Meta-analytic techniques were used to estimate how job insecurity relates to its postulated outcomes. Consistent with the conceptual framework, the results indicate that job insecurity has detrimental consequences for employees' job attitudes, organizational attitudes, health, and, to some extent, their behavioral relationship with the organization. Moderator analyses suggest that these relationships may be underestimated in studies relying on single-item measures of job insecurity and that the behavioral consequences of insecurity are more detrimental among manual, as compared with nonmanual, workers. Recommendations made for future research include utilization of multidimensional measures, consideration of a broader spectrum of outcomes and moderators, and use of longitudinal designs.

This contribution analyses whether temporary work and (the subjective perception of) job insecurity are associated with a reduction in job satisfaction and organizational commitment, as proposed in the literature. An interaction between temporary work and job insecurity is also tested. Data from four European countries (Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy and Sweden) are used to test the robustness of the hypotheses. The results show that temporary work is not associated with a reduction in job satisfaction and organizational commitment. Job insecurity is associated with a lower score on both outcome variables, as hypothesized. In two countries, an interaction was found: job insecurity was only associated with a reduction in job satisfaction and organizational commitment among workers with a permanent contract, suggesting that the psychological contract was violated for this category of workers.

Along with the increased flexibilization of the labour market in Europe, there has been a change in the permanence and security of employment. Job insecurity is constituted by a subjectively experienced threat of having to give up one's job sooner than one would like. The experience of job insecurity has been linked to decreasing well-being, negative attitudes towards one's job and organization, and reluctance to stay with the organization. The present study investigates what groups experience higher levels of job insecurity than others. Survey data from four European countries (Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands and Sweden) were used to determine what characterizes individuals who experience high levels of job insecurity. The results show that employees in jobs characterized by manual labour, contingent workers, and to some extent older workers and those with lower levels of education, experience higher levels of job insecurity.

Previous research has shown that job insecurity is linked to a range of performance outcomes, but the number of studies exploring this relationship is still limited and the results are somewhat mixed. The first aim of this study was to meta-analytically investigate how job insecurity is related to task performance, contextual performance, counterproductive work behavior, creativity, and safety compliance. The second aim was to test two method-related factors (cross-sectional vs. longitudinal associations and self- vs. supervisor-ratings of performance) and two macro-level indicators of social protection (social welfare regime and union density) as moderators of these associations. The results show that job insecurity was generally associated with impaired employee performance. These findings were generally similar both cross-sectionally and longitudinally and irrespective of rater. Overall, the associations between job insecurity and negative performance outcomes were weaker in welfare regimes characterized by strong social protection, whereas the results concerning union density produced mixed results. A majority of the findings confirmed the negative associations between job insecurity and types of employee performance, but future research is needed to elaborate on the effects of temporal aspects, differences between ratings sources, and further indicators of social protection in different cultural settings in the context of job insecurity.

Resilience in organizations denotes system agility and robustness, essential to survival and thriving in increasingly challenging contexts. Contemporary scholarship has acknowledged the relationship between employee resilience and organizational resilience. Yet interventions aimed at developing employee resilience tend to use stress and well-being as proxy resilience indicators, focusing primarily on individual rehabilitation or the development of personal resources. We argue that these interventions should also consider the development of organizational resources that ensure both the inherent and adaptive resilience of employees. This article introduces employee resilience as behavioral capability, signaled by adaptive, learning, and network-leveraging behaviors, and it discusses ways in which supportive organizational contexts enable the development and enactment of these behaviors. The article proposes a series of resilience-building initiatives, embedded in everyday practice, and elucidates how leading and organizing for the development of employee resilience contributes to improved well-being and performance.

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to introduce a new measure of employee resilience. Employee resilience is a key capability enabling employees to manage and adapt to continually changing circumstances. While there is an increasing body of research on how to best promote resilience among employees in organizations, the measurement of the construct has received less research attention. The measure introduced in this paper focuses on employee resilience as a work-related capability that can be developed. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents three survey-based studies describing the development of a new measure, the Employee Resilience Scale and its preliminary validation. Study 1 concerns the scale development and testing, along with a confirmatory analysis of the measurement structure in a different sample. Study 2 investigates the discriminant validity of the scale in relation to a well-known measure of personal resilience, the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale. Study 3 was concerned with work-related outcomes of employee resilience (e.g. job engagement). Findings Support was found for the unidimensionality of the scale in Study 1. Study 2 showed a clear differentiation between the two measures of resilience: employee resilience and personal resilience, supporting the discriminant validity of the measure. Study 3 provided evidence for the criterion-related validity of the scale. Research limitations/implications The three studies presented here provide preliminary support that the Employee Resilience Scale can be used to measure resilience among employees. Originality/value While the concept of employee resilience has gained attention in the literature, a measure of the construct has lacked. The study presents a valid measure of employee resilience which can be used to diagnose and develop a more adaptive workplace.

Britt, Shen, Sinclair, Grossman, and Klieger (2016) offer compelling arguments for the need to consider resilience trajectories and to identify the intrapersonal, interpersonal, and contextual factors accountable for unique trajectories. We welcome the call for more focused research efforts toward uncovering the role of resilience in organizations and concur with Britt et al. that there is a need for a clearer characterization of resilience among employees, the correlates of resilience, and the way that resilience can be facilitated. Our objective here is to build on the main thrust of Britt et al.’s focal article by outlining a novel perspective on employee resilience, which we believe will constitute an important contribution to the organizational resilience literature.

Exit, voice, loyalty, or neglect as employee responses to organizations in decline have been investigated in several studies. The aim of the present study is to investigate whether employability moderates the effects of job insecurity on exit, voice, loyalty and neglect. The results, based on questionnaire data from white-collar workers in Sweden (N = 725), indicate that individuals who are high in employability may have greater opportunities for gaining control over their working life. Job insecurity was found to be associated with increased exit as well as with decreased voice and loyalty, although these effects were stronger among individuals who perceived themselves to be employable. Thus, instead of making employees more likely to use voice in times of uncertainty, employability appears to primarily induce vocational mobility.