Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries

Volume 22, Issue 3 p. 197-212

Research Article

A new model of job design: Initial evidence and implications for future research

Rose Challenger,

Corresponding Author

Rose Challenger

[email protected]

Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, UK

Socio-Technical Centre, Leeds University Business School, Maurice Keyworth Building, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK. Phone: +44 (0)113 343 7425Search for more papers by this author

Desmond J. Leach,

Desmond J. Leach

Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, UK

Search for more papers by this author

Christopher B. Stride,

Christopher B. Stride

Institute of Work Psychology, University of Sheffield, UK

Search for more papers by this author

Chris W. Clegg,

Chris W. Clegg

Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, UK

Search for more papers by this author

Rose Challenger,

Corresponding Author

Rose Challenger

[email protected]

Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, UK

Socio-Technical Centre, Leeds University Business School, Maurice Keyworth Building, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK. Phone: +44 (0)113 343 7425Search for more papers by this author

Desmond J. Leach,

Desmond J. Leach

Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, UK

Search for more papers by this author

Christopher B. Stride,

Christopher B. Stride

Institute of Work Psychology, University of Sheffield, UK

Search for more papers by this author

Chris W. Clegg,

Chris W. Clegg

Leeds University Business School, University of Leeds, UK

Search for more papers by this author

First published: 12 December 2011

https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20273

Citations: 2

Read the full text

About

PDF

Tools

Share a link

Email
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
Wechat

Abstract

Clegg and Spencer's (2007) model of job design synthesizes and extends recent conceptions of the job design process by incorporating variables such as knowledge, motivation, and trust into a cyclical and dynamic system. The objective of this study was to examine the sequential organization of variables that comprise the model, as a basis from which to justify further investigations of the model's dynamic properties. Data were collected via questionnaires from 432 participants in two work organizations. Results obtained from structural equation modeling are broadly supportive of the proposed relationships between the variables. Implications of this initial study for future research and practice are discussed. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

References

Amabile, T. M., Hill, K. G., Hennessey, B. A., & Tighe, E. M. (1994). The work preference inventory: Assessing intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 950–967.
10.1037/0022-3514.66.5.950
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Birdi, K., Clegg, C., Patterson, M., Robinson, A., & Stride, C. B. (2008). The impact of human resource and operational management practices on company productivity: A longitudinal study. Personnel Psychology, 61, 467–501.
10.1111/j.1744-6570.2008.00136.x
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Burr, R., & Cordery, J. L. (2001). Self-management efficacy as a mediator of the relation between job design and employee motivation. Human Performance, 14, 27–44.
10.1207/S15327043HUP1401_03
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Clegg, C., & Spencer, C. (2007). A circular and dynamic model of the process of job design. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80, 321–339.
10.1348/096317906X113211
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Clegg, C., Unsworth, K., Epitropaki, O., & Parker, G. (2002). Implicating trust in the innovation process. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 409–422.
10.1348/096317902321119574
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Conway, J. M., & Huffcutt, A. I. (2003). A review and evaluation of exploratory factor analysis practices in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 147–168.
10.1177/1094428103251541
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Conway, J. M., & Lance, C. E. (2010). What reviewers should expect from authors regarding common method bias in organizational research. Journal of Business and Psychology, 25, 325–334.
10.1007/s10869-010-9181-6
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Dean, T. J., & Brown, R. L. (1995). Pollution regulation as a barrier to new firm entry: Initial evidence and implications for future research. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 288–303.
10.2307/256737
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18, 39–50.
10.1177/002224378101800104
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Frese, M., Garst, H., & Fay, D. (2007). Making things happen: Reciprocal relationships between work characteristics and personal initiative in a four-wave longitudinal structural equation model. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1084–1102.
10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.1084
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Grant, A. M., & Sumanth, J. J. (2009). Mission possible? The performance of prosocially motivated employees depends on manager trustworthiness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 927–944.
10.1037/a0014391
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16, 250–279.
10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Holman, D., Wall, T. D., Clegg, C. W., Sparrow, P., & Howard, A. (Eds.) (2003). The new workplace: A guide to the human impact of modern working practices. London: Wiley.

Google Scholar
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling: Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424–453.
10.1037/1082-989X.3.4.424
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Ilgen, D. R., Hollenbeck, J. R., Johnson, M., & Jundt, D. (2005). Teams in organizations: From input-process-output models to IMOI models. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 517–543.
10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070250
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Jackson, P. R., Wall, T. D., Martin, R., & Davids, K. (1993). New measures of job control, cognitive demand, and production responsibility. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 753–762.
10.1037/0021-9010.78.5.753
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The Guilford Press.

Google Scholar
Lane, C., & Bachmann, R. (1998). Trust within and between organizations: Conceptual issues and empirical applications. New York: Oxford University Press.

Google Scholar
Lawler, E. E. (1974). The individualized organization: Problems and promise. California Management Review, 17, 31–39.
10.2307/41164558
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Leach, D. J., Wall, T. D., & Jackson, P. R. (2003). The effect of empowerment on job knowledge: An empirical test involving operators of complex technology. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 27–52.
10.1348/096317903321208871
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20, 709–734.
10.2307/258792
Web of Science®Google Scholar
McAllister, D. J. (1995). Affect- and cognition-based trust as foundations for interpersonal cooperation in organizations. Academy of Management Journal, 38, 24–59.
10.2307/256727
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Morgeson, F. P., Delaney-Klinger, K., & Hemingway, M. A. (2005). The importance of job autonomy, cognitive ability, and job-related skill for predicting role breadth and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 399–406.
10.1037/0021-9010.90.2.399
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Morrison, D. L., Upton, D. M., & Cordery, J. L. (1999). The role of supervisor behavior in facilitating opportunities for skill development and utilization. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 9, 49–67.
10.1002/(SICI)1520-6564(199924)9:1<49::AID-HFM3>3.0.CO;2-6
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Oldham, G. R., & Hackman, J. R. (2010). Not what it was and not what it will be: The future of job design research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 463–479.
10.1002/job.678
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Parker, S. K. (1998). Enhancing role breadth self-efficacy: The roles of job enrichment and other organizational interventions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 835–852.
10.1037/0021-9010.83.6.835
CASPubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Parker, S. K., Wall, T. D., & Cordery, J. L. (2001). Future work design research and practice: Towards an elaborated model of work design. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 413–440.
10.1348/096317901167460
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Pierce, J., Jussila, I., & Cummings, A. (2009). Psychological ownership within the job design context: Revision of the job characteristics model. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 477–496.
10.1002/job.550
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. M., Lee, J., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method variance in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903.
10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Potosky, D., & Bobko, P. (2004). Selection testing via the internet: Practical considerations and exploratory empirical findings. Personnel Psychology, 57, 1003–1034.
10.1111/j.1744-6570.2004.00013.x
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Shea, C. M., & Howell, J. M. (2000). Efficacy-performance spirals: An empirical test. Journal of Management, 26, 791–812.
10.1177/014920630002600409
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 9, 221–232.
10.1177/1094428105284955
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Warr, P. B., Cook, J. D., & Wall, T. D. (1979). Scales for the measurement of some work attitudes and aspects of psychological well-being. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 52, 129–148.
10.1111/j.2044-8325.1979.tb00448.x
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Welbourne, T. M., Johnson, D. E., & Erez, A. (1998). The role-based performance scale: Validity analysis of a theory-based measure. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 540–555.
10.2307/256941
Web of Science®Google Scholar
West, M. (1987). Role innovation in the world of work. British Journal of Social Psychology, 26, 305–315.
10.1111/j.2044-8309.1987.tb00793.x
Web of Science®Google Scholar
Westaby, J. D., Versenyi, A., & Hausmann, R. C. (2005). Intentions to work during terminal illness: An exploratory study of antecedent conditions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90, 1297–1305.
10.1037/0021-9010.90.6.1297
PubMedWeb of Science®Google Scholar
Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. Academy of Management Review, 26, 179–201.
10.2307/259118
Web of Science®Google Scholar

Citing Literature

Volume22, Issue3

May/June 2012

Pages 197-212

A new model of job design: Initial evidence and implications for future research

Abstract

References

Citing Literature

References

Information

About Wiley Online Library

Help & Support

Opportunities

Connect with Wiley

A new model of job design: Initial evidence and implications for future research

Abstract

References

Citing Literature

References

Related

Information