Self-Determination and Job Stress

Traditional models of job stress often focus on the fit between environmental demands and individual resources. Fernet and Austin argue that these models are limited because they fail to fully explain the psychological processes that occur when employees struggle to adapt. By applying Self-Determination Theory (SDT), the authors introduce a motivational model that centers on the quality of employee motivation as the primary mechanism linking workplace stressors to strain and well-being.

SDT distinguishes between three types of motivational processes:

• Autonomous motivation: Engaging in work for inherent pleasure or because one personally values the tasks.
• Controlled motivation: Performing tasks due to internal or external pressure, such as avoiding guilt or seeking rewards.
• Amotivation: A lack of intent to act, often resulting from a perceived lack of fit between actions and outcomes.

The authors posit that job stressors—such as high demands and low resources—act as external pressures that diminish autonomous motivation and increase controlled motivation or amotivation. This shift in motivation is what ultimately leads to negative outcomes like burnout, psychological strain, and diminished well-being.

The paper also highlights the critical role of management styles. Autonomy-supportive managers, who consider employee perspectives and offer choices, help foster autonomous motivation. Conversely, controlling managers can exacerbate the perception of job stressors, making tasks feel more burdensome. The authors suggest that motivation acts as a buffer: employees with high autonomous motivation are better equipped to use available resources to cope with stressors, whereas those with controlled or amotivational orientations are more vulnerable to the negative impacts of their work environment.