The structure of work values: A cross cultural comparison

Abstract

Several years ago a research project on work values was originated. The study strived to examine the relative importance of work value items and to analyze the structure of the domain for samples from various cultural environments. A facet definition of work values was suggested that provided guidelines for constructing the Work Values Questionnaire and the formulation of hypotheses regarding the structure of relationships among components of work values. Based on data collected from 2280 respondents in eight countries the hypotheses were tested by means of Guttman's Smallest Space Analysis. The results support the hypotheses. An empirical double‐ordered conceptual system, a radex structure, was obtained in each of the samples reflecting the facets of the definition: modality of outcome — cognitive, affective and instrumental, and system ‐ performance contingency — reward, resource. In terms of the issue of cultural differences the results indicate the presence of cultural differences in the rating of a limited number of specific values. These differences are only minor variations within a much broader pattern of structural similarity. The fact that essentially the same structure was obtained in eight independent samples lends substantial support to the definitional framework of work values suggested.

Effect of Work Values on Work Outcomes: Investigating Differences between Job Categories

“…Carruthers (1968) distinguished between three basic dimensions: extrinsic rewards, extrinsic concomitants, and intrinsic concomitants, and he identified fifteen sub-dimensions within these three value dimensions. Elizur (1984); Elizur, Borg, Hunt, and Beck (1991);and Cassar (2008) Clearly, there is no consensus on the dimensionality of work values across different studies. To investigate the dimensionality of work values for people in different jobs, it is preferable to begin by asking general questions about various aspects of the work situation to determine the dimensionality of work values in an ex-post manner, rather than adopting a simple ex-ante dichotomy.…”

“…In terms of antecedents, some demographic factors, such as gender, age, and educational level, have been found to influence work values (Cassar, 2008;Hagstrom & Kjellberg, 2007;Hirschi, 2010;Warr, 2008). The differences or similarities in work values across various countries with different national cultures have also been investigated (Choo, Hendrick, & Keng-Howe, 2009;Elizur et al, 1991;Hattrup, Muller, & Aguirre, 2007;Hattrup et al, 2007;Latifi, 2006;Siu, 2003;Steyn & Kotze, 2004;Wang et al, 2010;Warr, 2008).…”

Islamic Work Values and Organizational Commitment: A Case Study Among Employees in Broadcasting Industry

“…Nevertheless, the relationship between work value and organisational commitment has also received considerable attention (e.g., Jones, 1997;Elizur, Borg, Hunt, & Magyaribeck, 1991;Yousef, 2001). …”

The Relationship Between Work Values and Employee Voice

“…Additional to these two groups, social and environmental values are identified (Ginzberg et al, 1951;Manhardt, 1972;Elizur et al, 1991 (Tevrüz et al, 2015). Growth or individualistic function includes intrinsic values such as "to perform the desired profession", "to be enriched in knowledge and to use it" and "to have a meaningful life".…”