The Paradoxical Effects of High Work Methods and Work Scheduling Autonomy

Tanja Bipp, Marvin Walczok
{"title":"The Paradoxical Effects of High Work Methods and Work Scheduling Autonomy","authors":"Tanja Bipp, Marvin Walczok","doi":"10.1026/0932-4089/a000431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract: Job autonomy is traditionally seen as a core job characteristic with positive effects on work outcomes. However, in today’s world of work, excessive levels of job autonomy have also been suggested to lead to demands with negative downstream effects. We investigated paradoxical effects of high levels of two autonomy facets with regard to work engagement. In an experimental vignette study ( N = 228 German employees), we manipulated two autonomy facets in a 2×2 between-subject design (high vs. low work methods autonomy vs. work scheduling autonomy). We found evidence for paradoxical effects for one facet: High levels of work scheduling autonomy directly stimulated work engagement but led to higher levels of work intensification therefore also (indirectly) hindering work engagement. To our knowledge, our findings are the first to provide evidence of the simultaneous paradoxical effects of work scheduling autonomy and an explanation for detrimental effects on work engagement via the intensification of work.","PeriodicalId":503814,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie A&O","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift für Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie A&O","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1026/0932-4089/a000431","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Job autonomy is traditionally seen as a core job characteristic with positive effects on work outcomes. However, in today’s world of work, excessive levels of job autonomy have also been suggested to lead to demands with negative downstream effects. We investigated paradoxical effects of high levels of two autonomy facets with regard to work engagement. In an experimental vignette study ( N = 228 German employees), we manipulated two autonomy facets in a 2×2 between-subject design (high vs. low work methods autonomy vs. work scheduling autonomy). We found evidence for paradoxical effects for one facet: High levels of work scheduling autonomy directly stimulated work engagement but led to higher levels of work intensification therefore also (indirectly) hindering work engagement. To our knowledge, our findings are the first to provide evidence of the simultaneous paradoxical effects of work scheduling autonomy and an explanation for detrimental effects on work engagement via the intensification of work.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
高度工作方法与工作安排自主权的矛盾效应
摘要:工作自主权历来被视为对工作成果具有积极影响的核心工作特征。然而,在当今的工作世界中,过度的工作自主性也被认为会导致产生负面下游效应的需求。我们研究了高水平的两种自主性对工作投入的矛盾影响。在一项实验小故事研究中(N = 228 名德国员工),我们采用 2×2 受试者间设计(高工作方法自主性与低工作方法自主性与工作安排自主性)对两种自主性进行了操纵。我们发现了一个方面的悖论效应:高水平的工作安排自主权直接刺激了工作投入,但却导致了更高水平的工作强度,因此也(间接)阻碍了工作投入。据我们所知,我们的研究结果首次提供了工作安排自主性同时具有矛盾效应的证据,并解释了通过工作强化对工作投入产生的不利影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Paradoxical Effects of High Work Methods and Work Scheduling Autonomy Digitalisierung der Arbeit und Eigeninitiative – die Rolle der organisationalen Fehlerkultur Formen der Arbeitszufriedenheit sensu Bruggemann Rezension von Allgemeine Arbeitspsychologie. Psychische Regulation von Tätigkeiten When and How Proactivity Impacts Vitality
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1