Core self-evaluation and career decision self-efficacy: A mediation model of value orientations

(Dis)Trust, Control, and Project Success: From a Chinese Project Owner’s Perspective

“…For example, longitude data could be used to explore the relationship between trust and control. Also, the single source data tend to bring about common method biases [96,97]. Moreover, some control variables were not considered in this research, such as the competence of the contractor and the attitude or propensity of the owner.…”

Linking Individual Value Orientations to Employee Attitudes: An Exploratory Analysis

“…Mastery is a cultural component drawn from Kluckhohn and Strodbeck’s (1961) value orientation model, which complements and serves as the foundation of many other models (e.g., Hofstede, 1980; House et al, 2004). According to research that highlights mastery from a cultural perspective (e.g., Jiang, 2015; Yeganeh & Su, 2011), one core effect of mastery is that it contributes to people’s confidence and reduces psychological stress and concerns in work and career settings, thus increasing their tendency to actively take risks at work (Lysaker et al, 2011). As stated previously, employees’ commitment to and trust in their organization are built on their exchanges with the organization.…”

“…Because mastery is characterized as the value orientation governing proactive control over situational and environmental forces (Jiang, 2015), it might be considered an individual attribute that assists in reducing perceptions of risk in certain situations and that benefits the levels of employee commitment and trust. For example, people high on mastery tend to have greater self‐confidence in managing outside forces in their associated environments, such as work settings, to create positive changes in their environment to meet their desired goals.…”

“…In contrast, people low on mastery tend to believe that these forces (e.g., the organization’s policies and decisions) are beyond their personal control, which may raise psychological concerns about whether positive outcomes can be attained. These concerns may prevent low‐mastery employees from showing trust and committing to the organization despite wanting to maintain a harmonious relationship in their job environment (Jiang et al, 2015). Thus, it is argued that high‐mastery employees, compared with their low‐mastery counterparts, have a greater propensity to trust in and commit to their organizations.…”

“…Both models have been verified to be operationalizable at the individual level (e.g., Clugston et al, 2000; Maznevski et al, 2002), although Hofstede’s model was originally developed from the societal level. At the individual level, individualism refers to a person’s tendency to value his or her interests more than the group’s welfare; power distance reflects one’s tendency to accept power differences and to value personal status (Clugston et al, 2000; Dorfman & Howell, 1988); and mastery orientation denotes an individual’s tendency to exert control over his or her environment and outside forces (Jiang, 2015; Maznevski et al, 2002). The present study focuses on this set of values because they reflect Triandis’s (1993) ideology that culture is a group strategy for survival that comprises continuous attempts to adapt to external environments.…”