Home Hackman 1971 - Employee reactions to job characteristics
Post
Cancel

Hackman 1971 - Employee reactions to job characteristics

Google Scholar Link

Brief, A. P., & Aldag, R. J. (1975). Employee reactions to job characteristics: A constructive replication. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(2), 182.

This experiment used a multilevel design, which allowed them to control for the effects of position. The statistical analysis was more rudimentary than would be used today (true multilevel statistical analysis is widely used), but was quite thorough. If teaching a statistics class, it would be enlightening to have students read the first part of the paper, and then ask them how they would solve certain questions that the researchers ask, like “Must Jobs Be High on All Four Core Dimensions?”, in addition to having them come up with their own questions. They could then compare their methods to answer those questions with the actual methods used by the researchers. Because the techniques used aren’t too advanced (mainly means, correlation, and t-tests), this would be appropriate for earlier students.

Summary

Job simplification has been used in attempts to drive efficiency, allow the use of lower-skilled workers, to increase control of production, and to increase profits. These “simple jobs” lead to decreased employee satisfaction, increased turnover and absenteeism, and increased difficulty in management. However, research shows that job satisfaction is influenced not only by job characteristics, but also by individual-level employee attributes. Some individuals desire higher order satisfaction, such as personal growth (competency) or feelings of accomplishment (meaning), which is frequently not provided by simple jobs. Research has moved towards “job enlargement.”

This paper cites four specific job dimensions that relate to job enlargement. When the levels across these four dimensions are high, individuals who need higher order satisfaction tend to have higher motivation, higher job satisfaction, lower absenteeism, and are rated more positively by supervisors. Variety refers to the degree to which employees need to use different skills to fulfill their job. This can include doing different things, using different tools or equipment, and following different procedures. Autonomy allows for work to be self-directed. Jobs high on autonomy allow employees to select both “when” and “how” work is accomplished. Task identity refers to “the extent to which employees do an entire or whole piece of work, and can clearly identify the result of their efforts.” This includes tasks that have a distinct beginning and end, and also which effect a noticeable (and preferably large) distinction. Finally, feedback refers to performance-related information that allows the employee to assess if they are being successful or not. Notably, this feedback needs to be believable (e.g., if a manager always says “Good job!” the feedback will lose its believability and potency).

One interesting note is that Hackman and Lawler (1971) found “The amount of respect and fair treatment I receive from my boss” to be the satisfaction item least correlated with the four core dimensions. This stands in contrast to Rhoades and Eisenberger (2002) who, while studying perceived organizational support (which correlated with satisfaction), found that “fairness” and “supervisor support” were the most important factors. This could perhaps reflect a changing role and/or perception of bosses - an interesting note for future research.

Application

Though an older paper, it still has high applicability for job design and job fit. Managers should be aware of employees that desire higher-order satisfaction (most employees). If simple work needs to be done, it can be assigned to those without such a need – or can be assigned on a rotating basis (a “fair” solution).

This post is licensed under CC BY 4.0 by the author.

Fiske 1980 - Attention and weight in person perception - The impact of negative and extreme behavior.

Hobfoll 1989 - Conservation of Resources - A New Attempt at Conceptualizing Stress

Comments powered by Disqus.