Tracing Motivation in Modern Workplaces: A Two-Decade Bibliometric Insight and Research Mapping

Herlina Lusiana; Firdaus; Mursanto; Lamsah; Teguh Wicaksono

doi:10.63922/ijebir.v4i06.2430

Herlina Lusiana Management Program, Islamic University of Kalimantan MAB Banjarmasin, Indonesia
Firdaus Management Program, Islamic University of Kalimantan MAB Banjarmasin, Indonesia
Mursanto Management Program, Islamic University of Kalimantan MAB Banjarmasin, Indonesia
Lamsah Management Program, Islamic University of Kalimantan MAB Banjarmasin, Indonesia
Teguh Wicaksono Management Program, Islamic University of Kalimantan MAB Banjarmasin, Indonesia

DOI: https://doi.org/10.63922/ijebir.v4i06.2430

Keywords: Motivation, Modern Workplaces, Bibliometric Mapping, Employee Well-being, Digital Work Environment

Abstract

Motivation in modern workplaces has evolved significantly over the past two decades, shaped by technological disruption, changing work paradigms, and shifting employee expectations. This study aims to systematically trace the conceptual, thematic, and collaborative development of workplace motivation research through a comprehensive bibliometric analysis. Drawing on 300 peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2001 and 2021, data were sourced from Scopus and Google Scholar using the search phrase “understanding motivation in modern workplaces.” The analysis employed VOSviewer software to generate network, overlay, density, and co-authorship visualizations, while data selection followed the PRISMA framework to ensure relevance and transparency.

Findings reveal a major shift from traditional constructs such as performance and job satisfaction to emerging themes including psychological well-being, digital leadership, remote work, and meaningful work. The evolution indicates a transition from incentive-based to experience-centered motivation theories, reflecting broader sociotechnical changes. However, the study also uncovers thematic blind spots—such as sustainability-related motivation and employee values—and highlights the fragmented nature of global research collaboration. These insights underscore the need for integrative, cross-disciplinary, and future-oriented frameworks in understanding motivation.

This study contributes to the literature by offering a aiming to enhance engagement and well-being in increasingly digital and hybrid work environments.

References

A., Saragih, R., & Winarno, A. (2024). The influence of digital culture and transformational leadership style on employee performance: The mediating role of work motivation. International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research, 6(5). https://doi.org/10.36948/ijfmr.2024.v06i05.29546

Alasiri, N., & AlKubaisy, Z. (2022). Exploring the role of leadership, work environment, IT alignment and company performance on digital transformation: A study on private sector companies in western region, Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Professional Business Review, 7(2), e0500. https://doi.org/10.26668/businessreview/2022.v7i2.500

Astafieva, K., Bondarchuk, O., Astafiev, O., & Nikulnikova, H. (2023). Digitalization of the workplace as a means of HR-branding. Herald of Khmelnytskyi National University, 314(1), 103–109. https://doi.org/10.31891/2307-5740-2023-314-1-15

Ayun, T. (2025). Digital leadership and job satisfaction: The role of intrinsic motivation as mediating variable. Journal of Management and Administration Provision, 5(2), 183–192. https://doi.org/10.55885/jmap.v5i2.587

Bakker, A. (2015). A job demands–resources approach to public service motivation. Public Administration Review, 75(5), 723–732. https://doi.org/10.1111/puar.12388

Batubara, K., Syam, B., & Wahyuni, S. (2020). Job demands–resources model affects the performance of associate nurses in hospital. Jurnal Keperawatan Indonesia, 23(2), 111–118. https://doi.org/10.7454/jki.v23i2.1132

Bangura, S., & Lourens, M. (2024). Constraints and enablement of workplace digitalisation: An integrative review. International Journal of Business & Management Studies, 5(5), 107–113. https://doi.org/10.56734/ijbms.v5n5a11

Barba, P., Kennedy, G., & Ainley, M. (2016). The role of students’ motivation and participation in predicting performance in a MOOC. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32(3), 218–231. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12130

Bessonova, Y. (2022). User motivation and psychological vulnerabilities in remote working. Organizational Psychology and Labor Psychology, 7(4), 195–226. https://doi.org/10.38098/ipran.opwp_2022_25_4_009

Christiana, C., & Rofiqoh, I. (2025). Systematic literature review: The impact of leadership style, work motivation, and job satisfaction on employee performance in the digital era. American Journal of Economic and Management Business (AJEMB), 4(4), 302–316. https://doi.org/10.58631/ajemb.v4i4.197

Cooman, R., Stynen, D., Broeck, A., Sels, L., & Witte, H. (2013). How job characteristics relate to need satisfaction and autonomous motivation: Implications for work effort. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 43(6), 1342–1352. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12143

Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.55.1.68

Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development, and health. Canadian Psychology, 49(3), 182–185. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012801

Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296.

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71.

van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2014). Visualizing bibliometric networks. In Measuring scholarly impact (pp. 285–320). Springer.

Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2017). Self-Determination Theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. Guilford Press.

Wiedmer, T. (2015). Generations do differ: Best practices in leading traditionalists, boomers, and generations X, Y, and Z. Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 82(1), 51–58.