Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1977,45, 835-841. @ Perceptual and Motor Skills 1977 MOTIVATION FOR PARTICIPATION, SUCCESS I N PERFORMANCE A N D THEIR RELATIONSHIP T O INDIVIDUAL A N D GROUP SATISFACTION1 ALBERT V. CARRON, JAMES R. BALL: A N D P. CHELLADURAI University of Western Ontario Summary.-The present study examined the interactive effects of participation motivation (task, self, and interaction) expressed in early season and successful performance ( n = 183) experienced throughout the collegiate hockey season upon satisfaction expressed post-season with individual and team performance. The experimental design consisted of a 2 x 2 factorial comprising two levels of motivation (high vs low) and two levels of success (successful vs unsuccessful). The results indicated that success, motivations, and the various interactions had no effect upon satisfaction with individual performance. Both success and high task-motive resulted in heightened levels of satisfaction in regard to team performance. In his theory of interpersonal behavior Bass (1962) postulated that the individual's orientation toward participation in group activity is characterized as comprising three dimensions: self, i.e., direct rewards or personal satisfaction is expected from the group and its activities, task, i.e., concern is directed toward carrying out the group's task, and iizteraction motivation, i.e., concern is directed toward maintaining happy, harmonious relationships within the group. Dunteman and Bass (1963), elaborating on this, suggested that behavior in interpersonal situations is a reflection of inherent personal needs and types of satisfactions desired. In fact, Bass, Dunteman, Frye, Vidulich, and Wambach ( 1963) have stated that the group is ". . . merely the theatre in which certain generalized needs can be satisfied" (p. 102). The relationship of the task and interaction motive to success and satisfaction in basketball teams was examined by Martens (1970). H e noted that those teams high in task motivation were more successful and more satisfied with team performance than were teams low in task motivation. Moreover teams high in interaction motivation were not as successful but were more satisfied with team performance than teams low in interaction motivation. Unfortunately Martens did not examine the third major dimension from the Bass schema, self-motivation. In a recent study in which the three motives were considered in combination with a series of cohesion measures, Ball and Carron ( 1976) noted that the self motive was the only one of these three which significantly discriminated between successful, moderately successful, and unsuccessful intercollegiate ice hockey teams. 'The study was supported in part by a research grant from the Ministry of Culture and Recreation. Government of Ontario. Toronto. Correswndence concerning the article should be'addressed to Albert V. d r r o n , Faculty of Physical Education, University of Western Ontario, London, Canada. Wow with the Canadian Amateur Rowing Association, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. 836 A. V. CARRON, ET AL Self-motivation and its relationship to satisfaction with team and individual performance would seem to have particular relevance for the individual engaged in team/group activities. That is, the performance of team sports is carried out within a specific formal structure, a structure which imposes particular task demands upon the p a r t i c i ~ a n t s . ~Thus, for example, individual performance in basketball and hockey is characterized by required interaction (Turner & Lawrence, 1965), a performance interdependence which is inherent in the sport and which facilitates a more efficient operation. However, while an effective required interaction might result in performance success for the team, it would not necessarily provide an optimal forum in which the individual could fulfill personal needs and obtain satisfaction. This would particularly seem to be the case for those participants with heightened levels of self-motivation. Also, and somewhat related to the above, it does seem important to compare the individual's level of task-, self-, or interaction motivation with degree of personal satisfaction. Although satisfaction with the team's performance is of interest, the individual's motivation should be evaluated against the individual's satisfaction. Martens did not consider the interrelationship of task and interaction motivation and success upon the level of individual satisfaction (the degree to which the individual's personal needs are met within the group context). The only assessment of satisfaction related to the group's performance,4 i.e., "How satisfied are you with the performance of your team as a whole" (Martens, 1970, p. 512). The present study was concerned with the interactive effects of individual orientation (as measured through self, task and interaction motivation expressed in the initial portion of a competitive season) and performance success (as reflected through the team's win/loss record throughout the season) upon personal satisfaction (as expressed following the completion of the season). As a secondary problem and in order to compare the present study with previous research, the level of team satisfaction was also examined. METHOD The general method and experimental design have been outlined in detail previously (Ball & Carron, 1976) but an overview is also presented here. Questionnaire Participation motivation was assessed in early season (prior to the completion of two games) from a scale developed by Martens, Landers, and Loy ( 1972 ) which used as a basis, the more general Orieiztatio~zlnventory developed 'For a comprehensive discussion of the interaction of formal structure and task-imposed demands, see Chelladurai and Carron ( 1977 ). 'It should be noted that the omission of self motivation and the exclusive focus on team satisfaction do appear appropriate in the Martens study. Both decisions are consistent with the general research strategy adopted. That is, 144 teams were tested and the team per se became the unit of analysis, not individual athletes within teams. MOTIVATION FOR PARTICIPATION, PERFORMANCE, SATISFACTION 837 by Bass ( 1962). The Martens, e t al. scale has 10 questions, each of which required a forced-choice response (most true versus least true) to t h e e statements. The statements assessed three motives for participation: self, hternction, and task. According to Bass ( 1962) the self-oriented individual is attracted to a group in expectation of a direct reward. The group represents a theatre for the individual to gain esteem or status, aggress, or dominate. The interactionoriented individual's rewards are achieved through an affiliation with others in the group. As a result there is less concern with achieving the group's objectives or solving the group's external problems than with maintaining harmonious, conflict-free relationships. Finally a task-oriented individual is most attracted to the group though expectations of performance success and concomitant rewirds. The questions used to assess personal and team satisfaction were constructed to provide two polarities on a nine-point continuum. For individual satisfaction the athletes were asked "How satisfied are you with your own over-all performance in hockey this year?" For team satisfaction the athletes were asked "How satisfied are you with the over-all performance of your hockey club this year?" In the case of both questions the two polarities were marked by the responses "not at all satisfied and "very satisfied" respectively. The measures of satisfaction were obtained following the completion of league competition. Sample rmd Design The original sample (Ball & Carton, 1976) included 183 athletes from 12 intercollegiate ice hockey teams participating in the three divisions of the Ontario University Athletic Association. For purposes of the present investigation, the teams were classified on the basis of season's win/loss record and final league standing into two categories. Teams in the successful category ( N = 61 athletes) obtained a winning percentage of .690 or better and a final league standing of first or second. The unsuccessful category ( N = 5 9 ) comprised teams with a winning percentage of .400 or lower and a final league standing of last or second last. Athletes in the successful category were then ranked from highest to lowest according to degree of task-motivation expressed in early season and groups comprising the two extremes of the distribution were chosen for analysis. This identical process was repeated for those athletes in the unsuccessful category. The number of athletes in the successful low task-motivation, successful high task-motivation, unsuccessful low task-motivation, and unsuccessful high taskmotivation groups is outlined in Table 1 below. In summary, the general experimental design consisted of two levels of task-motivation (high versus low) tested over two levels of performance success (successful versus unsuccessful). For the statistical analysis a 2 X 2 analysis of covariance was utilized with the self- and interaction-motivation variables considered as covariates. Two A. V. CARRON,ET AL. separate analyses were carried out, one using personal satisfaction as the dependent variable and a second using team satisfaction. An identical procedure was also used to obtain athletes high and low in interaction and high and low in self-motivation within the successful and unsuccessful categories. Again the experimental design was a 2 X 2 factorial. In the analysis using high versus low interaction, the covariates were self- and taskmotivation. Similarly for the analysis of high versus low self-motivation, taskand interaction-motivation were treated as covariates. RESULTS The descriptive statistics for the various groups used in the analyses are presented in Table 1. TABLE 1 DESCRIPTIVE S T A ' I ~ S ~FOR C SVARIOUS GROUPS Group Successful High Task Low Task High Self Low Self High Interaction Low Interaction N Personal Satisfaction M SD Team Satisfaction M SD 19 13 17 19 16 2.47 2.23 2.71 2.53 2.68 .70 .73 .59 .69 1.20 3.42 4.39 3.71 4.68 4.18 1.54 1.98 1.53 1.64 1.83 14 2.43 .76 4.50 1.45 2.63 2.46 2.54 2.63 2.61 2.50 .62 .66 .49 .78 .66 .63 5.53 5.69 5.08 5.08 5.35 5.50 1.37 2.12 2.00 1.73 1.64 2.00 Unsuccessful High Task 16 Low Task 13 High Self 13 Low Self 19 High Interaction 23 Low Interaction 16 *Lower scores reflect greater satisfaction. Task Motive The results of the analysis of covariance showed there were no differences in personal satisfaction between the two levels of success, the two levels of taskmotivation or in the interaction ( F = .17, .46, and .02, respectively, p > .05). When the results for team satisfaction were examined they did show that the successful group was significantly more satisfied than the unsuccessful group ( F = 12.54, p < ,001). Similarly there was also a significant difference between high versus low task-motive groups ( F ,= 4.20, $ < .05) but the interaction ( F = .63, p > .05) was not statistically significant. interaction Motive Individual satisfaction expressed in postseason appeared to be independent MOTIVATION FOR PARTICIPATION, PERFORMANCE, SATISFACTION 839 of the level of interaction-motivation present in early season ( F = .68, p > .05 ), the level of success experienced throughout the season ( F = .02, p > .05), and the interaction of success and motivation ( F = .12, p > .05). The results from the analysis concerned with team satisfaction indicated that the successful group was significantly more satisfied than the unsuccessful group ( F = 3.97, p < .05). However, there was no difference either between high versus low interaction-motivation or in the success X motivation interaction (F = .09, .10 respectively, p > .05). Self Motive As was the case with the previously discussed two motives, no differences were noted when the individual satisfaction results were examined, i.e., F = .13, .62 and .59 ( p > .05) for success, self-motivation and success X selfmotivation, respectively. Insofar as team satisfaction was concerned, there were no significant differences between levels of success, levels of motivation and their interaction ( F = 3.32, 1.88 and .05 respectively, p > .05). DISCUSSION The present results demonstrated that there are differences between successful and unsuccessful groups and groups high and low in task motivation with regard to the degree of satisfaction expressed with team performance. These findings are similar to those previously reported by Martens (1970). H e noted that groups higher in task motivation were more successful and expressed greater satisfaction with the season's participation than groups lower in task motivation. The present findings relating to success and team satisfaction are also consistent with what would be predicted from theoretical models for performance/ satisfaction. According to Lawler ( 1973 ) ; in performance situations the individual comparatively assesses his obtained outcome against other possible outcome levels. When a difference is evident-specifically, when an obtained outcome is lower or less than the reference-lowered satisfaction is the result. In athletics relative differences in level of team outcome would be readily evident since team performance can be compared with objective references such as win-loss record and/or final league standing. Therefore, the discrepancy in outcome apparent to unsuccessful teams could be expected to contribute to decreased satisfaction. The findings for task-motivation as relates to team satisfaction, despite a similarity to previous research, do not appear to conform as readily to the theoretical model. That is, an interaction would be predicted between taskmotivation and successful performance, namely, high task-motivated (strongly oriented toward carrying out the group's task) successful groups would show greater team satisfaction than highly task-motivated unsuccessful groups. As MOTIVATION FOR PARTICIPATION, PERFORMANCE, SATISFACTION 841 tested against two levels of team success (high and low). Although the results indicated that the high performers did express less personal satisfaction with their = 2.00, p individual performance, the F value did not reach significance > .05). It must be concluded that, if additional research is undertaken to determine which factors contribute to individual satisfaction in the group/team context, variables other than the team's successful performance and/or individual motivation must be utilized. Since the individual's underlying personality traits, his perception of his role within the group, ability, and his perceived equity of rewards have been demonstrated to relate through performance to individual satisfaction in research on management (Porter & Lawler, 1968), these would represent an excellent starting point in research on team sports. REFERENCES BALL,J. R., & CARRON,A V. The influence of team cohesion and participation motivation upon performance success in intercollegiate ice hockey. Canadian Journal of AppIied Sport Sciences, 1976, 1, 271-275. BASS,B. M. The Orientation Inventory. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologists, 1962. BASS,B. M., DUNTEMAN,G., PRY& R., VIDULICH,R., & WAMBACH,H. Self, interaction, and task orientation inventory scores associated with overt behavior and personal factors. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1963, 23, 101-116. CHELLADURAI, P., & CARRON,A. V. A reanalysis of formal structure in sport. Canadhn Journal o f Applied Sport Sciences, 1977, 2, 9-14. DUNTEMAN,G., & BASS,B. M. Supervisory and engineering success associated with self, interaction and task orientation scores. Personnel Psychology, 1963, 16, 16-22. LAWLER,E. E. Motivation in work organizations. Monterey, C a : Brwks/Cole, 1973. MARCH,J. G., & SIMON, H. A. Organizations. New York: Wiley, 1958. MARTENS,R. Influence of participation motivation on success and satisfaction in team performance. Research Quarterly, 1970, 41, 510-517. ~ T B N R., S ,LANDERS,D., & LOY, J. Sfiorf Cohesiveness Questionnaire. Washington: AAHPER, 1972. PENNER,D. A study of causes and consequences of salary satisfaction. Crotonville, N. Y . : General Electric Behavioral Research Service, 1967. PORTER, L. W., & LAWLER,E. E., 111. Managerial attitudes and performance. Homewood, Ill.: Richard D. Irwin, 1968. TURNER, A. N., & LAWRENCE,P. R. Industrial jobs and the worker. Boston: Harvard Univer. Press, 1965. Accepted August 16, 1977.