Hiếu, P. T. (2026). Work Motivation of University Lecturers: A Narrative Review and Policy-Oriented Synthesis. International Journal of Research, 13(1), 494–507. https://doi.org/10.26643/ijr/2026/24
Phí Thị Hiếu
Associate Professor, Thai Nguyen University of Education, Thai Nguyen, Vietnam
Abstract
This article presents a narrative review of selected literature on work motivation among university lecturers, aiming to synthesize key theoretical perspectives and recurring empirical themes. Drawing on established motivational frameworks, particularly self-determination theory and two-factor theory, the review examines how intrinsic and extrinsic factors interact to influence lecturers’ engagement, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment.
The reviewed literature suggests that intrinsic motivation is frequently identified as an important factor in sustaining lecturers’ long-term engagement and professional dedication. These intrinsic factors are strongly supported by autonomy, perceived competence, collegial relationships, and opportunities for meaningful teaching and research. At the same time, extrinsic conditions, including salary, workload, promotion systems, and employment stability, function as essential foundational factors that shape lecturers’ overall job satisfaction and retention, even if they do not directly generate intrinsic motivation.
The review further highlights the importance of organizational culture, leadership practices, and governance structures in shaping motivational experiences. Several studies suggest that managerialist and performance-driven environments may, in some contexts, be associated with reduced perceptions of autonomy and intrinsic motivation among lecturers. In addition, contemporary higher education reforms emphasizing accountability and performance metrics are shown to have mixed motivational effects, depending on how they are implemented and perceived by academic staff. Overall, the review underscores that lecturers’ work motivation is a multidimensional and context-dependent phenomenon with significant implications for teaching quality, research productivity, and the sustainability of higher education systems. The reviewed literature points to the potential value of higher education policies that take lecturers’ psychological needs into account when designing governance and evaluation mechanisms.
Keywords
Work motivation, academic motivation, university lecturers, higher education
Introduction
Work motivation of university lecturers has been widely recognized as a critical factor influencing the quality of higher education, institutional effectiveness, and the sustainable development of academic systems worldwide. University lecturers play a central role not only in teaching and research but also in curriculum development, academic governance, and community engagement. As higher education systems face increasing pressures related to globalization, digital transformation, accountability, and performance-based evaluation, understanding the factors that motivate lecturers to perform effectively has become an important concern for researchers, educational leaders, and policymakers.
In the context of higher education, work motivation refers to the internal and external forces that initiate, direct, and sustain lecturers’ professional behaviors, including teaching commitment, research productivity, innovation, and engagement with institutional goals. Motivated lecturers are more likely to demonstrate higher levels of job satisfaction, instructional quality, and professional dedication, which in turn positively affect student learning outcomes and institutional reputation. Conversely, low levels of work motivation among academic staff may lead to reduced teaching effectiveness, diminished research output, burnout, and higher turnover intentions.
The literature on work motivation of university lecturers draws on established motivational theories such as Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, Herzberg’s two-factor theory, self-determination theory, and expectancy–value theory. These theoretical frameworks have been used to explain how intrinsic factors (e.g., passion for teaching, academic autonomy, professional growth) and extrinsic factors (e.g., salary, promotion opportunities, working conditions, leadership support) interact to shape lecturers’ motivational orientations. In academic settings, intrinsic motivation is often emphasized due to the intellectual and autonomous nature of academic work, yet extrinsic conditions remain crucial for sustaining long-term commitment and performance.
A growing body of empirical studies across different national contexts has explored how lecturers’ work motivation may be influenced by a combination of individual, organizational, and contextual factors. These include institutional policies, workload distribution, research support, evaluation systems, leadership styles, collegial relationships, and opportunities for professional development. In recent years, changes in higher education governance—such as increased performance measurement, publication pressure, and competition for research funding—have significantly reshaped lecturers’ motivational experiences. While some lecturers may feel motivated by clear performance incentives and recognition, others may experience increased stress and reduced autonomy.
In developing and transitional higher education contexts, including Vietnam and other Southeast Asian countries, research has highlighted additional challenges related to limited resources, heavy teaching loads, and disparities in career advancement opportunities. These contextual factors may intensify the importance of supportive leadership, fair evaluation systems, and meaningful professional development in sustaining lecturers’ motivation. However, despite a growing body of research, existing findings remain fragmented, and systematic syntheses focusing specifically on university lecturers’ work motivation are still limited.
Therefore, a comprehensive literature review on the work motivation of university lecturers is necessary to consolidate existing evidence, identify dominant research themes, and clarify theoretical and empirical trends in this field. By synthesizing prior studies, such a review can contribute to a deeper understanding of how motivational factors operate within higher education and provide valuable insights for institutional policy and academic management. Ultimately, enhancing lecturers’ work motivation is essential for improving educational quality, fostering innovation, and ensuring the long-term sustainability of higher education institutions.
Materials and Methods
This study employed a narrative literature review approach to critically synthesize influential theoretical and empirical studies relevant to lecturers’ work motivation. The literature was collected primarily from peer-reviewed academic journals, scholarly books, and reputable academic reports focusing on higher education, educational psychology, and human resource management in academic settings. The review included both international and regional studies, with particular attention to empirical research and theoretical frameworks addressing intrinsic and extrinsic motivation, job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and professional engagement among university lecturers.
The selection of literature was guided by the following inclusion criteria: (1) studies explicitly examining work motivation, job motivation, or closely related constructs such as job satisfaction and organizational commitment among university or college lecturers; (2) research grounded in established motivational theories, including self-determination theory and two-factor theory; (3) studies conducted in higher education contexts; and (4) publications considered relevant to contemporary higher education systems and policy environments. Both qualitative and quantitative studies were included to capture a broad range of methodological perspectives.
After the identification and screening process, the selected publications were analyzed using a thematic synthesis approach. The analysis focused on identifying recurring themes and patterns related to motivational factors influencing university lecturers. Specifically, the findings were organized around key thematic dimensions, including intrinsic motivational factors such as professional autonomy and academic identity, extrinsic motivational factors such as salary, promotion, and working conditions, and institutional and policy-related influences such as leadership practices, performance evaluation systems, and professional development opportunities.
The synthesis process involved comparing findings across studies to identify commonalities and divergences, as well as examining how contextual factors such as national higher education policies and institutional characteristics shape lecturers’ motivation. Through this thematic organization, the review aimed to provide an integrated and evidence-based understanding of work motivation among university lecturers, thereby informing future research directions and policy development in higher education.
Research Results
Based on the literature selection criteria and the methodological approach outlined in the Materials and Methods section, the reviewed studies provide a comprehensive and multi-layered picture of work motivation among university lecturers. Across diverse higher education systems and institutional contexts, lecturers’ motivation emerges as a complex construct influenced by individual psychological needs, organizational conditions, and broader policy environments. Drawing primarily on self-determination theory and two-factor theory, the findings are synthesized into interrelated thematic domains that collectively explain how and why lecturers experience varying levels of motivation in their academic work.
1. Theoretical grounding of lecturers’ work motivation in higher education research
A dominant characteristic of the reviewed literature is its strong grounding in established motivational theories. Self-determination theory is widely used to conceptualize lecturers’ work motivation as a continuum ranging from intrinsic motivation to different forms of extrinsic motivation. Many studies drawing on self-determination theory emphasize autonomy as a key motivational factor in academic work, although the strength of this relationship appears to vary across institutional contexts. Empirical studies demonstrate that autonomy, understood as control over teaching content, research agendas, and professional decision-making, is a central motivational driver for university lecturers. Research grounded in self-determination theory shows that when lecturers perceive high levels of autonomy, they report stronger intrinsic motivation, higher job satisfaction, and greater commitment to their institutions. Conversely, environments characterized by rigid managerial control or excessive administrative regulation tend to frustrate autonomy needs, resulting in diminished motivation.
Two-factor theory provides a complementary perspective by distinguishing between intrinsic motivators related to the nature of academic work itself and extrinsic or hygiene factors associated with employment conditions. The reviewed studies consistently support Herzberg’s distinction, showing that intrinsic factors such as intellectual challenge, recognition, and opportunities for academic achievement play a crucial role in sustaining long-term motivation. At the same time, inadequate hygiene factors—such as low salary, job insecurity, or heavy workloads—do not necessarily motivate when present but can significantly demotivate when absent.
Qualitative research deepens these theoretical insights by illustrating how lecturers interpret motivation through their professional identities. Interviews and narrative studies reveal that many lecturers view teaching and research not merely as occupational tasks but as vocations aligned with personal values and social responsibilities. These findings reinforce theoretical models that conceptualize academic motivation as value-driven and meaning-oriented rather than purely instrumental.
2. Intrinsic motivational factors in academic work
Across the reviewed literature, intrinsic motivation consistently emerges as a central component of lecturers’ engagement and persistence in higher education. Studies examining intrinsic motivation highlight factors such as enjoyment of teaching, intellectual curiosity, commitment to knowledge creation, and satisfaction derived from mentoring students. These intrinsic drivers are frequently identified as more stable and enduring than extrinsic incentives.
Research grounded in self-determination theory demonstrates that intrinsic motivation among lecturers is strongly associated with perceived competence. Lecturers who feel capable of delivering high-quality teaching, conducting meaningful research, and contributing to academic communities report higher levels of motivation and professional fulfillment. Opportunities for professional development, research collaboration, and academic recognition are therefore frequently cited as key conditions supporting intrinsic motivation.
Several qualitative studies further show that intrinsic motivation is closely linked to lecturers’ perceptions of the social value of their work. Lecturers often describe motivation in terms of contributing to student development, advancing societal knowledge, or addressing local and global challenges. This sense of purpose reinforces sustained engagement, even in contexts where extrinsic rewards are limited.
However, the literature also indicates that intrinsic motivation is vulnerable to erosion when institutional conditions undermine autonomy or overload lecturers with administrative tasks. Studies report that increasing bureaucratic demands and performance pressures can reduce the time and energy available for intrinsically rewarding activities such as teaching innovation and research, thereby weakening motivation over time.
3. Extrinsic motivational factors, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment
In addition to intrinsic factors, extrinsic motivators play a significant role in shaping lecturers’ work motivation, particularly through their influence on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Quantitative studies frequently examine salary, promotion systems, workload distribution, and employment stability as key predictors of motivation-related outcomes.
The reviewed literature indicates that fair and transparent reward systems contribute positively to lecturers’ job satisfaction. While salary alone is rarely identified as a primary motivator, inadequate compensation relative to workload and expectations is consistently associated with dissatisfaction and reduced commitment. Promotion opportunities and recognition of academic achievements are similarly important, particularly for early- and mid-career lecturers seeking career progression.
Organizational commitment emerges as a closely related construct in many studies. Lecturers who perceive institutional support, fairness, and recognition tend to report stronger affective commitment and a greater willingness to invest effort in teaching and research. Conversely, perceptions of inequity, opaque evaluation criteria, or unstable employment conditions are associated with lower commitment and higher turnover intentions.
Importantly, the literature emphasizes that extrinsic factors interact with intrinsic motivation rather than replacing it. Supportive extrinsic conditions can create an environment in which intrinsic motivation flourishes, whereas poor working conditions can undermine even highly motivated lecturers. This interaction aligns with theoretical arguments that motivation in academic work is best understood as a combination of internal drives and external supports.
4. Organizational culture, leadership, and institutional governance
A substantial portion of the reviewed studies situates lecturers’ motivation within organizational contexts, highlighting the role of institutional culture, leadership styles, and governance structures. Research consistently demonstrates that collegial and participatory organizational cultures are positively associated with higher levels of motivation and job satisfaction among lecturers.
Studies examining leadership practices find that supportive and transformational leadership styles foster motivation by recognizing academic contributions, encouraging professional autonomy, and facilitating collaboration. Leaders who engage lecturers in decision-making processes contribute to a sense of ownership and shared responsibility, which enhances both intrinsic motivation and organizational commitment.
In contrast, studies report that managerialist governance models emphasizing performance metrics, accountability, and competition may negatively affect lecturers’ motivation. When evaluation systems are perceived as overly quantitative or misaligned with academic values, lecturers often experience increased stress and reduced intrinsic motivation. These findings suggest that governance structures play a critical mediating role between policy demands and individual motivational experiences.
Qualitative evidence further reveals that organizational culture influences how lecturers interpret institutional expectations. In supportive environments, lecturers are more likely to view performance requirements as opportunities for growth, whereas in unsupportive contexts, similar requirements may be perceived as controlling or demotivating.
5. Policy environments and systemic influences on lecturers’ motivation
Beyond organizational factors, the reviewed literature highlights the significant impact of national and institutional policy environments on lecturers’ motivation. Higher education reforms related to funding, accountability, and labor markets are frequently examined in relation to academic work motivation.
Studies document that performance-based funding models and publication-driven evaluation systems can alter motivational orientations among lecturers. While some lecturers respond positively to performance incentives, others experience heightened pressure and diminished intrinsic motivation, particularly when evaluation criteria prioritize quantity over quality.
Job insecurity emerges as a recurring theme in policy-related research. Studies focusing on contract-based employment and casualization report negative effects on motivation, job satisfaction, and long-term commitment. Lecturers facing uncertain employment conditions often adopt extrinsically driven motivational strategies focused on short-term survival rather than long-term academic development.
At the same time, policy environments that support academic freedom, stable employment, and investment in professional development are associated with more sustainable motivational patterns. These findings underscore the importance of aligning higher education policies with motivational principles that support both individual well-being and institutional quality.
6. Variations in motivation across career stages and institutional contexts
The reviewed studies reveal systematic variations in work motivation across career stages, institutional types, and national contexts. Early-career lecturers often emphasize extrinsic concerns such as job security, mentorship, and promotion opportunities, reflecting their transitional position within academic labor markets.
Mid-career lecturers tend to focus on balancing teaching, research, and service demands, with motivation shaped by workload management and recognition of achievements. Senior academics, in contrast, frequently prioritize autonomy, leadership roles, and opportunities to influence institutional directions.
Cross-institutional comparisons indicate that resource availability and institutional mission significantly shape motivational experiences. Research-intensive universities often provide stronger research-related motivators, while teaching-oriented institutions may emphasize pedagogical engagement. Cross-national studies further show that motivational patterns are influenced by cultural norms, policy stability, and economic conditions.
These variations highlight the importance of contextualized approaches to understanding and supporting lecturers’ motivation rather than relying on one-size-fits-all strategies.
7. Consequences of lecturers’ work motivation for individual and institutional outcomes
Finally, the literature consistently documents the consequences of lecturers’ motivation for both individual performance and institutional effectiveness. High levels of motivation are associated with greater teaching quality, research productivity, innovation in pedagogy, and engagement in academic service.
Conversely, low motivation is linked to burnout, emotional exhaustion, and intentions to leave the profession. Several studies suggest that sustained motivational decline can undermine institutional capacity by reducing staff retention and weakening academic communities.
By integrating findings across theoretical frameworks, methodologies, and contexts, the reviewed literature demonstrates that lecturers’ work motivation is a critical mechanism through which organizational practices and policy decisions influence higher education quality.
Discussion
The present review highlights that lecturers’ work motivation in higher education is not solely an individual psychological phenomenon but is deeply embedded in institutional practices and policy frameworks. By synthesizing findings across studies grounded in self-determination theory and two-factor theory, this discussion connects each major result theme to implications for higher education policy, governance, and management.
First, the strong theoretical grounding of lecturers’ motivation in self-determination theory and two-factor theory has important policy implications. The consistent emphasis on autonomy, competence, and relatedness suggests that higher education policies should move beyond narrow performance management approaches and explicitly support lecturers’ psychological needs. Policies that increase administrative control, impose rigid accountability mechanisms, or standardize academic work without regard for disciplinary diversity may unintentionally undermine intrinsic motivation. From a policy perspective, this implies that national and institutional frameworks should preserve academic freedom, allow flexibility in teaching and research design, and recognize the professional judgment of lecturers as a core principle of quality assurance in higher education.
Second, the prominence of intrinsic motivational factors such as intellectual engagement, enjoyment of teaching, and commitment to knowledge creation underscores the need for policies that protect the core academic mission. The results indicate that lecturers are most motivated when they can focus on meaningful teaching and research activities rather than excessive administrative tasks. Higher education policies that overload lecturers with reporting requirements or prioritize short-term output indicators risk eroding intrinsic motivation over time. Therefore, policy reforms should aim to streamline administrative processes, reduce unnecessary bureaucratic burdens, and create institutional conditions that allow lecturers to invest time and energy in pedagogically and intellectually rewarding work.
Third, findings related to extrinsic motivational factors, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment highlight the importance of fair and transparent employment policies. While salary and material rewards alone do not guarantee high motivation, inadequate compensation, unclear promotion pathways, and insecure employment conditions consistently undermine lecturers’ commitment. This has direct implications for higher education labor policies, particularly in systems experiencing increasing casualization and contract-based employment. Policies that ensure reasonable workload allocation, transparent evaluation criteria, and stable career pathways are essential not only for staff well-being but also for institutional sustainability and educational quality.
Fourth, the role of organizational culture, leadership, and governance revealed in the results points to the significance of institutional-level policy implementation. Even well-designed national policies may fail to support motivation if institutional leadership adopts overly managerial or control-oriented practices. The reviewed studies suggest that participatory governance, collegial decision-making, and supportive leadership styles are critical for sustaining lecturers’ motivation. From a policy perspective, this implies that leadership development and governance reform should be integral components of higher education policy, with explicit attention to fostering trust, recognition, and professional respect within academic institutions.
Fifth, the influence of broader policy environments on lecturers’ motivation highlights tensions between accountability-driven reforms and academic values. Performance-based funding, publication pressure, and metric-oriented evaluation systems may incentivize productivity but can also generate stress and reduce intrinsic motivation, particularly when quality and context are overlooked. These findings suggest that higher education policies should adopt more balanced evaluation frameworks that combine quantitative indicators with qualitative assessments of teaching, research, and service. Policymakers should be cautious about relying exclusively on competitive performance metrics and consider their long-term motivational and professional consequences.
Sixth, variations in motivation across career stages and institutional contexts indicate that uniform policy solutions are unlikely to be effective. Early-career lecturers, for example, are particularly sensitive to job security and mentorship opportunities, while senior academics value autonomy and opportunities for leadership. Higher education policies should therefore be differentiated and flexible, providing targeted support for different career stages and institutional missions. Such differentiation can help align policy interventions with lecturers’ evolving motivational needs and professional trajectories.
Finally, the documented consequences of lecturers’ motivation for teaching quality, research productivity, and staff retention emphasize the strategic importance of motivation as a policy concern. Low motivation and burnout are not merely individual problems but systemic risks that can undermine institutional capacity and educational outcomes. From a policy standpoint, investing in supportive working conditions, professional development, and psychologically informed management practices should be viewed as long-term investments in higher education quality rather than short-term costs.
Overall, this discussion reinforces the idea that lecturers’ work motivation is a critical link between higher education policy and educational outcomes. Policies that align with established motivational theories and respect the professional nature of academic work are more likely to foster sustained engagement, innovation, and commitment among university lecturers. Conversely, policies that neglect psychological and organizational dimensions of motivation risk weakening the very human resources on which higher education systems depend.
Conclusion and Policy Implications
Conclusion
This review highlights lecturers’ work motivation as an important analytical lens for understanding how organizational practices and policy environments may influence academic engagement and institutional outcomes.
Overall, the reviewed literature indicates that intrinsic motivation—such as enjoyment of teaching, intellectual fulfillment, and commitment to academic values—plays a central role in sustaining lecturers’ engagement and professional dedication. These intrinsic factors are strongly influenced by lecturers’ perceptions of autonomy, competence, and relatedness, as well as by opportunities for meaningful teaching, research, and academic contribution. At the same time, extrinsic factors, including salary, promotion systems, workload, and employment stability, remain essential baseline conditions. While these factors may not directly generate high levels of intrinsic motivation, their absence consistently undermines job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and long-term retention.
The review also highlights the critical role of organizational culture and leadership in shaping lecturers’ motivational experiences. Supportive leadership, participatory governance, and collegial decision-making are associated with higher motivation and stronger professional commitment, whereas overly managerial, metric-driven, or control-oriented environments tend to weaken intrinsic motivation and increase stress and disengagement. These findings underscore that lecturers’ motivation cannot be understood or addressed in isolation from broader institutional practices and governance structures.
Furthermore, the reviewed studies suggest that contemporary higher education reforms—particularly those emphasizing accountability, performance measurement, and competition—have ambiguous effects on lecturers’ motivation. While such reforms may enhance productivity in the short term, they risk narrowing academic work, intensifying pressure, and diminishing intrinsic motivation if not carefully balanced with academic values and professional autonomy. The evidence also indicates that motivational needs vary across career stages and institutional contexts, suggesting that uniform policy approaches are unlikely to be effective.
Taken together, the findings confirm that lecturers’ work motivation is not merely an individual concern but a systemic issue with direct implications for teaching quality, research productivity, institutional stability, and the overall effectiveness of higher education systems.
Policy Implications
The findings of this review have several important implications for higher education policy and institutional practice.
First, higher education policies should explicitly recognize lecturers’ motivation as a central component of educational quality and institutional sustainability. Policymakers should move beyond narrowly defined performance indicators and incorporate psychological and organizational dimensions into policy design. This includes protecting academic autonomy, supporting intellectual freedom, and ensuring that accountability mechanisms do not undermine intrinsic motivation.
Second, employment and human resource policies in higher education should prioritize fairness, transparency, and stability. Clear promotion criteria, reasonable workload allocation, and secure career pathways are essential for sustaining lecturers’ job satisfaction and organizational commitment. In contexts where short-term contracts and performance-based employment are expanding, policymakers should carefully assess the long-term motivational and professional consequences of such practices.
Third, institutional governance and leadership development should be a policy priority. Universities should be encouraged to adopt participatory governance models that involve lecturers in decision-making processes affecting teaching, research, and working conditions. Leadership training programs should emphasize supportive, trust-based management approaches that align institutional goals with lecturers’ professional values.
Fourth, policy frameworks should support differentiated and flexible approaches to motivation across career stages. Early-career lecturers may benefit from mentorship, job security, and clear developmental pathways, while mid- and late-career academics may value autonomy, recognition, and leadership opportunities. Policies that acknowledge these differences are more likely to foster sustained motivation across the academic lifespan.
Finally, future higher education policies should adopt a long-term perspective on academic work. Investing in lecturers’ motivation—through supportive working environments, professional development opportunities, and psychologically informed management practices—should be viewed as a strategic investment rather than a cost. Such investments are essential for maintaining high-quality teaching, advancing research, and ensuring the resilience and adaptability of higher education systems in an increasingly complex policy environment.
In conclusion, this review underscores that effective higher education policy must be grounded not only in structural and economic considerations but also in a deep understanding of lecturers’ motivational processes. Aligning policy design with established motivational theories and empirical evidence offers a pathway to strengthening academic engagement, institutional effectiveness, and the long-term sustainability of higher education.
References
1. Barkhuizen, N., Rothmann, S., & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (2014). Burnout and work engagement of academics in higher education institutions: Effects of dispositional optimism. Stress and Health, 30(4), 322–332. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2520
2. Bennett, A. A., Beehr, T. A., & Lepisto, L. R. (2017). A longitudinal study of work after retirement: Examining predictors of bridge employment, continued employment, and retirement satisfaction. Work, Aging and Retirement, 3(1), 16–31. https://doi.org/10.1093/workar/waw019
3. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01
4. Deci, E. L., Olafsen, A. H., & Ryan, R. M. (2017). Self-determination theory in work organizations: The state of a science. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032516-113108
5. Franco-Santos, M., Lucianetti, L., & Bourne, M. (2012). Contemporary performance measurement systems: A review of their consequences and a framework for research. Management Accounting Research, 23(2), 79–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2012.04.001
6. Huyghe, A., & Knockaert, M. (2015). The influence of organizational culture and climate on entrepreneurial orientation among research scientists. Journal of Technology Transfer, 40(1), 138–160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-013-9323-3
7. Kinman, G., & Wray, S. (2018). Work-related wellbeing in UK higher education: A benchmark study. Higher Education, 77(2), 357–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0268-7
8. Nguyễn, T. H., & Trần, V. Q. (2023). Động lực làm việc của giảng viên đại học trong bối cảnh đổi mới giáo dục đại học ở Việt Nam. Tạp chí Giáo dục, 23(21), 12–17.
9. OECD. (2021). Building a high-quality teaching profession: Lessons from around the world. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264444161-en
10. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Routledge.
11. Shin, J. C., & Jung, J. (2014). Academics job satisfaction and job stress across countries in the changing academic environments. Higher Education, 67(5), 603–620. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-013-9668-y
12. Teelken, C. (2012). Compliance or pragmatism: How do academics deal with managerialism in higher education? A comparative study in three countries. Studies in Higher Education, 37(3), 271–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2010.511171
13. Tremblay, M. A., Blanchard, C. M., Taylor, S., Pelletier, L. G., & Villeneuve, M. (2009). Work extrinsic and intrinsic motivation scale: Its value for organizational psychology research. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 41(4), 213–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015167
14. Tuchman, G. (2009). Wannabe U: Inside the corporate university. University of Chicago Press.
15. Van den Broeck, A., Ferris, D. L., Chang, C.-H., & Rosen, C. C. (2016). A review of self-determination theory’s basic psychological needs at work. Journal of Management, 42(5), 1195–1229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316632058
16. Winter, R., Taylor, T., & Sarros, J. (2000). Trouble at mill: Quality of academic worklife issues within a comprehensive Australian university. Studies in Higher Education, 25(3), 279–294. https://doi.org/10.1080/713696156
International Journal of Research (IJR) 