Search results

A prominent labour market feature in recent decades has been the increase in abstract and service jobs, while the demand for routine work has declined. This article examines whether the components of Type A behaviour predict workers' selection into non-routine abstract, non-routine service and routine jobs.

Building on the work by Barrick et al. (2013), this article first presents how the theory of purposeful work behaviour can be used to explain how individuals with different levels of Type A components sort into abstract, service and routine jobs. Then, using longitudinal data, it examines whether the components of Type A behaviour predict occupational sorting. Estimations were performed based on the linear regression method.

The results show that the Type A dimension “leadership” was associated with a higher level of abstract and service job tasks in occupation. High eagerness-energy and responsibility were also positively linked with occupation's level of abstract tasks. These results suggest that workers sort into jobs that allow them to pursue higher-order implicit goals.

Job market polarisation towards low-routine jobs has had a pervasive influence on the labour market during the past few decades. Based on high-quality data that combine prime working-age register information on occupational attainment with information about personality characteristics, the findings contribute to our knowledge of how personality characteristics contribute to occupational sorting in terms of this important job aspect.

Job analysis is the common basis for designing a training course or programme, preparing performance tests, writing position (job) descriptions, identifying performance appraisal criteria, and job restructuring. Its other applications in human resource development include career counselling and wage and salary administration. Job analysis answers the questions of what tasks, performed in what manner, make up a job. Outputs of this analytical study include: (a) a list of the job tasks; (b) details of how each task is performed; (c) statements describing the responsibility, job knowledge, mental application, and dexterity, as well as accuracy required; and (d) a list of the equipment, materials, and supplies used to perform the job. Various techniques for conducting a job analysis have been used. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. As a result, different techniques or combinations of techniques are appropriate to different situations. The combined on‐site observation and individual interview techniques are recommended for industrial, trade, craft, clerical, and technical jobs because they generate the most thorough and probably the most valid information. A job analysis schedule is used to report the job information obtained through observations and individual interviews. The schedule provides a framework of 12 items in which to arrange and describe important job analysis information. These 12 items are organised into four sections. Section one consists of items one through four. These items identify the job within the establishment in which it occurs. The second section presents item five, the work performed. It provides a thorough and complete description of the tasks of the job. The Work Performed section describes what the job incumbent does, how it is done, and why it is done. Section three presents items six through nine. These are the requirements placed on the job incumbent for successful performance. It is a detailed interpretation of the basic minimum (a) responsibility, (b) job knowledge, (c) mental application, and (d) dexterity and accuracy required of the job incumbent. The fourth section includes three items which provide background information on the job. These items are: (a) equipment, materials and supplies; (b) definitions of terms; and (c) general comments. Appendix A is a glossary of terms associated with job analysis. It is provided to facilitate more exacting communication. A job analysis schedule for a complex and a relatively simple job are included in Appendices B and C. These examples illustrate how important job analysis information is arranged and described. Appendix D provides a list of action verbs which are helpful when describing the manipulative tasks of a job.

This study attempts to identify the different types of activities that comprise a worker's job, and provide a framework for quantitative definition and segmentation of knowledge works (KWs).

Every KW has two main parts: working with knowledge and establishing communication. Thus, in order to provide an exact definition for the KW it is necessary to calculate the knowledge intensity score of a job (JKIS) and communication intensity score of a job (JCIS). For determining these two parameters precisely, jobs were broken hierarchically to tasks and then activities. To identify these activities, an initial list of activities mentioned in the literature was created and then completed with generalized work activities of O*NET. A six‐step framework for calculating of JKIS and JCIS was proposed and finally, different groups of knowledge workers (KWrs) with respect to JKIS and JCIS were identified by using a clustering method.

This article shows how KW can be defined and segmented based on two dimensions (i.e. knowledge intensity score of a job (JKIS) and communication intensity score of a job (JCIS)). The proposed framework was used to analyze 133 jobs in 11 organizations. Practicality and validity of framework were examined based on this empirical study.

This study is a base for the identification of appropriate managerial frameworks corresponding to each discovered group of KWrs. Using more data can improve the results obtained in this study.

This work emphasizes the importance of defining and clustering KW and proposes a practical method for this aim.

A new framework for the quantification of KW is proposed. This framework is supported by five principles inferred from the literature.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate a specific pattern of relationships among various task, knowledge and social characteristics of work design and work outcomes. It clearly shows how particular work characteristics influence task and contextual performance.

The empirical research was conducted through a field survey of the largest Croatian organizations with more than 500 employees. A cross-sectional and cross-occupational sample of 512 knowledge workers from 48 organizations is analyzed by applying the partial least squares structural equation modeling technique.

The results confirmed the existence and importance of the interaction between work characteristics and work outcomes. However, the findings suggest that only knowledge characteristics of work design exhibit a significant effect on both dimensions of work behavior, while task and social characteristics showed different effects on task and contextual performance, respectively.

The research findings clearly show that work design efforts are not straightforward but rather context-specific, and with diverging performance effects. Organizations can significantly enhance their bottom-line performance by designing challenging and cognitively demanding configurations of work tasks for their knowledge workers.

The paper extends previous research by capturing a broader set of work characteristics of knowledge workers. The results suggest that different categories of work characteristics have different effects on task and contextual performance. By revealing the nature of work design in the central and eastern European context, this study indicates the existence of possible differences in work design practices in various backgrounds.

Job design researchers advocate that jobs should be interesting, that is they should involve tasks that are meaningful and have significance. However, all jobs contain tasks that may be meaningful and significant and essential to organizations’ operation but not enjoyed by the employee. We refer to these tasks as non-preferred work tasks (NPWT). In this chapter, we draw on Conservation of Resources (COR) Theory to develop a conceptual model proposing that the intensity and frequency of non-preferred work tasks reduces employees’ propensity to engage in extra-role discretionary work behavior, and that job crafting and emotional state moderate this relationship.

Building on the premise of conservation of resources theory (COR) that people protect their knowledge as a resource, the authors questioned whether the contextual nature of job resources buffers the counterintuitive positive relationship between evasive knowledge hiding (KH) and task performance.

Two multisource field survey studies were conducted to examine the moderating influence of task-job resources on the knowledge hiders' task performance. Hierarchical regression analyses tested the main effect of evasive KH on task performance. In addition, conditional process analyses were applied to examine two-way and three-way interactions of evasive KH, job autonomy and task variety.

The data analysis showed a positive relationship between evasive KH and task performance. Moreover, the authors found that employees receiving accumulative task-job resources continued to hide knowledge and used abundant resources to increase their task performance further. However, contrary to expectations, for employees—who received partial task-job resources—their task performance deteriorated when evasively hiding knowledge.

Managers and human resource practitioners should acknowledge that employees' evasive KH to co-workers is not always wrong and should not be treated like it is. Moreover, they are endorsed to pay attention and invest in job resources since job autonomy and task variety create a beneficial context for knowledge holders' task performance.

The authors provided novel theoretical (the gain-loss perspective of COR theory) and consistent empirical (confirmed by two field-study evidence) arguments for an important contextual role of an HRM practice of job design in shaping the underrepresented knowledge behavior–task performance relationship.

This article aims to examine whether specific job tasks measured at the individual level or personality traits are associated with wages and whether the relationship between personality traits and wages differs depending on the job tasks that individuals perform.

This study analyzes the association between job tasks and personality traits, and their interaction, with regard to wages using German employee data from 2017/2018.

Results suggest that nonroutine manual, interactive or analytic tasks are associated with significantly higher wages compared to routine manual tasks, and while extraversion and emotional stability are related to higher wages, agreeableness and openness tend to be associated with lower wages also within occupations. Moreover, the association between personality traits and wages varies depending on the job task requirements at the workplace. A high degree of extraversion in particular is associated with higher wages when the employee performs nonroutine manual, interactive or analytic tasks.

To date, especially the interaction between individual job tasks and personality traits on wages has not been extensively studied because data on both job tasks and personality at the employee level are scarce. This study contributes to the understanding of wage differences among employees.

The purpose of this paper is to uncover the nature of job characteristics related to different generational cohorts (Baby-boomers, Generation X and Generation Y). Significant differences between four task and four social job characteristics across generational cohorts have been revealed.

The empirical research was conducted through a field study of employees from large-sized Croatian organizations. A cross-sectional and cross-occupational research design was applied. A total of 512 knowledge workers (139 managers and 373 professionals) participated in the research. Descriptive and inferential statistical methods were used to determine and compare work design across generations.

The results indicate that job characteristics are not equally represented within different generational cohorts. While the nature of task job characteristics is mostly irrespective of generations, social job characteristics to some extent differ among generational cohorts. High task variety, reasonably high task identity, and a moderate level of both received interdependence and task significance are recognized as common job characteristics of knowledge workers across generations. However, jobs of Baby-boomers, Xers, and Yers are idiosyncratic for work autonomy, interaction with others, initiated interdependence, and teamwork. Additionally, the inclusion of the work type as a control variable revealed that interaction with others does differ but only among generations of professionals.

The present study is the first research in which generational similarities and differences have been empirically examined through job characteristics. The authors focused on knowledge workers within an under-researched context (studies about knowledge workers, work design and generational differences are rare or non-existent in south-eastern European countries), making this systematic investigation unique and practically significant.