Work meaning among mid-level professional employees: A study of the importance of work centrality and extrinsic and intrinsic work goals in eight countries

Abstract

We conducted a survey-based study on the meaning of work of some 1500 mid-level professional employees in private and public organizations in eight countries. Using the country clustering described in the GLOBE series of studies and the theoretical framework of the Meaning of Work study, five hypotheses were tested. The study found support for the universal valuation of work and family as major life domains and the relative importance of leisure, religion, and community involvement. Work centrality was related in differentiated ways to performance orientation, assertiveness, and humane orientation indices. Extrinsic and intrinsic work goals differed and were related to country clustering. The report concludes with implications for the theory and practice of human resource development and offers suggestions for further research.Few topics over the past thirty years have captured as much attention in the broader social science literature and the popular business press as the changing nature of work, with its effects on countries, organizations, families, and individuals giving rise to a broad literature on new careers and new work. Far from presenting a uniform picture of the effects of changing work provisions, the literature points to highly differentiated and complex sets of responses and assessments of the value of work in the new economy (for example, Baldry et al. 2007;Cooper and Burke 2002;Hall 2004;Volti 2008;Wrzesniewski 2001). While much of this research has focused on changes in objective provisions of work, the concern of human resource management is with the coherent and strategic management of individuals, groups, and other subsets of employees. Thus a deeper understanding of how individuals experience work and its changing nature is essential in a rapidly globalizing economy. The focus on the subjective meaning of work can provide insight into the construction of work as subjectively experienced and offers information about how individuals make sense of, negotiate, and navigate the new work environment.Despite its central role in guiding behavior at work, empirical cross-cultural HR research on the topic is underdeveloped. To help advance understanding and explore implications for research and practice, a group of researchers from countries around the world convened in late 2007 to plan and implement a multi-country empirical study focused on the core question of similarities and differences in subjective understanding of work in a diverse set of cultures, countries, and economies around the world. The population was defined broadly as mid-level professional level employees, such as managers, engineers, accountants, and human resource professionals, employed in medium and large public and private organizations in their respective countries, and working full-time in diverse sectors and industries. The choice of this volunteer population was determined by accessibility, but more importantly by their role as current or future leaders in their organizations. Mid-level managers and professionals with comp...

Development and initial validation of a multidimensional questionnaire on the relationship to work (RWQ)

“…The tool proposed in 1987 by the team is indisputably the most comprehensive tool developed to date for measuring the relationship to work. It is, accordingly, one of the tools that has been most used up till now, be it in part or in full (e.g., Ardichvili, 2005Ardichvili, , 2009Harpaz & Fu, 2002;Isaksson & Johansson, 2000;Kuchinke, Kang, Oh, & Kang, 2008;Manuti, 2006;Peterson & Ruiz-Quintanilla, 2003;Sharabi & Harpaz, 2010 and in highly varied cultural contexts (e.g., Harpaz, Honig, & Coetsier, 2002;Kuchinke et al, 2011;Sharabi, 2011). However, given that occupational and living contexts have changed profoundly since the 1980s, it would seem that the operationalization of certain dimensions would gain from being reconsidered and other items would benefit from being reformulated or created in order to more accurately reflect the present-day reality workers must face.…”

“…Generally, studies tend to show that the higher the value or importance that people attribute to work and the more central it is to their lives, then the more they feel engaged in their role as a worker (Hattrup et al, 2007), the more it is a source of accomplishment, and the more it contributes to their identity and personal development (Arvey, Harpaz, & Liao, 2004;Blustein, 2011;Méda & Vendramin, 2013;Tziner, Ben-David, & Sharoni, 2014). Likewise, numerous studies tend to show that the importance attached to work is a stable dimension in the relationship to work that does not vary greatly throughout a person's lifetime (Ardichvili, 2005;Bal & Kooij, 2010;Harpaz & Fu, 2002;Hirschfeld & Feild, 2000;Kuchinke et al, 2011;Ruiz-Quintanilla, 1991;Samuel & Harpaz, 2004;Saunders & Nedelec, 2014). In the questionnaire, the absolute centrality of work, which is considered to be a stable variable in the relationship to work, was conceptualized using two sub-dimensions, namely: the ideological value of work, defined as the individual's belief in the importance of work in human existence; and the existential value of work, defined as the importance of work in a person's life.…”

Meaning of Work for Managers in the Brazilian Contemporary Business Context

“…A good proportion of recent studies on the meaning of work reinforce two MOW dimensions-centrality and valid results, either by elaborating the research hypothesis or by analyzing emerging results. Work centrality is high in almost all researched countries (Belgium, Brazil, China, German, Holland, Hong Kong, Hungary, Israel, Japan, Kazakhstan, Poland, Russia, USA, and Yugoslavia), despite cultural differences among them (Kuchinke, 2009;Kuchinke, Ardichvili, Borchet, & Rozanski, 2009;Kuchinke et al, 2011).…”

Positive Organizational Behavior In The Workplace: A Cross-Cultural Perspective

“…A study by Kuchinke et al (2011) found support for the universal valuation of work and family as major life domains and the relative importance of leisure, religion, and community involvement. Work centrality was related in differentiated ways to performance orientation, assertiveness, and humane orientation indices.…”