Summary Two dominant perspectives of job crafting—the original theory from Wrzesniewski and Dutton () and the job demands resources perspective from Tims, Bakker, and Derks ()—remain separate in research. To synthesize these perspectives, we propose a three‐level hierarchical structure of job crafting, and we identify the aggregate/superordinate nature of each major job crafting construct. The first level of the structure is job crafting orientation, or approach versus avoidance crafting, which we argue is an essential yet often neglected distinction in the literature. We address the debate surrounding cognitive crafting and identify crafting form (behavioral versus cognitive crafting) as the next hierarchical level of constructs. Finally, we concur that job resources and job demands, or crafting content, capture different ways that individuals craft their jobs. Using this integrated hierarchical structure, we were able to review antecedents and outcomes from both perspectives. We show, for example, that approach crafting in its behavioral form is very similar to other proactive behaviors in the way it functions, suggesting a need for closer synthesis with the broader proactive literature, whereas avoidance crafting appears to be less proactive and often dysfunctional. On the basis of our review, we develop a road map for future research.

In response to the call to investigate the positive side of overqualification, we drew on the job crafting perspective to theorize that overqualified employees can proactively regulate the discrepancies between their actual and ideal jobs via two different job crafting strategies: job crafting towards strengths (JC-strengths) and job crafting towards interests (JC-interests). We expected distinct positive outcomes for JCstrengths and JC-interests. Specifically, JC-strengths benefits both overqualified employees and the organization, whereas JC-interests only benefits the individual employees. We further proposed that the relationship between perceived overqualification and JC-strengths will be stronger when employees' organizational identification is higher, whereas the relationship between perceived overqualification and JC-interests will be stronger when their identification with the organization is lower.As expected, with the use of two-wave and dual-source data from 653 employees, we found that perceived overqualification was positively related to both JC-strengths and JC-interests; JC-strengths was positively related to both vitality and supervisorrated task performance, whereas JC-interests was only positively related to vitality.We also found that the relationship between perceived overqualification and JC-strengths was moderated by organizational identification as hypothesized.

No abstract

Employees can craft their job demands by optimizing or reducing them. Research has shown reducing demands produces dysfunctional effects, yet optimizing demands creates positive effects. However, little is known about when and why employees choose to engage in optimizing demands versus reducing demands. Drawing on the transactional theory of stress, we proposed that individuals' primary appraisal of a demand as a challenge or a hindrance affects their choice of demands crafting via secondary appraisal of control. We further theorized that job autonomy affects control appraisal and interacts with primary appraisal to affect control appraisal. We conducted two randomized vignette experiments in which we manipulated primary appraisal and job autonomy in Study A (N = 182) and control appraisal in Study B (N = 145) to test our hypotheses. The assigned challenge appraisal positively predicted optimizing demands indirectly via the increased control appraisal. The assigned hindrance appraisal positively predicted reducing demands, but this effect was not mediated by control appraisal. Job autonomy had a main effect on control appraisal but did not interact with assigned challenge/hindrance appraisal in predicting control appraisal. Our findings provide significant insights into distinct mechanisms of two demands crafting strategies, and guidance to organizational practices.

No abstract