts a
classification of four sources of bias that must be
avoided to ensure that the research results are
independent of particular research characteristics
and can therefore be replicated in other studies
(Swanborn, 1996; Yin, 2013). Firstly, reliability is
enhanced through the usage of multiple research
instruments. The use of a semi-structured
interview instrument and the consultation of the
employee satisfaction report is regarded as such a
triangulation approach, as multiple sources of
evidence are combined (Van Aken et al., 2012;
Yin, 2013). Therefore, instrument bias is reduced
through triangulation, which remedies

11. 11
shortcomings and biases of the used data
collection instruments by complementing and
correcting each other (Van Aken et al., 2012).
Secondly, as interviews leave relatively more
room for biases as a data collection interview,
standardisation is of importance; this yields that
explicit procedures for data collection, analysis
and interpretation should be followed (Van Aken
et al., 2012). As the interviews conducted in this
research are of a semi-structured nature, this
strategy is not fully exploited. Hence, the
software package Atlas.ti is used to reduce
researcher dependence by assisting the researcher
to work in a systematic manner (Van Aken et al.,
2012). Moreover, it can be stated that researcher
bias is combated by the triangulation approach, as
researcher independency is improved through the
use of multiple researchers and working towards
consensus. (Swanborn, 1996). Thirdly, as people
within an organisation can have widely diverging
views and opinions, it is of importance to gather
a mixture of perspectives (Van Aken et al., 2012).
Therefore, this study selects a diverse set of
respondents, on the basis of age, tenure, position
and department, which provides a source of
information about organisational reality. Fourthly,
a potential threat to the reliability of this study
lies in the fact that this study is carried out in a
limited time period, and therefore it does not
consider a multitude of circumstances (Van Aken
et al., 2012). Therefore, this source of situation
bias could potentially have a restricting impact on
the data collection process. However, as this
research also investigates a recently conducted
survey, two different time periods are included,
hence reducing the situation bias.
Validity presupposes reliability, as a
research result is valid when it is justified by the
way it is generated (Audi, 1998; Van Aken et al.,
2012). This research relies on a trichotomy of
validation criteria (Swanborn, 1996; Yin, 2013).
To maintain a high level of construct validity, the
present research pursues a high degree of
adequacy and completeness of the measurement
instruments. This is reached by making an effort
to cover the relevant concepts of management
control and employee motivation completely
during the interviews. Moreover, as the semi-
structured interview instrument is combined with
a survey investigation, construct validity is
enhanced through this triangulation approach
(Yin, 2013). Internal validity is pursued through
the use of a theoretical triangulation approach, as
the multiple perspectives could facilitate the
discovery of all causes, therefore ruling out
alternative explanations regarding the proposed
relationship (Van Aken et al., 2012). Moreover,
by conducting systematic analysis, internal validity
is maintained. Concerning the potential
generalisability implications of this research, it is
important to note that the investigation of the
employee satisfaction report increases the
number of studied objects, which consequently
improves external validity (Van Aken et al., 2012).
4. Findings
The findings are structured as follows. Firstly, the
research setting will be introduced; the notions of
centralisation and formalisations will be used to
provide a more comprehensive view of the
research setting. Secondly, covering the main
objective of this study, performance appraisal will
be discussed, in relation to intrinsic motivation.
In quoting respondents' statements, a numbering

12. 12
system is used to ensure confidentiality, while still
allowing for distinction.
4.1. Research setting
The research will be carried out at Omrop
Fryslân: the regional radio and television
broadcasting organisation of Friesland, a
province of the Netherlands. Omrop Fryslân is
an organisation with a strong brand name and has
held a leading position in the regional society
over the years due to its distinctive and
innovative approach to broadcasting. Being part
of the Dutch regional broadcasting system,
Omrop Fryslân is a public sector organisation,
therefore suiting the formulated description of an
appropriate research setting. The case of Omrop
Fryslân is particularly interesting because of the
turbulent organisational climate it currently
operates in; due to governmental pressures
regarding an announced budget cut in the Dutch
public broadcasting system. Consequently, as
Omrop Fryslân is partially dependent on
government funding, it may have to implement
cost reduction measures. Considering the focus
of the present research, this case provides a
fruitful opportunity to study the relationship
between management control mechanisms and
employee motivation.
In terms of organisational structure,
centralisation and formalisation have proven to
be two valuable notions in the interviews as well
as in the employee satisfaction report, with
regards to the forthcoming discussion regarding
intrinsic motivation. Firstly, centralisation was
shown to be a familiar term to a large number of
employees; it was stated that it is present in the
organisation, although the focus was laid on
quality rather than the degree of centralisation, in
terms of consequences for intrinsic motivation.
Employees stated that decisions should be taken
in a consistent manner, should originate from a
legitimate source in terms of knowledge of facts,
and should be conveyed in a manner that enables
employees to recognise and understand the value
and usefulness of these decisions. Moreover, it
was deemed important that employees should be
involved in decision-making, so that their voice is
heard, and that their initiatives and ideas are
taken into consideration. An excessively high
degree of centralisation, however, was perceived
by employees as obstructive, as it is believed to
limit their actions. It was consequently perceived
as having a negative effect on intrinsic
motivation, as employees stated that it would
limit their level of autonomy and responsibility;
intrinsic motivation increases through an increase
of freedom, and in this case, an increase in
creativity.
Regarding formalisation, employees
stated that formalisation is not perceived to be
present to a high degree, or at least not strikingly
due to automatisms in workflows. They did,
however, provide a clear-cut image of the relation
between formalisation and intrinsic motivation.
Based on observations, it can be argued that a
moderate but steadfast degree of formalisation
leads to an increase in intrinsic motivation, as it
provides a grip for employees in their work
procedures. However, overlapping with the
centralisation notion, an excessively high degree
of formalisation was perceived to lead to a
decrease in autonomy and self-development
opportunities, consequently decreasing intrinsic
motivation. Strikingly, an increase in
formalisation is felt by a number of employees,
and has consequently been linked to the

13. 13
uncertain future of the organisation. The new
work procedures project, which is currently
taking place in the organisation, is a concrete
example of this according to the interviewed
employees and the employee satisfaction report.
This project aims to sharpen the degree of
formalisation by providing a clearer structure for
it. Employees stated that, for intrinsic motivation
to be maintained, formalisation should be
implemented in a way that includes employees in
the process, maintains employee flexibility, yields
consistency, adds value and makes sense to
employees.
4.2. Performance appraisal and intrinsic motivation
Drawing further on the interview and employee
satisfaction report data sources, as well as the
abovementioned statements, it can be argued that
generally many statements can be traced back to
the organisational relation that is central to the
present study: the relation between employee and
manager. Concentrating on this study's main
objective— investigating the impact of
performance appraisal— it is observed that
intrinsic motivation plays a central role in the
organisation, as is clearly illustrated by the
following respondent's statement.
Omrop Fryslân operates on the basis of intrinsic
motivation; things are not always well organised,
but then people think to themselves "I want this
to be a good broadcast, that's what I want."; it's
a passion. We all work together to ensure that it
doesn't go wrong. That is something we recognise
in each other, we want to produce work of
quality. And in that sense, it's a very cosy
organisation, there are many
relationships, people get along well. Sometimes
there are difficulties, but people know each other
well, there are a lot of things that connect us.
[12]
Moreover, according to the employee satisfaction
report, employees state that managers serve an
important role regarding this. Employees expect
their manager to motivate them intrinsically; they
desire opportunities for self-development in their
work and want to feel appreciated. On the basis
of this, and in line with the current study's main
objective, a fruitful opportunity ensues, as it can
be argued that performance appraisal is an
excellent opportunity to put this key task in the
relation between manager and employee into
practice.
To enhance the clarity of the results
regarding the main research, the main findings of
this study are divided into three sections,
representing the three different characteristics of
performance appraisal as they were included in
the three sets of formulated hypotheses. The
frequency of performance appraisal and the effect
on intrinsic motivation will be discussed in the
first sub-paragraph, along with a verdict regarding
hypothesis 1. In the second sub-paragraph,
positive and negative performance appraisal
feedback in relation to intrinsic motivation will be
discussed, resulting in a verdict regarding
hypotheses 2a and 2b. The third sub-paragraph
will discuss performance appraisal of a formal
and informal nature, in relation to intrinsic
motivation, resulting in a verdict regarding
hypotheses 3a and 3b.

14. 14
4.2.1. Frequency of performance appraisal and intrinsic
motivation
The findings that concern hypothesis 1— the
effect of performance appraisal frequency on
intrinsic motivation— will be discussed here. In
general, employees view a high frequency of
performance appraisals as positive; this is
especially linked to a desire to know where one
stands. The employee satisfaction report
confirms this relation; communication and
transparency are valued highly on the work floor,
and informal performance appraisal is regarded as
a means to accomplish this. Regarding their
intrinsic motivation, specifically, a positive effect
is experienced by employees, as a high frequency
of performance appraisal yields a high number of
opportunities for self-development.
Having many feedback and evaluation moments
causes you to think deeply about things that
might not be developed properly yet, or that
you're struggling with a little. It gives you the
opportunity to develop, which of course is a big
part of intrinsic motivation. [13]
Focusing on the employee-supervisor
relationship, it can be argued that the supervisors
do not sufficiently meet this desire of employees
at times. Several employees have stated that there
is little time to talk about matters, that they do
not hear enough from their supervisor and that
performance appraisal suffers from these time
constraints as well. Moreover, it seems that
performance appraisal is not high on the list of
priorities, resulting in negligence.
It's always under time pressure, an item has to
be ready for a certain programme. And to
discuss it the next day in peace doesn't work
either. So it becomes quick, or at the coffee
machine; something that comes across badly. [7]
This desire for a higher frequency revealed a clear
enterprising and perhaps venturous character of
some employees, triggered by a sense of
responsibility, and enabled by confidence, trust
and communication.
I am someone who does not always know how
things work, so I walk up to him myself. I
feel like I can always knock on his door, that I
can always ask things. I'm also someone who
appreciates responsibility. I think people can
flourish in that, when you take action yourself. I
believe it should come from both sides. You
should not wait until the action is taken higher
up in the organisation, you have to do something
yourself too. You can complain, but then are you
doing enough yourself? [4]
However, a limit is set for this desire for high
frequency; too many performance appraisals may
convey feelings of restlessness and oppression,
and may consequently hamper their intrinsic
motivation. Notwithstanding this, it can be
concluded that frequency generally has a positive
effect on intrinsic motivation, therefore,
hypothesis 1 is supported.
Employees often linked this frequency
notion to the other two sets of hypotheses; a high
frequency magnifies the effect of positive or
negative feedback in performance appraisals, and
formal and informal performance appraisals on
intrinsic motivation. Hence, it is believed that
interweaving these connections in the
forthcoming discussion, in the two following sub-

15. 15
paragraphs, will result in a more clear cut
structure of findings, as well as providing a more
comprehensive view regarding the relation
between these aspects.
4.2.2. Positive and negative performance appraisal
feedback and intrinsic motivation
This sub-paragraph will discuss the findings
regarding hypothesis 2a and 2b: the effect of
positive and negative performance appraisal
feedback on intrinsic motivation. On the basis of
this distinction, striking findings arise. Positive
feedback in performance appraisals is desired and
is claimed to have a positive effect on intrinsic
motivation; it drives employees and makes them
feel appreciated. Moreover, it allows them to
focus on a satisfactory goal to work towards.
It is true that positivity drives me more, it gives
me a thrill. You then keep doing what you're
doing. If I deliver a performance, and both
supporters and antagonists react overwhelmingly
positive, then it motivates me. [6]
Compliments are nice to hear in our profession.
Positivity has an effect on intrinsic
motivation; it is a form of appreciation that
works well, you are being recognised. [12]
An exception to this relation is found in the
source of this positive performance appraisal
feedback. If employees question the legitimacy of
the information that is provided to them, the
positive effect is reduced. For instance, this is the
case when the manager is believed to have
insufficient knowledge of the facts.
I cannot take the performance appraisals
seriously; they are retrospective, but due to a lack
of knowledge I cannot debate with my supervisor.
[8]
However, this positive relation with intrinsic
motivation does not provide a full picture; in line
with the stewardship theory notion that
employees are intrinsically motivated by self-
development opportunities, negative
performance appraisal feedback contributes to
this positive relation as well by offering such self-
development opportunities. However, conditions
are imposed on the structure of the criticism
expressed by a manager, in order for intrinsic
motivation to indeed increase. For instance, not
only does criticism need to be grounded,
constructive and relevant, it also has to lead to
personal growth opportunities.
I always have to be able to do something with it,
I can't deal with negativity and that's it, I have
problems with that. Then I am only trying to
please people. I am solution- oriented. We have
had discussions with points of criticism, and
afterwards I am glad that the facts are presented,
on the basis of which you can make agreements.
Criticism must yield the opportunity to do
something with it. [12]
If you're doing your best, under difficult
circumstances, but you get a negative response
like “this isn't good, that doesn't work”, so it's
not constructive criticism- because that's always
good- but just something negative, then it has a
demotivating effect. So, give me constructive
feedback, not things that are irrelevant. And
we're dealing with that more and more often. Or
that costs are too high, it takes too long,

16. 16
this or that. You don't have control over that.
The result has then become less important than
the total cost package. [6]
Although negative feedback in performance
appraisals has a positive effect on intrinsic
motivation, it must not gain the upper hand. The
employee satisfaction report reinforces this line
of reasoning; although employees desire
managers to take a critical look at the current
situation, negative performance appraisal
feedback must not suppress positive performance
appraisal feedback to a point where the latter is
absent. Again, this is linked to the subordinate
role that negative performance appraisal feedback
fulfils in relation to intrinsic motivation; positive
performance appraisal feedback is desired more.
However, there seems to be a limit for both
positive and negative performance appraisal
feedback, which can be linked to the frequency
notion. Too much positive or negative
performance appraisal feedback, too often, is
experienced as tiresome, as the credibility of the
performance appraisals decreases.
Notwithstanding this, it was derived from the
employee satisfaction report that the current
frequency of positive and negative performance
appraisal feedback was regarded as unsatisfactory
to barely satisfactory. Frequency is therefore, in
principle, positively related to positive and
negative performance appraisal feedback. It can
be concluded that both positive or negative
performance appraisal feedback generally have a
positive effect on intrinsic motivation, therefore,
hypothesis 2a and 2b are supported.
4.2.3. Formal and informal performance appraisal and
intrinsic motivation
The findings that regard to the effect of formal
performance appraisal, as formulated in
hypothesis 3a, and informal performance
appraisal, as formulated in hypothesis 3b, on
intrinsic motivation, will be discussed here.
Scrutinising the effect of formal performance
evaluations has not resulted in a clear direct
relation with intrinsic motivation. A small group
of respondents has stated that their intrinsic
motivation would increase if formal performance
appraisals had a more informal character.
However, contrasting this notion, one employee
stated that formal performance appraisals should
be more critical for intrinsic motivation to
increase. Therefore, although informality is
desired and appreciated— even in formal
performance appraisals— formality should not
disappear completely; firm guidance is also
desired.
Drawing further on this line of
reasoning, it is argued that informal performance
appraisals prevail in relation to intrinsic
motivation, due to the positive effect of high
frequency. Formal performance appraisals
generally occur twice a year, in the form of a
retrospective performance evaluation interview
and a functional assessment interview that
focuses on the future. In general, formal
performance appraisals are perceived as more
top-down and artificial in nature, compared to
informal performance appraisals, due to the fact
that they are planned in advance, yielding more
time to prepare feedback. Moreover, they are less
frequent than informal performance appraisals
and thus are regarded as a more important event.
In contrast, informal performance appraisals are

17. 17
of a more spontaneous nature. In summary, it can
be argued that formal performance appraisals do
not have a clear-cut effect on intrinsic
motivation, while informal performance
appraisals have a positive effect on intrinsic
motivation.
Formal is twice a year, informal happens on a
daily basis for me, particularly because
I am a professional perfectionist; you want to
know what you have done, you want to
move forward and get better, that is my
motivation to develop. [3]
It can be concluded that, while formal
performance appraisals do not have a
straightforward effect on intrinsic motivation,
informal performance appraisals have a positive
effect on intrinsic motivation; therefore,
hypothesis 3a is rejected and hypothesis 3b is
supported. Table 1 presents an overview of the
hypotheses that were included in this research,
along with their status resulting from the findings
discussed in this chapter. In the forthcoming
discussion, the findings will be compared to the
literature from the literature review. The same
structure as in previous chapters will be adopted
for this discussion.
Hypothesis Status
Hypothesis 1 Supported
Hypothesis 2a Supported
Hypothesis 2b Supported
Hypothesis 3a Rejected
Hypothesis 3b Supported
Table 1. Hypotheses overview.
5. Analysis
5.1. Frequency of performance appraisal and intrinsic
motivation
A perceived high frequency of performance
appraisals has a positive effect on intrinsic
motivation, as employees regard this as a high
number of opportunities for learning and self-
development. This is in line with stewardship
theory, which states that employees are
intrinsically motivated by these opportunities, as
they enable them to reflect on themselves, and to
improve (Buelens and Van den Broeck, 2007;
Donaldson and Davis, 1991; Houston, 2000).
Furthermore, as frequency is part of the
feedback-rich environment description, this
proved to be suiting for the positive relation
between frequency and intrinsic motivation
(Kinicki et al., 2004). This relation has been
proven to be strong, as employees took the
initiative to approach their supervisor, thus
increasing the frequency of performance
appraisals themselves. Based on this critical
evidence, hypothesis 1 is confirmed.
Moreover, this positive relation between
performance appraisal frequency and intrinsic
motivation also affects the other two sets of
hypotheses; a high frequency magnifies the effect
of positive or negative feedback in performance
appraisals, and informal performance appraisals
on intrinsic motivation. This is in line with
Kinicki et al's (2004) feedback-rich environment
description. Frequency does not have a clear
effect on formal performance appraisal, due to
the ambiguous relation between formal
performance appraisal and intrinsic motivation.
Although frequency has a clear effect on three of
the performance appraisal characteristics, it also
sets a limit; the positive effect of positive or

18. 18
negative performance appraisal feedback
diminishes when performance appraisals are
deployed excessively, which attenuates the
strength of the relevant formulated hypotheses.
This line of reasoning also applies to informal
performance appraisal. Formal performance
appraisal is excluded from this line of reasoning,
as employees did not formulate a consistent
relation between formal performance appraisal
and intrinsic motivation.
5.2. Positive and negative performance appraisal feedback
and intrinsic motivation
Positive feedback in performance appraisals is
regarded as positive by employees, in relation
with intrinsic motivation, as it offers employees a
learning opportunity as well as an opportunity for
self-development This conclusion is in line with
stewardship theory and the description of a
feedback-rich environment, which states that
frequent and positive feedback is desired by
employees (Buelens and Van den Broeck, 2007;
Donaldson and Davis, 1991; Houston, 2000;
Kinicki et al., 2004). Moreover, the same line of
reasoning applies for negative feedback in
performance appraisals.
However, these lines of reasoning must
be clarified. It should be noted that a balance
between positive or negative performance
appraisal feedback must be attained, for intrinsic
motivation to increase. This balance includes
more positive than negative performance
appraisal feedback, which is in line with Kinicki
et al.'s (2004) feedback-rich environment
description. This is also where the current
research contributes to literature. By narrowing
the focus from motivation to intrinsic
motivation, and by including the negative aspect
of performance appraisals, it is found that
negative performance appraisal feedback plays an
important role in the positive relation with
intrinsic motivation as well. This is in line with
stewardship theory, which states that self-
development opportunities are valued by
employees; negative feedback is perceived as an
opportunity to critically reflect upon
performance, and consequently as an opportunity
for self-development, thus increasing intrinsic
motivation (Buelens and Van den Broeck, 2007;
Houston, 2000). Sufficient supporting evidence
has been identified, which leads one to confirm
hypothesis 2a and 2b; though it should be noted
that the positive relation in 2a is stronger, as
positive performance appraisal feedback is
desired more than negative performance appraisal
feedback.
5.3. Formal and informal performance appraisal and
intrinsic motivation
Compared to prior literature on performance
appraisals and intrinsic motivation, it can be
concluded that the distinction between formal
and informal performance appraisal has proven
to be sensible, as clearly distinctive effects have
been found on intrinsic motivation. Formal
performance appraisals are regarded as both
pressuring and desired by some employees,
leading to an ambiguous and therefore
insignificant relation with intrinsic motivation.
Although a weaker positive effect of formal
performance appraisals was formulated, this
relation proved to be weaker and less clear than
expected. Therefore, a nuance should be given to
the unconditional nature of the self-development
stewardship theory notion; not all self-
development opportunities lead to an increase of

19. 19
intrinsic motivation (Buelens and Van den
Broeck, 2007; Donaldson and Davis, 1991;
Houston, 2000). Informal performance
appraisals, on the other hand, do have a
straightforward effect on intrinsic motivation. In
line with stewardship theory and the feedback-
rich environment notion, it can be argued that
informal performance appraisals provide frequent
self-development opportunities of a spontaneous
nature, which results in an increase in intrinsic
motivation (Buelens and Van den Broeck, 2007;
Donaldson and Davis, 1991; Houston, 2000).
Moreover, this line of reasoning also suits the
feedback-rich environment notion, which also
offers an explanation for the difference in effect
compared to formal performance appraisals;
informal performance appraisals are believed to
be more desired for intrinsic motivation, due to a
higher degree of specificity, through spontaneity
and greater relevance and recency of the feedback
(Kinicki et al., 2008).
In summary, regarding the performance
appraisal characteristics that were included in this
research, it can be concluded that the results are
compatible with Van der Kolk's (2013) statement
that management controls should be used in a
behavioural way that satisfies employees' intrinsic
desires. Only formal performance appraisal did
not withstand this test, due to a lack of frequency
and therefore insufficient opportunities for self-
development.
6. Conclusion
This study was conducted to address specific
gaps in the literature regarding the effect of
management control mechanisms and intrinsic
motivation. Specifically, the main theoretical
objective was to reveal the relation between
performance appraisals and intrinsic motivation,
which is in line with the research question. In
summary, it was shown that positive and negative
performance appraisal feedback, and
performance appraisal of an informal nature have
a positive effect on employee motivation; this
effect is mainly explained by the self-
development desire of employees. Moreover, a
similar effect was triggered by a high frequency of
performance appraisals. Formal performance
appraisals, however, did not show a
straightforward relation with intrinsic motivation.
The findings of this study contribute to the field
of management control, representing a clear and
comprehensive picture of the effect of
performance appraisal as a behaviour control
mechanism on intrinsic motivation. Moreover,
focusing on intrinsic motivation, this study
contributed to the stewardship theory, by testing
and consequently confirming its views regarding
intrinsic motivation in a practical setting.
Therefore, this study contributes to the scarce
volume of empirical research on stewardship
theory and bridges a potential relevance gap. In
addition, as this study was conducted in the
public sector, a contribution has been made to
strengthen the current, subordinate role of the
public sector in employee motivation research, in
relation to the private sector.
On the basis of these theoretical
implications, two implications for practice arise.
Firstly, it shows how performance appraisal
affects intrinsic motivation. This presents a
tailored guideline for managers; concrete
requirements have been imposed by employees
that should be met when implementing specific
changes or additions to this specific behaviour

20. 20
control mechanism. Secondly, focusing on the
intrinsic motivation notion, it was shown that
intrinsic motivation can be of utmost importance
in an organisation; it has proven to be a powerful
driver that employees expect to be created and
maintained by managers.
A number of limitations to this research
must be recognised. Firstly, the primary limitation
of this study stems from the specificity of the
research setting; the study covered one
organisation, and the primary data collection
method included only thirteen respondents. In
spite of the fact that the organisation-wide
employee satisfaction report reinforces the
findings in this study, this leads to generalisability
concerns, as generalising the findings to alternate
contexts and organisations may prove to be
difficult. Secondly, this study has focused on one
behaviour control mechanism. Aside from
excluded behaviour control mechanisms, it must
also be noted that input and output control
mechanisms could yield effects on intrinsic
motivation. It has been stated that forms of
control typically do not exist in isolation, but
rather are combined to influence the attainment
of a specific aim (Cardinal 2001; Kirsch 1996).
Due to the focus of this study, this statement has
not fully been taken into account.
The findings of this study, along with its
limitations, suggest interesting avenues for future
research. Firstly, through the research on
performance appraisal characteristics and their
effect on intrinsic motivation, this study has
opened up opportunities to further analyse the
effects of these characteristics, and consequently
increase the generalisability of this study's
findings. Moreover, future research could further
analyse the interconnectedness and interplay of
these performance appraisal characteristics.
Secondly, the performance appraisal notion could
be broken down further, potentially identifying
other characteristics that could conform or
contradict the effects on intrinsic motivation
which have been identified by this study. This
would paint a fuller picture, resulting in more
steadfast conclusions. Thirdly, it would be
interesting to conduct a longitudinal case study in
one or more companies, before, during and after
a turbulent period, change or event. This would
allow for variance to be measured, which stems
from a change in perception potentially triggered
by this change in the organisational environment.
Acknowledgements
I gratefully acknowledge the people that stood by
me during this intensive period, which was
preluded by an accident and required a
considerable time period in recovery. I would like
to thank my mum and dad, and my brother
Sander, for supporting me in this time. I would
also like to thank Emily, my girlfriend, who stood
beside me from start to finish, for taking care of
me and guiding me through this turbulent period-
and also for proofreading my work. Furthermore,
I am grateful for the helpful comments and
suggestions received from my supervisor Berend
van der Kolk, as well as Remi and Remco, my
peers, who provided me with solid grips in
finishing my Master's Thesis. I would also like to
thank Omrop Fryslân, for granting me the
opportunity to interview employees, and thus
conduct my research.

21. References
Abbey, A. (1982). Technological innovation: the
R & D work environment (No. 49). UMI
Research Press.
Adler, P. S., & Borys, B. (1996). Two types of
bureaucracy: Enabling and coercive.
Administrative science quarterly, 61-89.
Aiken, M., & Hage, J. (1968). Organizational
interdependence and intra-organizational
structure. American sociological review,
912-930.
Aken, J. van, Berends, H., & Van der Bij, H.
(2012). Problem solving in organizations:
A methodological handbook for business
and management students. Cambridge
University Press.
Anthony, R. and Govindarajan, V., 2007.
Management Control Systems, Chicago,
Mc-Graw-Hill/ Irwin.
Audi, R. (2003). Epistemology: a contemporary
introduction to the theory of
knowledge (Vol. 2). Psychology Press.
Boswell, W. R., & Boudreau, J. W. (2002).
Separating the developmental and
evaluative performance appraisal uses.
Journal of Business and Psychology,
16(3), 391-412.
Brink, P. J. (1991). Issues of reliability and
validity. Qualitative nursing research: A
contemporary dialogue, 164-186.
Buelens, M., & Van den Broeck, H. (2007). An
analysis of differences in work
motivation between public and private
sector organizations. Public
administration review, 67(1), 65-74.
Burgelman, R. A., & Sayles, L. R. (1988). Inside
corporate innovation. Simon and
Schuster.
Burgess, S., & Ratto, M. (2003). The role of
incentives in the public sector: Issues and
evidence. Oxford review of economic
policy, 19(2), 285-300.
Cardinal, L. B. (2001). Technological innovation
in the pharmaceutical industry: The use
of organizational control in managing
research and development. Organization
Science, 12(1), 19-36.
Chenhall, R. H. (2003). Management control
systems design within its organizational
context: findings from contingency-based
research and directions for the
future. Accounting, organizations and
society, 28(2), 127-168.
Corbey, M.H. (2010), Agent of steward? Over
mensbeeld en management control,
Maandblad voor Accountancy en
Bedrijfseconomie, vol. 84, no. 9
(September), 487-492.
Covington, M. V., & Müeller, K. J. (2001).
Intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation: An
approach/avoidance reformulation.
Educational Psychology Review, 13(2),
157-176.

22. 22
Davis, J. H., Schoorman, F. D., & Donaldson, L.
(1997). Toward a stewardship theory of
management. Academy of Management
review, 22(1), 20-47.
Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New
York: Plenum Press.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (Eds.).
(2002). Handbook of self-determination
research. Rochester: University
Rochester Press.
Deshpande, R., & Zaltman, G. (1982). Factors
affecting the use of market research
information: A path analysis. Journal of
marketing research, 14-31.
Dewar, R., & Werbel, J. (1979). Universalistic and
contingency predictions of employee
satisfaction and conflict. Administrative
science quarterly, 426-448.
Dewar, R. D., Whetten, D. A., & Boje, D. (1980).
An examination of the reliability and
validity of the Aiken and Hage scales of
centralization, formalization, and task
routineness. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 120-128.
Dilulio, John D., 1994, Principled agents: the
cultural bases of behavior in a federal
government bureaucracy, Journal of
Public Administration Research and
Theory 4:277-318.
Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. H. (1991).
Stewardship theory or agency theory:
CEO governance and shareholder
returns. Australian Journal of
management,16(1), 49-64.
Frey, B. S., Homberg, F., & Osterloh, M. (2013).
Organizational control systems and pay-
for- performance in the public
service. Organization Studies,
0170840613483655.
Griffin, R. W. (1990), Management, 3rd edition.
Dallas: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976).
Motivation through the design of work:
Test of a theory. Organizational
behavior and human performance, 16(2),
250-279.
Hage, J., & Aiken, M. (1967). Relationship of
centralization to other structural
properties. Administrative Science
Quarterly, 72-92.
Hall, R. H. (1968). Professionalization and
bureaucratization. American sociological
review, 92-104.
Herzberg, F. I. (1966). Work and the nature of
man. Cleveland: World Publishing
Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. B.
(1959). The motivation to work. New
York: John Wiley & Sons.
Herzberg, F. (1986). One more time: How do
you motivate employees. New York: The
Leader Manager, 433-448.

23. 23
Hopper, T., & Powell, A. (1985). Making sense of
research into the organizational and
social aspects of management
accounting: A review of its underlying
assumptions [1]. Journal of
management Studies, 22(5), 429-465.
Houston, D. J. (2000). Public-service motivation:
A multivariate test. Journal of public
administration research and theory, 10(4),
713-728.
Ilgen, D. R., Fisher, C. D., & Taylor, M. S. (1979).
Consequences of individual feedback on
behavior in organizations. Journal of
applied psychology, 64(4), 349.
Kauffman, D. F., Soylu, M. Y., & Duke, B.
(2011). Validation of the motivation to
teach scale. H. U. Journal of
Education, 40(40).
Khandwalla, P. N. (1974). The design of
organisations. New York: Harcourt Brace
Jovanovich, Inc.
Kinicki, A. J., Prussia, G. E., Wu, B. J., & McKee-
Ryan, F. M. (2004). A covariance
structure analysis of employees' response
to performance feedback. Journal of
applied psychology, 89(6), 1057.
Kirsch, L. J. (1996). The management of complex
tasks in organizations: Controlling the
systems development process.
Organization Science, 7(1), 1-21.
Kleinginna Jr, P. R., & Kleinginna, A. M. (1981).
A categorized list of motivation
definitions, with a suggestion for a
consensual definition. Motivation and
emotion, 5(3), 263-291.
Kolk, B. van der (2013). Bonussen: kunnen we
zonder? Maandblad voor Accountancy
en Bedrijfseconomie, vol. 87, no. 3
(March), 487-492.
Kovach, K. A. (1995). Employee motivation:
Addressing a crucial factor in your
organization's performance. Employment
Relations Today, 22(2), 93-107.
Laing, R.D. (1967). The Politics of Experience.
New York: Ballantine.
Louise Barriball, K., & While, A. (1994).
Collecting Data using a semi‐structured
interview: a discussion paper. Journal of
advanced nursing, 19(2), 328-335.
Maciariello, J. A., & Kirby, C. J. (1994).
Management control systems: using
adaptive systems to attain control.
Prentice-Hall International.
Otley, D. (1994). Management control in
contemporary organizations: towards a
wider framework. Management
accounting research, 5(3), 289-299.
Ouchi, W. G. (1979). A Conceptual Framework
for the Design of Organizational Control
Mechanisms. Management Science,
25(9), 833-848.
Pearce, J. L., & Porter, L. W. (1986). Employee
responses to formal performance

24. 24
appraisal feedback. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 71(2), 211.
Perry, J. L., & Porter, L. W. (1982). Factors
affecting the context for motivation in
public organizations. Academy of
management review, 7(1), 89-98.
Pugh, D. S., Hickson, D. J., Hinings, C. R., &
Turner, C. (1969). The context of
organization structures. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 91-114.
Rainlall, S. (2004). A review of employee
motivation theories and their
implications for employee retention
within organizations. The journal of
American academy of business, 9, 21-
26.
Robbins, S. P. (1991). Organizational behavior:
Concepts, controversies, and
applications. Prentice Hall.
Roberson, Q. M., & Stewart, M. M. (2006).
Understanding the motivational effects
of procedural and informational justice in
feedback processes. British Journal of
Psychology, 97(3), 281-298.
Rockness, H. O., & Shields, M. D. (1984).
Organizational control systems in
research and development. Accounting,
Organizations and Society, 9(2), 165-177.
Swanborn, P. G. (1996). A common base for
quality control criteria in quantitative and
qualitative research. Quality and
Quantity, 30(1), 19-35.
Taylor, M. S., Tracy, K. B., Renard, M. K.,
Harrison, J. K., & Carroll, S. J. (1995).
Due process in performance appraisal: A
quasi-experiment in procedural
justice. Administrative Science Quarterly,
495-523.
Turner Parish, J., Cadwallader, S., & Busch, P.
(2008). Want to, need to, ought to:
employee commitment to organizational
change. Journal of Organizational
Change Management, 21(1), 32-52.
Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New
York: Wiley.
Wiley, C. (1997). What motivates employees
according to over 40 years of
motivation surveys. International Journal
of Manpower, 18(3), 263-280.
Wright, B. E. (2001). Public-sector work
motivation: A review of the current
literature and a revised conceptual
model. Journal of public administration
research and theory, 11(4), 559-586.
Yin, R. K. (2013). Case study research: Design
and methods. Sage publications.

25. 25
Appendix A. Interview questions: variables and items at the individual unit level.
Variables Items References
Introduction
When did you start working for Omrop Fryslân?
Could you briefly describe the goal of your department?
What is your role within this department?
For how long have you held this position already?
What are the core tasks that are part of your function?
What has changed in terms of management control, over the past five years?
What is your opinion on these changes?
Behaviour Control
Mechanisms:
Performance appraisal
Stage 1: measuring the frequency and nature of performance appraisal Abbey (1982)
What are the performance appraisals based on? Kinicki et al. (2004)
What is the ratio between formal and informal performance appraisals?
What is the ratio between positive and negative performance appraisals?
How often do performance appraisals occur?
Stage 2: measuring the impact of performance appraisal
What is your opinion on the performance appraisals?
How do the performance appraisals affect your intrinsic work motivation?
Centralisation
Stage 1: measuring the level of centralisation Aiken and Hage (1968)
How large is the ability to take action yourself, without supervisor approval? Dewar et al. (1980)
What are the consequences if an unauthorised decision is made or action is taken? Khandwalla (1974)
Stage 2: measuring the impact of centralisation
What is your opinion on the centralisation that you have to cope with?
How does the present degree of centralisation affect your intrinsic work motivation?
Formalisation
Stage 1: measuring the level of formalisation Aiken and Hage (1968)
Are formulated rules available for every work situation? Desphande and Zaltman (1982)
Are standard procedures established for every work situation? Dewar and Werbel (1979)
Do these rules and procedures need to be strictly followed; are there consequences? Hall (1968)
Stage 2: measuring the impact of formalisation
What is your opinion on the formalisation that you have to cope with?
How does the present degree of formalisation affect your intrinsic work motivation?