Job Attitudes (Judge & Kammeyer-Mueller, 2012) PDF

Job Attitudes Timothy A. Judge and John D. Kammeyer-Mueller, 2012 Introduc)on Defini7ons of important constructs, conceptualisa7ons and measures Descrip7on of current research (especially using within-persons designs) Disposi7onal vs. situa7onal influences and possible interac7on on a;tudes Rela7on o...

Job Attitudes Timothy A. Judge and John D. Kammeyer-Mueller, 2012 Introduc)on Defini7ons of important constructs, conceptualisa7ons and measures Descrip7on of current research (especially using within-persons designs) Disposi7onal vs. situa7onal influences and possible interac7on on a;tudes Rela7on of employee a;tudes on behaviour on individual vs. aggregated level The paper provides insight into the defini7on and characteris7cs of job a;tudes and which • Recency bias: only researchvariables and topics are considered in the review environmental, interandrecent intrapersonal influence their forma7on. The focus lies on o But tradi7onal findings are s7ll included as a baseline the effects of job a;tudes on job sa7sfac7on and respec7ve consequences for work performance. Overall, many variables are highly influen7al for forma7on of job a;tudes, job What are joband a+tudes? sa7sfac7on work performance on many levels. Link between job A-tudes and Social A-tudes • • Job a;tudes as a type of a;tudes needs to be considered in the broader scope of social a;tudes o Reserachwise there are many links between the disciplines leading to reciprocal benefits o Jobs themselves are important en77es, related to people’s iden7ty, life sa7sfac7on, health and general evalua7on of life o A;tudes shape behaviour and job a;tudes could too, more research should be done in that field with the model of social a;tudes à all three facets should be more acknowledged No universally agreed defini7on! Attitude = “Psychological tendency that is expressed by evalua7ng a par7cular en7ty with some degree of favor or disfavor” ~Eagly & Chaiken, 1993 • • Problem: people hold limitless number of evalua7ons and a;tudes à mul$plicity of a.tudes Tripar7e nature of a;tudes: (1) affect; (2) cogni7on; (3) behaviour o A;tudes can also be based on only one facet o Assump7on that the factors must be consistent is not supported in the literature Job A-tudes Job attitude = evalua7ons of one’s job that express one’s feelings toward, beliefs about, and a[achment to one’s job. • • • Including cogni7ve & affec7ve components Job = broad understanding of one’s current working occupa7on A;tudes towards the work and the employer may differ o Boundaries between targets can be fluid à a;tudes are organised in hierarchical fashion (global a;tudes – specific a;tudes) Mul7faceted Nature of Job A-tudes • Mul7faceted on composi7on, structure, temporal nature • A;tudes varying depending on… …target …specificity …nature • Hierarchical structure 1. Overall job a.tude 2. Rela$vely general job a.tudes: job sa7sfac7on, organiza7onal commitment 3. Specific a.tudes: job sa7sfac7on facets, specific dimensions of organiza7onal commitment Job satisfaction = an evalua7ve state that express contentment with and posi7ve feelings about one’s job • Job a;tudes can either be manifest or latent depending on the research defini7on o Facets of job sa7sfac7on would be rather manifest o Broad job a;tudes can also be latent à the dichotomous differen7a7on is only important for research and how to handle data but not for general defini7on of a;tudes Recent Emphasis on Affect • Cogni7ve and affec7ve dimensions cannot easily be separated o Higher-level cogni7on depends on emo7onal input o Reciprocal rela7onship between brain areas involved o Measures of affect are substan7ally cogni7ve • Job-evalua7ons always include affec7ve components • In recent research inves7ga7on of affec7ve dimensions became more important Mul7level, Experience-Sampling Designs • Affec7ve reac7ons are likely to be flee7ng and episodic à leading to a measure problem, measure of a;tudes needs to be in line with the nature of affect o Experience sampling method as a solu7on Experience-sampling methodology (ESM) = a method of data collec7on, where job a;tudes or other psychological states are measured repeatedly (e.g., once a day or more oeen) over 7me • permi;ng mul7level modelling of job a;tudes: within-individual (state), betweenindividual (trait) o Only 1/3 – 1/2 are within-individual varia7on of job sa7sfac7on à one 7me point measurements lack important informa7on Discrete job a+tudes Defining the Construct Space • Measurement of a;tudes is usually done using Likert scale measures A.tudes vs. percep$ons & descrip$ons • Many variables include behavioural responses (like a;tudes) • evalua7on or appraisal is central to a;tudes which is oeen not covered in percep7on or descrip7on scales • percep7on scales are oeen antecedents to a;tude scales General vs. behavioural a.tudes and inten$ons • empirically and conceptually a;tudes are linked to inten7ons • situa7onal variables moderate the rela7onship between a;tudes and behaviour Mo$va$onal constructs vs. job a.tudes • engagement reflects investment or involvement in work performance, evalua7on of this investment is not • a;tudes and mo7va7onal energies are likely to influence each other but are dis7nct constructs ➪ many variables are involved when measuring a;tudes and may influence data, important to keep in mind as a researcher! Global a-tudes • • • different measures address different specificity of a;tudes o depending on the goal the target should vary most relevant level of a;tudinal specificity will depend on the bandwidth of the antecedents and consequences under considera7on. Global measures aim to cover overarching level of sa7sfac7on across different a[ributes o Best predicted by broad measures (e.g. disposi7on or aggregate measures) Facets of Job Sa7sfac7on Job Descriptive Index (JDI) = perhaps the most valid measure of job sa7sfac7on. In addi7on to a Job-In-General scale, the JDI includes the sa7sfac7on facets: Work supervision, coworkers, pay and promo7on • • JDI is a commonly used method to asses different facets of job sa7sfac7on o Other measures like the Minnesota Sa,sfac,on Ques,onnaire or The Index of Organiza,onal Reac,ons measure similar dimensions as well as other subdimensions Individual dimensions and measures are posi7vely correlated Work • Sa7sfac7on with the work itself strongest rela7ons with global measures • Model of job characteris$cs (Hackman&Oldham): skill variety, task iden7ty, task significance, autonomy and feedback influence sa7sfac7on with work • empowerment atmosphere increases job sa7sfac7on • individuals with high other orienta7on have weaker rela7onships between work a[ributes and sa7sfac7on Pay and promo$on policies • four main dimensions: (1) pay level; (2) benefits; (3) pay rise; (4) structure/ administra7on • sa7sfac7on depends on the discrepancy between actual payment and the amount of pay workers believe they deserve Social environment: supervision & co-workers • li[le research on co-worker sa7sfac7on and general social environment at the work place • unidimensional sa7sfac7on with co-workers à fail to address the complexity of rela7onships Organiza7onal commitment Organizational commitment = an individual’s psychological bond with the organiza7on, as represented by a affec7ve a[achment to the organiza7on, internaliza7on of its values and goals, a feeling of loyalty toward item, inten7on to remain as part of it and behavioural desire to put forth effort to support it. • mul7dimensional construct but the focus of research is rather on the nature than on the focus of commitment Affec$ve commitment • inves7gates people’s values towards the organiza7on, their a[achment, how much they feel included and similarity of goals • highest predic7ve power of organiza7onal behaviour Con$nuance commitment • including the ques7on whether people are willing to leave to organiza7on Norma$ve commitment • describing whether or not qui;ng the job is a nega7ve behaviour • • empirical data does not support the theore7cal three-component model while affec7ve commitment is seen as an a;tude regarding employing situa7on norma7ve and con7nuance are rather related to specific behaviours of staying/leaving à may explain low convergent validity A-tudes towards Behaviours • • • a;tudes of behaviour seem antecedent to inten7ons similar rela7onship was found for a;tudes towards and engagement in job search a;tudes toward behaviours will be more strongly related to those behaviours than will generalized a;tudes States and traits in job a+tudes research Affec7ve Events Theory • emphasizes links between job events and job a;tudes o hypothesis: links between job affect and job behaviours are unique to affect • special focus on short-term behaviours like work withdrawal or organiza7onal ci7zenship behaviour • aims to answer ques7ons about job a;tudes and behaviours that are not covered in tradi7onal research of cogni7ve dimension for example Characteris$cs • differen7a7on between. Job structure/ features and job events • emphasis on affect as important feature of job a;tudes • interdependence between job affect and affect driven behaviours o incl. evalua7on-focused and judgement-driven behaviours • disposi7ons are believed to func7on as moderators Recent Research on Within-Individual Varia7on in Job A-tudes • a;tudes include stable (between-individual) and dynamic (within-individual) quali7es • job a;tudes show nearly as much within-individual varia7on as in moods and emo7ons à sugges7ng their importance to job a;tudes Moods and emotions = affec7ve states that are important to job sa7sfac7on and that may be dis7nguished from one another in terms of generality dura7on and event specificity • • stable and dynamic varia7on occur rather separated from one another literature on job a;tudes includes 3 overlapping categories 1. moods and discrete emo7onal stages a. moods/emo7ons as antecedents or consequence? à most think consequence b. are broad mood factors or discrete emo7ons object of inves7ga7on? à empirically difficult to separate 2. within-person variability in job a;tudes (without mood/emo7ons) à daily interpersonal, informa7onal jus7ce link to daily levels of job sa7sfac7on à disposi7onal affect influences employees’’ general sa7sfac7on levels and moderates sensi7vity of a;tudes to workplace events 3. rela7on of within-individual varia7on in job a;tudes and within-individual varia7on in work behaviours à higher varia7on in job a;tude may lead to higher levels of organiza7onal ci7zenship (but results should be treated with cau7on, more research needed!) Multilevel models = models where mul7ple observa7ons of job a;tudes are nested within individuals, to predict or be predicted by other within-individual states, and wherein these withinindividual rela7onships are predicted by between-individual differences • • oeen used synonymous for ESM but not necessarily the same ESM is more of a methodological design that may or may not be used to test mul7level models Disposi6onal antecedents of job a+tudes Early Influences • Job sa7sfac7on seems quite stale over 7me, disposi7onal and non-disposi7onal factors acknowledged Specific Disposi7ons • Posi7ve and nega7ve affec7vity seem related to job sa7sfac7on • The big5 can also explain varia7ons in job sa7sfac7on Core self-evalua7ons (CSEs) • The general trait of core self-evalua7on is based on evalua7ve criteria: (1) self esteem; (2) generalized self-efficacy; (3) neuro7cism; (4) locus of control • CSE and job sa7sfac7on have a correla7on of r = 0.37 • Other models are related to CSE and are also useful for predic7ng job sa7sfac7on (e.g., Big5, PA/NA [posi7ve affect/ nega7ve affect]) o 3 frameworks explain 36% of variance o Especially 3 factors: (1) CSEs/neuro7cism; (2) extraversion; (3) conscien7ousness o But only the first factor— CSE—consistently influenced job sa7sfac7on across studies. • CSE was nega7vely related to percep7ons of organiza7onal obstacles to goal fulfillment o High CSE à Less prone to perceive stress and therefor less risk for burnout o Cannot be determined if people with high CSE are just more posi7ve or if they actually select jobs with be[er a[ributes • • • o Subjec7ve and objec7ve indicators of job complexity as par7al mediators à CSE influences how high favorably people view their jobs but also the level of complexity the jobs they obtain High CSE people choose meaningful goals à increasing sa7sfac7on o Self- concordant goals par7ally mediated between CSEs and life sa7sfac7on individuals with posi7ve self-concept should be less vulnerable to external pressures CSE might work as a trigger: posi7ve CSE people strive for the right reasons and get the right results Integra7on of State and Trait Perspec7ves • Interac7onist perspec7ve: job a;tudes are influenced through interac7ons of individuals and work environment • Situa7ons may trigger expression of certain traits and reac7ons Situa6onal antecedents of job a+tudes Job Characteris7cs • Subjec7ve percep7ons of work characteris7cs are related to employee a;tudes o Subjec7ve percep7ons of job characteris7cs are more closely related to job sa7sfac7on than analyst-based • Job characteris7cs influence job a;tudes Social Environment Characteris7cs • Social environment is closely related to overall job sa7sfac7on and a be[er predictor than sa7sfac7on levels of the work itself o consistent posi7ve rela7onship between coworker support behaviours and job sa7sfac7on • examining network 7es o job-related affect scores tended to be similar among individuals who frequently interacted • demographically different people may feel less accepted à nega7ve job a;tude o nega7ve rela7on to organiza7onal commitment but not job sa7sfac7on • extraversion and openness to experience are nega7vely related to sa7sfac7on with coworkers • age similarity is associated with higher levels of engagement • higher control orienta7on of the supervisor leads to higher sa7sfac7on à showing that personality dissimilarity can have posi7ve effects Leadership • leadership styles and behaviours have a powerful effect on employee job a;tudes o r = 0.78 for leader considera7on behaviours and subordinate sa7sfac7on o r = 0.33 for ini7a7ng structure and subordinate sa7sfac7on • strong main-effect rela7onships between leader-ship and follower a;tudes • leader-member exchange and employee a;tudes is stronger when employees iden7fy their supervisor with the organiza7on • transforma7onal leadership is linked to more posi7ve employee emo7ons and can func7on as a buffer between emo7on regula7on and job dissa7sfac7on • • declines in supervisor support à decreases in job sa7sfac7on nega7ve leader behaviours à nega7ve employee a;tudes Organiza7onal Prac7ces • most of the research concerns the rela7onship between organiza7onal jus7ce and employee a;tudes • discrepancy theory: dissa7sfac7on results from discrepancy between desired payment and actual pay • percep7ons of distribu7ve jus7ce are nearly iden7cal to a;tudes toward organiza7onal pay prac7ces • payment rise seems to elicit more sa7sfac7on when related to performance and when high raise was expected • those who make upward comparisons are less sa7sfied with payment • correspondence between employee values and organisa7onal values is associated with more posi7ve job a;tudes • high levels of interpersonal jus7ce à organisa7onal commitment and supervisor sa7sfac7on • organiza7onal changes and the extent to which people see their own relevance in that change predicts employee commitment • high-performance human resources prac7ces were associated with higher levels of employee job sa7sfac7on and organiza7onal commitment ➪ collec7ve percep7ons of situa7ons are predic7ve of individual a;tudes Time and Job A-tudes • over 7me change of employee a;tudes is typically measured by using latent growth modelling or hierarchical linear modeling • high posi7ve job a;tudes are oeen followed by deteriora7on in appraisal of their new jobs • organiza7onal commitment tends to decline over 7me • a (perceived) breach of psychological contract will have nega7ve affects of organiza7onal commitment • job a;tudes vary over 7me o emo7on-laden at the workplace events may explain variability • work emo7ons can be explained by work features, those emo7ons mediated the rela7on to job sa7sfac7on • nega7ve events had a strong posi7ve rela7on- ship with nega7ve moods at work • interpersonal conflicts with customers acted as an environmental trigger that produced more nega7ve a;tudes ➪ job a;tudes will differ depending on the 7me point of measurement Outcomes of Job a+tudes Overview • most prominent to link a;tudes and behaviour is the theory of planned behaviour: general a;tudes develop into special a;tudes à forming inten7ons à performing behaviour • commitment may result from a;tudes which then in turn fosters mo7va7on • other theories put emo7ons more in focus as a link between a;tudes and behaviour o affect may lead to suppor7ve behaviour à affect gives cues about the environment and triggers appropriate responses • broad a;tudes only predict broad classes of behaviour not specific ones Job performance = employee behaviours that are consistent with role expecta7ons and that contribute to organiza7onal effec7veness • Mul7dimensional construct composed of: 1. task performance: du7es and behaviours that are formally required to perform one’s job 2. organiza$onal ci$zenship behaviour: behaviours that do beyond formal role expecta7ons 3. withdrawal/ counterproduc$vity: behaviours that are responses to dissa7sfac7on, oeen go against organiza7onal interest or norms 4. crea$ve performance Task performance • substan7al rela7on between job sa7sfac7on and job performance but causal direc7on is unclear o longitudinal findings on sa7sfac7on-to-performance • Different facets of job sa7sfac7on show different rela7onships with outcomes of interest o Sa7sfac7on with work has strongest rela7on with mo7va7on • aggregated pay sa7sfac7on is related to student academic competency • possible moderators: affec7ve and cogni7ve sa7sfac7on o when both types of sa7sfac7on were consistent stronger rela7on to performance was found • posi7ve rela7onship between commitment and performance declined significantly with increasing employee tenure à less-tenured employees have stronger a;tudebehaviour link • moderate levels of con7nuance commitment and low levels of affec7ve commitment à poorer supervisor ra7ngs of performance • low affec7ve commitment à nega7ve rela7onship between stress and performance (and vice versa) ➪ a;tudes can moderate the rela7onship between other work-related constructs and behaviours Crea7ve performance • posi7ve mood states associated with job sa7sfac7on encourage more flexible and open thought processes • nega7ve moods can generate ac7ve a[en7on and cri7cal thinking required for crea7vity • some argue that the focus is set wrong and should be more on the crea7vity levels associated with posi7ve or nega7ve moods • dissa7sfied employees were more crea7ve when they had high levels of con7nuance commitment and support • aggregate job sa7sfac7on à increased organiza7onal innova7on • more research needs to explore the rela7on between crea7vity and job sa7sfac7on and should inves7gate individual vs. group levels Ci7zenship behaviour • strong theore7cal support for a rela7on between ci7zenship behaviours and job a;tudes • overall sa7sfac7on links to behaviour, media7ng the rela7onship of personality traits (agreeableness and conscien7ousness) with ci7zenship • strong rela7onship between supervisor sa7sfac7on and ci7zenship behaviours • union commitment was associated with voluntary informal par7cipa7on • job sa7sfac7on and perceived fairness à higher levels of organiza7onal ci7zenship behaviour o sa7sfac7on mediates rela7onship between fairness and ci7zenship behaviours ➪ job a;tudes are related to ci7zenship Withdrawal/ Counterproduc7vity • nega7ve a;tudes are assumed to be related to nega7ve behaviours • sa7sfac7on with the work itself has the strongest rela7onship with both withdrawal cogni7ons and turnover inten7ons • job sa7sfac7on may lead to thoughts about qui;ng and consider job alterna7ves o more likely for people with high cogni7ve ability, educa7on and occupa7onspecific training à having concrete opportuni7es for expressing a;tudes • stronger rela7onship between sa7sfac7on and unit-level absence when unemployment rate is low à less worries of being fired • steeper declines in organiza7onal commitment à increased inten7ons and ac7on to quit • possible interac7ons of commitment and sa7sfac7on on work withdrawal o low levels of sa7sfac7on will be less likely to engage in work withdrawal o low levels of commitment will tend to have lower a[endance across the board • low organiza7onal commitment à high group-level absenteeism (regardless of job sa7sfac7on) • for high organiza7onal commitment high absenteeism only occurred for sa7sfied workers Organiza7onal Performance • generalizable rela7onships between unit-level employee sa7sfac7on and engagement with customer sa7sfac7on, produc7vity, profit, turnover, and accidents • • employee a;tudes are related to subsequent work performance manager sa7sfac7on is related to customer sa7sfac7on o high manager performance and sa7sfac7on à higher store performance of employees Conclusion • • job a;tudes are related to a variety of organiza7onally relevant behaviours new models help to gain more insight in specific factors that influence effects of job a;tudes (e.g., situa7onal percep7ons, within-person variability, disposi7ons…)