Main article:et al.’s Motivator–Hygiene Theory, aka Two-factor Theory, an influence on Job Characteristics Theory, sought to increase motivation and satisfaction through enriching jobs.The theory predicts changes in “motivators”, which are intrinsic to the work, (such as, and ) will lead to higher levels of employee motivation and satisfaction; while “hygiene factors”, which are extrinsic to the work itself, (such as company policies and ) can lead to lower levels of dissatisfaction, but will not actually effect satisfaction or motivation.Sociotechnical systems theory. Main article:Adaptive structuration theory provides a way to look at the interaction between technology's intended and actual use in an organization, and how it can influence different work-related outcomes.Variations Reverse scoring correction Idaszak and Drasgow provided a corrected version of the Job Diagnostic Survey that corrected for one of the measurement errors in the instrument. It had been suggested that reverse scoring on several of the questions was to blame for the inconsistent studies looking at the factors involved in the Job Diagnostic Survey. Following a, Idaszak and Drasgow found six factors rather than the theorized five characteristics proposed by the Job Characteristics Theory. Upon further investigation, they were able to show that the sixth factor was made up of the reverse coded items. The authors rephrased the questions, ran the analysis again, and found it removed the.
GN–GO model Due to the inconsistent findings about the validity of Growth Need Strength as a moderator of the Job characteristic-outcomes relationship, Graen, Scandura, and Graen proposed the GN–GO model, which added Growth Opportunity as another moderator. They suggested there isn't a simple positive relationship between motivation and Growth Need Strength, but instead there is an underlying incremental (stairstep) relationship with various levels of Growth Opportunity. Growth Opportunity increments are described as “events that change either the characteristics of the job itself or the understanding of the job itself”. It was hypothesized that as people high in Growth Need Strength met each level of Growth Opportunity they could be motivated to increase their performance, but when people low on Growth Need Strength met these same increments their performance would either maintain or degrade. Field studies found more support for the GN–GO model than the original Growth Need Strength moderation. Extension of characteristics and outcomes Humphrey, Nahrgang, and Morgeson extended the original model by incorporating many different outcomes and job characteristics. The authors divided the revised set of Job Characteristics into three sections- Motivational, Social, and Work Context Characteristics; and the outcomes were portioned out into four parts- Behavioral, Attitudinal, Role Perception, and Well-being Outcomes.
![Job Characteristics Model Job Characteristics Model](https://o.quizlet.com/iclhixzk7yiI48HMFFe.9A.jpg)
Start studying MGT final Ch.6 Major topics: Job Characteristics Model. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools. The job characteristics model, designed by Hackman and Oldham, is based on the idea that the task itself is key to employee motivation. According to the theory, five core job characteristics should prompt three critical psychological states, which lead to many favorable personal and work outcomes.
Results showed strong relationships between some of the expanded characteristics and outcomes, suggesting that there are more options for enriching jobs than the original theory would suggest. Psychological ownership Taking from earlier empirical research on Job Characteristics Theory and, researchers developed a model that combined the two theories. They replaced the psychological states of the Job Characteristics Theory with Psychological Ownership of the job as the mediator between job characteristics and outcomes.
In addition to the positive personal and work outcomes of Job Characteristics Theory, negative outcomes (e.g., and Burden of Responsibility) were added. Empirical tests Since its inception, Job Characteristics Theory has been scrutinized extensively. The first empirical tests of the theory came from Hackman and Oldham themselves. The authors found the “internal consistency of the scales and the of the items” to be “satisfactory”. They also tried to assess the of the measure by having the supervisors and the researchers evaluate the job in addition to the jobholders. More importantly, the authors reported the relationships predicted by the model were supported by their analysis.Following these publications, over 200 empirical articles were published examining Job Characteristics Theory over the next decade. Fried and Ferris summarized the research on Job Characteristics Theory and found “modest support” overall.
Fried and Ferris mentioned seven general areas of criticism in their review, which are discussed below:. Relation of objective and perceived job characteristics: Whether or not there is accuracy in the worker's perceptions of job characteristics is an important topic of concern for Job Characteristics Theory. Inaccurate ratings of the five job characteristics can be detrimental to the job enrichment process because the Job Diagnostic Survey, which is instrumental in determining what enrichment needs to take place, relies on jobholders' perceptions. Influential forces on job perceptions:, personal factors, and what order the portions of the Job Diagnostic Survey is given can influence job perceptions. ^ Hackman, J. How job characteristics theory happened.
The Oxford handbook of management theory: The process of theory development, 151-170. ^ Hackman, J. Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(2), 159-170.
^ Oldham, G. R., & Hackman, J. (2010) Not what it was and not what it will be: The future of job design research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 463-479. 2013-09-25 at the. ^ Turner, A. N., & Lawrence, P.
Industrial jobs and the worker. Boston: Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration. ^ Hackman, J.
R., & Lawler, E. Employee reactions to job characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology Monograph, 55(3), 259-286.
Cleave, S. A test of the job characteristics model with administrative positions in physical education and sport. Journal of Sport Management, 7(3), 228-242. Rungtusanatham, M., & Anderson, J. A clarification on conceptual and methodological issues related to the job characteristics model. Journal of Operations Management, 14(4), 357-367.
^ Hackman, J. Work redesign,(Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA). Katz, Ralph. Motivating Technical Professionals Today., Vol.
1, March 2013, pp. 28-38. Blauner, R. Alienation and freedom.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Walker, C. R., and Guest, C. The man on the assembly line.
Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press. Hackman, J. R., & Lawler, E. Employee reactions to job characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology, 55(3), 259.
^ Kulik, C. T., Oldham, G. R., & Hackman, J. Work design as an approach to person-environment fit. Journal of vocational behavior, 31(3), 278-296.
Argryis, C. Integrating the individual and the organization. New York: Wiley.
Lawler, E. Job design and employee motivation.
Personnel Psychology, 22, 426-435. Porter L. W., & Lawler, E. Managerial attitudes and performance. Homewood, Ill.: Irwin.
^ Hackman, J. Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250-279. ^ Steel, Piers. Motivation: Theory and Applied. Boston, MA: Pearson Learning Solutions, 2012.
49. ^ Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B. The motivation to work. New York.
Hulin, C. Individual differences and job enrichment: The case against general treatments.
New perspectives in job enrichment, 159-191. Taylor, F. Shop management. Harper & brothers. Trist, E. L., & Bamforth, K.
Some social and psychological consequences of long-wall methods of coal getting. Human Relations, 4, 3–38. Shewhart, W. The economic control of manufactured products. New York: Van Nostrand.
Deming, W. Out of the crisis. Cambridge, MA: Center for Advanced Engineering Study. Juran, J. Quality control handbook (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill., & Poole, M. Capturing the in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory.
Organization Science, 5 (2), 121–147. ^ Idaszak, J. R., & Drasgow, F.
A revision of the Job Diagnostic Survey: Elimination of a measurement artifact. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72(1), 69. Harvey, R. J., Billings, R. S., & Nilan, K.
Confirmatory factor analysis of the Job Diagnostic Survey: Good news and bad news. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70(3), 461. ^ Graen, G. B., Scandura, T.
A., & Graen, M. A field experimental test of the moderating effects of growth need strength on productivity.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 71(3), 484. Medcof, J. A test of a revision of the job characteristics model. Applied Psychology, 40(4), 381-393. ^ Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J.
D., & Morgeson, F. Integrating motivational, social, and contextual work design features: A meta-analytic summary and theoretical extension of the work design literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(5), 1332. ^ Pierce, J.
![Job Characteristics Model Job Characteristics Model](/uploads/1/2/5/5/125569255/979418075.png)
L., Jussila, I., & Cummings, A. Psychological ownership within the job design context: Revision of the job characteristics model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30(4), 477-496.
^ Fried, Y., & Ferris, G. The validity of the job characteristics model: A review and meta‐analysis.
Personnel Psychology, 40(2), 287-322., & (1977). An examination of need-satisfaction models of job attitudes.
Administrative Science Quarterly, 22, 427-456., & (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and job design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224-253.
O'Reilly, C. A., Parlette, G.
N., & Bloom, J. Perceptual measures of task characteristics: The biasing effects of differing frames of reference and job attitudes. Academy of Management Journal, 23(1), 118-131. Spector, P. E., & Jex, S.
Relations of job characteristics from multiple data sources with employee affect, absence, turnover intentions, and health. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(1), 46. Oldham, G.
R., Hackman, J. R., & Pearce, J. Conditions under which employees respond positively to enriched work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 61(4), 395.
Champoux, J. A preliminary examination of some complex job scope-growth need strength interactions. Proceedings of the Academy of Management, 38, 59-63.
Wall, T. D., Clegg, C. W., & Jackson, P. An evaluation of the job characteristics model. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 51(2), 183-196. ^ Arnold, H. J., & House, R.
Methodological and substantive extensions to the job characteristics model of motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 25, 161-183. Renn, R. W., & Vandenberg, R. The critical psychological states: An underrepresented component in job characteristics model research. Journal of Management, 21(2), 279-303.
Behson, S. R., & Lorenzet, S. The importance of the critical psychological states in the job characteristics model: A meta-analytic and structural equations modeling examination. Current research in social psychology, 5, 170-189. Evans, M.
G., Kiggundu, M. N., House, R. A partial test and extension of the job characteristics model of motivation. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 24, 354-381.