Intrinsic motivation for an international assignment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This study aims to explore how the motivational construct of intrinsic motivation for an international assignment relates to variables of interest in international expatriation research. Design/methodology/approach Questionnaire data from 331 employed business school alumni of a high‐ranking Canadian MBA program was analyzed. The sample consisted of respondents from a wide variety of industries and occupations, with more than half of them in marketing, administration or engineering. Findings Higher intrinsic motivation for an international assignment was associated with greater willingness to accept an international assignment and to communicate in a foreign language. Externally driven motivation for an international assignment was associated with perceiving more difficulties associated with an international assignment. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations for an international assignment were, however, associated with comparable reactions to organizational support. Originality/value Drawing from self‐determination theory, this study explores the distinction between authentic versus externally controlled motivations for an international assignment. It underscores the need to pay more attention to motivational constructs in selecting, coaching, and training individuals for international expatriation assignments. It extends a rich tradition of research in the area of motivation to the international assignment arena.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it