ArticlePDF Available

The Effects of Job Autonomy on Work Outcomes: Self Efficacy as an Intervening Variable

Article

The Effects of Job Autonomy on Work Outcomes: Self Efficacy as an Intervening Variable

Abstract and Figures

The purpose of this research was to examine the relationship between job autonomy and work outcomes (job performance, job satisfaction and job stress), self efficacy as a mediating variable. This research also investigated the impact of job satisfaction on job performance and job stress on job performance. Va-riables in this research were measured via a survey of 190 banking salespersons in D.I. Yogyakarta and Solo. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) were used to examine the effects of job autonomy on work outcomes, job satisfaction on job performance, and job stress on job performance. Results showed that the estimated model in this research is acceptable based on its score of the goodness of fit index. The structural relationship showed that job autonomy significantly related to job satisfaction and performance, but not significant with job stress. It also showed that self efficacy partially mediated the relationship between job autonomy and job satisfaction, and job performance. In addition, this research found that self efficacy not mediated the relationship between job autonomy and job stress. There was no significant relationship between job autonomy and job performance but this research showed that job satisfaction significantly related to job performance. Finally, these results had an important implication to managers in designing job.
Content may be subject to copyright.
- 203 -
Susanti Saragih / The Effects of Job Autonomy on Work Outcomes: Self Efficacy as an Intervening Variable / 203 - 215
The purpose of this research was to examine the relationship between job auto-
nomy and work outcomes (job performance, job satisfaction and job stress),
self efficacy as a mediating variable. This research also investigated the impact
of job satisfaction on job performance and job stress on job performance. Va-
riables in this research were measured via a survey of 190 banking salespersons
in D.I. Yogyakarta and Solo. Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) were used to
examine the effects of job autonomy on work outcomes, job satisfaction on job
performance, and job stress on job performance. Results showed that the esti-
mated model in this research is acceptable based on its score of the goodness
of fit index. The structural relationship showed that job autonomy significantly
related to job satisfaction and performance, but not significant with job stress.
It also showed that self efficacy partially mediated the relationship between job
autonomy and job satisfaction, and job performance. In addition, this research
found that self efficacy not mediated the relationship between job autonomy
and job stress. There was no significant relationship between job autonomy
and job performance but this research showed that job satisfaction significantly
related to job performance. Finally, these results had an important implication
to managers in designing job.
© 2011 IRJBS, All rights reserved.
Received: May 26, 2011
Final revision: October 30, 2011
Keywords:
Job autonomy,
Job Satisfaction,
Job performance,
Job Stress,
Self efficacy
Corresponding author:
luv_shant@yahoo.com
Susanti Saragih
Universitas Kristen Maranatha, Bandung - Indonesia
ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT
The Effects of Job Autonomy
on Work Outcomes:
Self Efficacy as an Intervening Variable
Vol. 4
|
No. 3
ISSN: 2089-6271
Previous researches have been used job
autonomy to predict and test the effects
of job design on work outcomes. These
researches describe that job autonomy became the
critical antecedent for many positive work outco-
mes. Gellatly and Irving (2001), Langfred and Moye
(2004) found the positive effects of job autonomy
on job performance. Job autonomy enhances per-
formance because workers with high job autonomy
will perceive that he/she trusted to perform the
- 205 -- 204 -
Susanti Saragih / The Effects of Job Autonomy on Work Outcomes: Self Efficacy as an Intervening Variable / 203 - 215International Research Journal of Business Studies vol. IV no. 03 (2011)
Job autonomy is defined as the degree to which the
job provides substantial freedom, independence,
and discretion to the individual in scheduling
work and in determining the procedures to be
used in carrying it out. Job autonomy is one of
several core job design characteristic (the others
are skill variety, task identity, task significance and
feedback from the job) developed by Hackman
and Oldham (1975). According to Hackman and
Oldham (1975), autonomy leads to the critical a
psychological state of “experienced responsibility
for outcomes of the work”, which in turn leads to
outcomes such as high work effectiveness and
high internal work motivation.
Researches in job autonomy have showed a
consistent and positive association between
job autonomy and performance. Gellatly and
Irving (2001) found positive effect of perceived
autonomy on contextual performance. Managers
who report greater autonomy in their work have
a better performance than managers who report
lower autonomy. Claessens et al., (2004) found
that perceived autonomy in time was positively
related to job performance and job satisfaction and
negatively to work strain. According to Langfred
and Moye (2004), job autonomy enhances job
performance because they perceive themselves
capable and more resourceful in performing the
task. Psychologically, employee will more motivate
to do the best and leads to higher performance.
Therefore, a positive linkage is hypothesized
between job autonomy and job performance.
Hypothesis 1: Job autonomy is positively related to
job performance.
A high level of autonomy as perceived by
employees has sends a message that supervisor
has confidence in his or her capability therefore
allows the employees to carry out the task the way
he or she wish to. This message has a positive effect
on employees’ self efficacy. Wang and Netemeyer
(2002) test the effects of job autonomy and self
efficacy. The result showed a positive association
between job autonomy and self efficacy. The
higher job autonomy leads to higher confidence in
performing the task. According to Bandura (1997),
this confidence will affect the effort invested to
attain the best performance. Therefore, a positive
linkage is hypothesized between job autonomy,
self efficacy and job performance.
Hypothesis-2: Job autonomy is positively related
to job performance, self efficacy as an intervening
variable.
Job autonomy, Self Efficacy and Job Satisfaction
Job autonomy is believed could influence job
satisfaction. More autonomy is expected to be
associated with greater job satisfaction because
employees have more freedom to determine their
own effort and work schedule. Previous research
in this area has been found the significant and
consistent results. Morrison et al. (2005) explain
that job autonomy became a critical factor in
enhancing employees’ intrinsic motivation and job
satisfaction. Finn (2001) found that job autonomy
became the important component in nurses’ job
satisfaction. Cuyper and Witte (2005) also support
this finding; job autonomy is found significantly
effect job satisfaction both permanent and
temporaries employment. A cross cultural study by
DeCarlo and Agarwal (1999) examines the effects
of job autonomy on salesperson’s job satisfaction.
In general, this study finding suggests perceived
job autonomy is an important antecedent to job
satisfactions among salesperson from Australia,
India and U.S. Therefore, it is hypothesized that:
Hypothesis-3: Job autonomy is positively related to
job satisfaction
Job autonomy will enhance employees’ self
efficacy because they fell they can go about job
basically by themselves without much guidance,
resulting in a stronger autonomy-efficacy linkage.
Research indicates that high job autonomy
enhances employee feelings that job outcomes are
a result of his/her efforts (Wang and Netemeyer,
task. This perceives positively effects their intrinsic
motivation and the effectiveness in working.
Several researches found positive association
between job autonomy and job satisfaction
(DeCarlo and Agarwal, 1999; Finn, 2001; Liu et al.,
2005; Nguyen et al., 2003; Thompson and Prottas,
2005). Workers that given high autonomy will
fell that the results of their job are determined by
their efforts, actions and decisions so, they will fell
more satisfied.
Another work outcomes that related to job
autonomy is job stress. Job autonomy allow
individuals to limit their exposure to stressors and
able to choose their task or allow individuals to
limit the more stressful tasks, thereby reducing
feelings of threat and encouraging positive coping
behaviors (Elsass dan Veiga, 1997). Thompson
and Prottas (2005) support this finding. They found
that job autonomy significantly negative to job
stress, turnover intention, and work and family
conflict. Furthermore, Kauffeld (2006), Nonaka et
al., (2000) in Smith et al. (2003) also found positive
association between job autonomy and worker’s
competency and creativity.
Generally speaking, researches in job autonomy
have showed the consistent relationship between
job autonomy and work outcomes. However,
research on job autonomy has left several
questions unanswered. This present study focuses
on question: what are the processes by which job
autonomy effects work outcomes? To answer that
question, this research used self efficacy as an
intervening variable between job autonomy and
work outcomes. According to Gist and Mitchell
(1992), self efficacy is an important motivational
construct. It influences individual choices,
goals, emotional reactions, efforts, coping and
persistence. Self efficacy also changes as a result
of learning, experience, and feedback.
To the extent that autonomy is high, work outcomes
will be viewed by employees as depending
substantially on their own efforts, initiatives,
and decisions, rather than on the adequacy of
instructions from the boss or in a manual of
procedures. This condition has positive effects on
employees’ self efficacy judgment because they
perceive themselves as more capable and more
resourceful thereby increasing their self efficacy
(Wang dan Netemeyer, 2002). Employee with high
self efficacy will put forth more effort and is more
likely to persist when encountering obstacles
or negative experiences (Kreitner and Kinicki,
2004).On the other hand, employee with low self
efficacy is apt to give up, believing the difficulties
merely prove that he or she was unable to do the
job. Self efficacy also has a significant positive
correlation with job satisfaction, job performance
and job stress. Employees’ satisfaction increases
because the feeling of competence and
confidence that accompany self efficacy make
job the more enjoyable and able to coping the
stressor in the workplace. Therefore, job design
with high autonomy will be powerful in influence
employees’ performance, satisfaction and reduce
job stress through increased self efficacy.
Finally, by setting self efficacy as an intervening
variable between job autonomy and work
outcomes (performance, satisfaction and job
stress), this research is going to explain the
process of job autonomy effects work outcomes.
This study is important for the following reasons.
First, it contributes to the literature by used self
efficacy to explain how job autonomy effects work
outcomes. Second, this study also contributes an
empirical evidence in investigated the relationship
within the work outcomes occurred on job
autonomy, such as the effects of job satisfaction
on performance and the effects of job stress on
performance. Third, the results of this study may
have important implications for human resource
managers in designing job.
Theoretical Framework and Hypotheses
Development
Job Autonomy, Self Efficacy and Job Performance
- 207 -- 206 -
Susanti Saragih / The Effects of Job Autonomy on Work Outcomes: Self Efficacy as an Intervening Variable / 203 - 215International Research Journal of Business Studies vol. IV no. 03 (2011)
shown to play a role in a number of key job-
related attitudes (organizational commitment,
job satisfaction) and behavior, such as turnover
(Sager, 1994). Moreover, stress can lead to physical
illness and chronic diseases such as heart disease,
mental ill-health, depression or other problems
such as alcoholism (Eckles, 1987 in Moncrief et al.
1997).
Narayanan et al. (1999) examined stressful
incidents at work for three different occupations
(clerical workers, university professors and sales
associates). Lack of control and work overload
were reported as major stressors by clerical group
and interpersonal conflict as a major stressor by
the academic and sales group. Gender differences
in stress were also found in this research.
Therefore, it can be conclude that stress occurred
in all kind of job and affects the individual, group
and organization’s performance. Therefore, it is
hypothesized that:
Hypothesis -8: Job stress is positively related to job
performance
METHODS
Sample and Data Collection
Data were obtained from banking salesperson
in Yogyakarta and Solo, Indonesia. Purposive
sampling is used as sampling method so several
criteria was applied to this study. The respondents
have been working with those companies for more
than 3 months. According to Gist and Mitchell
(1992), judgments about self efficacy become
more routinized and automatic as experience
with a task increases. Therefore, setting 3 months
as a criterion is relevant in reducing bias in answer
self efficacy, job satisfaction, job stress and
job performance. A total of 230 questionnaires
were distributed to the salesperson directly
through coordination with supervisor and area
sales manager. A total 190 questionnaires with
complete responses were returned directly to the
researcher. Therefore, the response rate in this
study is 89, 13 %.
The average age of the respondents was 26-35
years, 56,3 percent of the respondents were male
and 67,9 percent received a 4-years college degree
2002; DeCarlo and Agarwal, 1999). In addition,
the feeling of job personal responsibility leads
employees to develop favorable affective and
behavioral reactions to their job thereby increasing
job satisfaction. Cohrs et al. (2006) examined the
effects of self efficacy on job satisfaction and
found a positive association. According to Bandura
(1997) individual with high self efficacy will have
greater job satisfaction because the feelings of
competence and confidence that accompany self
efficacy make the job more enjoyable (Purwanto,
2002). Therefore, it is hypothesized that:
Hypothesis-4: Job autonomy is positively related
to job satisfaction, self efficacy as an intervening
variable.
Job autonomy, Self Efficacy and Job Stress
Some researchers suggest that the need for
personal control may be an intrinsic, ongoing
desire (Elsass and Veiga, 1997). Although the
need for personal control appears to vary among
individuals, as well as across time and situations
in a single individual, it may be that a desire
for personal control is an inherent motivation.
Therefore, when individual loss of control in her/
his work (low job autonomy), it will associated
with increased level of stress.
Previous researches have documented compelling
evidence linking how level of job autonomy with
the incidence of negative stress-related outcomes.
High job autonomy will leads to reducing job stress
because the presence of control may encourage
individuals to believe positive outcomes are
possible, thereby reducing feelings of threat
(Spector, 1986; Elsass and Veiga, 1997). Karasek
(1979) examined the effects of job control and level
of depression and the result show that job control
has a negative association with employees’ level
of depression. The higher job autonomy, the lower
level of stress he/she have. This condition happens
because high autonomy allows employees to carry
out the job the way he/she wishes to and lead to
reducing feelings of threat. Therefore, a negative
linkage is hypothesized between job autonomy
and job stress.
Hypothesis 5: Job autonomy is negatively related
to job stress.
The literature suggests that people’s perception
on job autonomy enhance their self efficacy
because this autonomous job allows people
to use their skill, knowledge, and creativity to
choose and formulate sales strategies without
others’ interference. According to Bandura (1997),
people with high self efficacy will more likely to
persist when encountering obstacles or negative
experiences. Therefore, it is hypothesized that:
Hypothesis-6: Job autonomy is negatively related to
job stress, self efficacy as an intervening variable.
Job Satisfaction and Job Performance
Perhaps the most controversial issues that
have evolved from behavior research is the job
satisfaction and job performance relationship.
Previous researchers identified the following
viewpoints that have been assumed by theorists
with respect to the satisfaction and performance
relationship. First, satisfaction causes performance.
Second, performance causes satisfaction. Third,
the satisfaction and performance relationship is
moderated by a number of other variables.
Meta analysis conducted by Petty et al. (1984)
found that the first viewpoint (satisfaction causes
performance) is stronger and more consistent
than others viewpoints. Engko (2006) also support
this finding; job satisfaction found has a significant
and positive effect on job performance with path
coefficient 0,252. Therefore, it is hypothesized that:
Hypothesis -7: Job autonomy is positively related
to job performance
Job Stress and Job Performance
Understanding job stress is a major concern
of organization research because it has been
Job Autonomy
Self Efficacy
Job Satisfaction
Job Performance
Job Stress
+ H - 7
+ H - 4
H - 3 +
H - 1 +
H - 1
-
H - 6
-
H - 2
+
-
H - 8
Figure 1. Research Model
- 209 -- 208 -
Susanti Saragih / The Effects of Job Autonomy on Work Outcomes: Self Efficacy as an Intervening Variable / 203 - 215International Research Journal of Business Studies vol. IV no. 03 (2011)
or higher education. The respondents have been
affiliated with the companies for an average of 2
years, and their range selling experience was 2-6
years.
This study used Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
to examined proposed model on figure 1. Samples
used in this research are 190 salespersons and this
amount are not meets the requirement of MLE
based on total amount of estimated parameters
(minimal 335 samples). This lackness will effects
on identification model process. Therefore,
researcher used two step approach on SEM which
each construct will be composite first so total
amount of estimated parameter can be reduced
based on total amount of sample collected.
Analysis
Data analysis was conducted in two stages. First,
checking for data entry includes validity and
reliability, identification outliers and normality
of the data. Second, testing of the fit model was
conducted by using Structural Equation Modelling
(SEM). Two-Step Approach to Structural Equation
Modelling (SEM) was used to test the proposed
model presented in figure 1. AMOS 4.01 computer
program was utilized to run data from question-
naires. Goodness of fit model was based on mul-
tiple indices, selected from: the chi-square value
and chi-square over degree of freedoms (normed
Chi-Square), the Goodness of Fit Index (GFI), the
Adjusted Goodness of Fit Index (AGFI), the Root
Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA).
NO Variables Operasionalized Measurement Amount of
items Sample Item
1 Job Autonomy The extent to which a
job allows the freedom,
independence and
discretion to schedule
work, make decision and
select the methods used
to perform tasks.
James Breaugh’s
Instrument: (1999)-
Work Autonomy
Scales
9 items I am free to choose
the methods the
methods to use in
carrying out my
work”.
2 Job Performance Individual achievement
that regulated based on
organization’s standard
and regulation
Instrument of Miao
dkk. (2007) 4 items “I am very effective
in contributing to
my firm’s market
share”.
3 Job Satisfaction a pleasurable or positive
and negative emotional
states resulting from the
appraisal of one’s job in
organization.
Dubinsky dan
Hartley’s Instrument
(1986)
5 items. “I am generally
satisfied with the
kind of work I do in
this job”.
4 Job Stress A mental and
physical condition
which affects an
individual’s productivity,
effectiveness, personal
health and quality of
work in organization.
Instrument of House
dan Rizzo (1972). 7 items “I often take my
work home with me
in the sense that I
think about it when
doing other things”.
5 Self-Efficacy Individual’s belief in his
or her ability to perform
job-related tasks.
Instrument of
Bandura (1977) 8 items. “I feel I am
overqualified for the
job I will be doing”.
Tabel 1. Operationalization Each Variables
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Validity and Reliability of Measures
Confirmatory Factor Analysis was used to asses the
validity of each construct. Items with factor loading
0.4 or greater are considered practically significant
(Hair et al. 2006). Results of Confirmatory Factor
Analysis asserted that final items used in this study
are 29 items. Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients were
used to estimate the reliability of each indicator
in this research. Although, there was a difference
criteria in Cronbach’s Alpha coefficients, this
research used 0, 6 as a criteria. According to Hair
et al. (2006) this value is threshold to accept. Table
2 provides the reliability of the measures.
Descriptive Statistic and Correlation
between Construct
Descriptive statistic in this research involved
mean, standard deviation and correlation between
construct. Table 3 provides the descriptive statistic
and correlation between construct. Result showed
that job autonomy, self efficacy, job satisfaction
and job performance correlate and significant in
0. 01 while there is no correlation existed between
job stress and other construct.
Fixing the Error Terms and the Lambdas
This study used two-step approach to test the
proposed model in figure 1. Testing structural
model using two-step approach requires value of
lambda (λ) and epsilon (υ). The measurement
error (epsilon) terms were fixed at (1-a) X variance
and the corresponding lambdas-the loading from a
latent construct to its corresponding indicator were
fixed at (alpha)2 X standard loading deviation.
The lambdas and epsilon of the constructs are
presented in table 4.
Construct Number of items in the
questionnaire Number of item
retained Cronbach’s Alpha
Job Autonomy 9 items 9 items 0. 915
Self Efficacy
Job Satisfaction
Job Stress
Job Performance
8 items
5 items
7 items
4 items
6 items
3 items
7 items
4 items
0. 868
0. 608
0. 809
0. 914
Tabel 2. Reliability Coefficients (Cronbach’s Alpha) of the Construct
Variables Correlation Coefficient
OTO SE KK SK K
Job Autonomy (Oto) 1,00 .593** .347** .005 .500**
Self Efficacy (SE) 1,00 .451** -.014 .485**
Job Satisfaction (KK) 1,00 -.046 .379**
Job Stress (SK) 1,00 -.012
Job Performance (K) 1,00
Mean
Std. DeviasiMinimum
Maximum
5.7754 5.2509 4.8193 3.5301 5.2263
.96174 1.17973 1.14528 1.18165 1.16330
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.43 1.50
7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00 7.00
Tabel 3. Alphas (α), lambdas (λ) and Epsilon (υ)
** Significant correlation at the level 0,01
OTO= Job Autonomy; SE= Self Efficacy; KK= Job Satisfaction; SK= Job Stress; K= Job Performance
- 211 -- 210 -
Susanti Saragih / The Effects of Job Autonomy on Work Outcomes: Self Efficacy as an Intervening Variable / 203 - 215International Research Journal of Business Studies vol. IV no. 03 (2011)
efficacy is 9, 459 (significant at 0, 01) and CR for self
efficacy on job stress 0, 240 (not significant). Based
on this, this research did not support hypothesis
6. Self efficacy did not mediate the relationship
between job autonomy and job stress.
In addition, this research supports the hypothesis
7. The results showed that critical ratio for job
satisfaction on job performance is 2, 345 (significant
at 0, 05). The higher job satisfaction, the higher job
performance. Table 5 also showed that CR for job
stress on job performance is 0, 043 and lower than
1, 96 (not significant). So, it can be conclude that
there is no significant relationship existed between
job autonomy and job performance.
This research’s result showed that job autonomy
positively related to performance. This finding
support the study conducted by Gellatly
and Gregory (2001). The higher salesperson
perceives job autonomy will lead to increasing
job performance. Job autonomy affects
salesperson’s performance because through job
autonomy, salesperson granted responsibility
and independence to perform their work.
Psychologically, salesperson will more motivate
which in turn leads to outcomes such as high self
efficacy. According to Bandura (1997) individual
with high self efficacy will put forth more effort
to attain the best performance. Therefore, similar
with the result, self efficacy partially mediated job
autonomy on job performance (H-2 supported).
This research also support that job autonomy
positively related to job satisfaction. This results
support the study conducted by Morrison et al.
(2005) which found that job autonomy became an
important factor for employee’s job satisfaction.
High autonomy affects salesperson’s perception
about their job. They will fell that the results of their
job are determined by their efforts, actions and
decisions. This condition changes their judgement
of self efficacy and behavior in performing the job
which leads to increasing self efficacy and job
satisfaction. Therefore, we can conclude that job
autonomy enhance job satisfaction through self
efficacy (H-4 supported).
Job autonomy negatively related to job stress
(Elsass and Veiga, 1997; Karasek, 1979; Spector,
1979). Job autonomy allows salesperson to carry
out the job with the way he/she wishes to which
leads to reducing feeling of threat. This condition
creates a comfortable work environment and
Test of the Structural Model
Table 4 interpret the test of structural model
proposed. Goodness of fit model was assessed
base on multiple indices. The result showed that
the model proposed is acceptable and has a good
fit (table 5).
Test of Structural Relationship
After the criteria of goodness of fit have been
fulfilled, the test of structural relationship is
conducted. The relationship between constructs
in output AMOS 4.01 showed by value of
standardized regression weight. According to Hair
et al. (2006) structural relationship is significant if
estimate parameter more than 1, 96 (significance
level 0.05) and 2, 58 (significance level 0, 01).
Regression weight model in this research provide
in table 6.
Table 6 showed that critical ratio (CR) for
relationship between job autonomy and job
performance is 2, 795 (significant at α = 0.01).
It indicated that hypothesis 1 is supported; job
autonomy significantly positive related to job
performance. Similarly, the test showed a strong
support for H-2. Critical ratio for relationship
between job autonomy and self efficacy is 9.
459 and self efficacy on performance is 2.151.
It means that, self efficacy partially mediated
the relationship between job autonomy and job
performance. This study also support hypothesis
3; CR for job autonomy on job satisfaction is 2.097
(significant at α = 0.05). It indicated that the higher
level of job autonomy, the higher level of job
satisfaction. Critical ratio for job autonomy on self
efficacy, and self efficacy on job satisfaction also
significant at 0,01. Therefore, self efficacy partially
mediated the relationship between job autonomy
and job satisfaction (H-4 supported).
Furthermore, critical ratio for job autonomy on
job stress is 0, 079 and it lower than criterion
required. Therefore, this research did not support
hypothesis 5. It indicated that there is no significant
relationship existed between job autonomy and
job stress. Similarly, CR for job autonomy on self
Construct Alpha (α) Lambda (λ) Epsilon (υ)
Job Autonomy 0,92 0,72 0,061
Self efficacy 0,87 0,87 0,71
Job Satisfaction 0,63 0,34 0,27
Job Performance 0,92 0,95 0,11
Job Stress 0,82 0,76 0,24
Tabel 4. Reliability Coefficients (Cronbach’s Alpha) of the Construct
Indices Cut of value Result Remarks
(χ2) – Chi-square expected to be smaller 0.494 Marginal
Significance Probability 0,05 0.482 Marginal
RMSEA 0,08 0.000 Good
GFI 0,90 0.999 Good
AGFI 0,90 0.984 Good
CMIN/DF 2,00 0.494 Good
TLI 0,90 1.026 Good
CFI 0,90 1.000 Good
NFI 0,90 0.998 Good
Tabel 5. Structural Model Equation Results
Structural Relationship Critical Ratio
selfefficacy <--------autonomy 9.459*
jobsatisfaction <----selfefficacy 3.680*
jobsatisfaction <------ autonomy 2.097**
jobstress <------selfefficacy -0.240
jobstress <--------- autonomy 0.079
jobperformance <-------jobsatisfaction 2.345**
jobperformance <----------jobstress -0.043
jobperformance <---------selfefficacy 2.151**
jobperformance <-----------autonomy 2.793*
Tabel 6. Regression Weights
* Significant at α = 0.01; ** Significant at α = 0.05
- 213 -- 212 -
Susanti Saragih / The Effects of Job Autonomy on Work Outcomes: Self Efficacy as an Intervening Variable / 203 - 215International Research Journal of Business Studies vol. IV no. 03 (2011)
environments through reward and punishment
system, physical work environment, facility, social
support, and supervisor support.
Limitation and Futher Study
There are four limitations worth noting in this
study. First, this investigates is limited in scope of
banking salesperson’s which reducing in external
validity. So, in further study should involve other
salespersons in different industry. Second, the final
sample used in this study is relatively small which
causes in difficulties fitting models with data. As
a consequently, the research conducted two step
approach to estimate the model proposed. Third, a
self-report job performance measure was used in
this study. This may be contained bias in capture
the phenomena. So, in further study objective
performance measure or multi-rater should
be used to assess the job performance. Forth,
this research treats stress as a negative stress
and did not distinguish between negative and
positive stress. However, researcher have been
interviewed the supervisor, area sales manager
and several salespersons to get the phenomena
about stress in their workplace.
CONCLUSION
The purpose of this research is to examine the
relationship between job autonomy and work
outcomes (job performance, job satisfaction and
job stress), self efficacy as a mediating variable.
This research also investigates the impact of job
satisfaction on job performance and job stress
on job performance. Based on the results, can be
concluding that:
1. Structural model estimated in this research
acceptable fit to the data. It can be seen in
several criterion of goodness of fit, such as:
Chi-Square (0,494); Significance Probability
(0,482); RMSEA (0,000); GFI (0,999); CMIN/DF
(0,494); TLI (1,026); CFI (1, 00); NFI (0, 998).
2. Job autonomy positively related to
job performance and satisfaction. The
higher autonomy will leads to increasing
salesperson’s job performance and job
satisfaction.
3. Self efficacy partially mediated the relationship
between job autonomy and job satisfaction,
and relationship between job autonomy
performances.
4. Job autonomy did not relate to job stress. Self
efficacy also did not mediate the relationship
between job autonomy and job stress.
Individual difference may be the causes of
insignificant this relationship.
5. Job satisfaction positively related to job
performance. Satisfied salespersons will
positively effects their intrinsic motivation and
the effectiveness in working.
6. Job stress did not relate to job performance.
This condition happens because this research
did not distinguish between negative and
positive stress which lead to bias.
reducing job stress. This research did not
support this relationship. There is no significant
relationship existed between job autonomy and
job stress. Table 2 reported that salesperson’s job
stress is lower than other variables (autonomy,
satisfaction, performance and self efficacy). This
research also did not find the role of self efficacy in
mediated job autonomy on job stress.
This inconsistency result occurred because of
several factors. First, there are many antecedents
of job stress. Salespersons might be exposed to
the same stressors but they experience different
stress levels or different stress symptoms. This
happens because of individuals differences. Each
of salespersons perceives the same situation
differently. Each salesperson also has different
thresholds of resistance to a stressor and different
way to coping stressors (Greenberg and Baron,
2003). These individual difference may be the
causes inconsistency the relationship between job
autonomy and job stress. Second, job experience
may be effects the level of salesperson’s job
stress. Based on respondent’s demography in
this research, 34, 21% of salespersons have been
working as a salesperson for 2 until 6 years while
31, 57% have been working less than two years.
Job experience enhances salesperson’s belief
that he or she has the ability to complete a task
and coping the stressors successfully. Gist and
Mitchell (1992) state that judgments about self
efficacy become more routinized and automatic
as experience with a task increases. Third, each
salesperson has a difference perception on
stressful circumstance. Stress involves people’s
cognitive appraisal of the potential stressors
they face (Greenberg and Baron, 2003). Job
autonomy shapes important factor in influencing
salesperson’s behavior, namely self efficacy. Self
efficacy changes salesperson’s perception about
stressful circumstance. Salespersons perceive
stressors as challenge rather than threat in work.
This condition may be the causes of insignificance
the role of self efficacy in mediated the relationship
between job autonomy and job stress.
The testing of seventh hypothesis showed that job
satisfaction positively related to job performance.
Satisfied salesperson will put forth more effort and
leads to increasing job performance. This result
support Engko’s (2006) study which states that
satisfied worker is an effective worker. Finally,
this research did not found significant relationship
between job stress and performance (H-7). A
Meta analytic test by Lepine et al. (2005) report
that inconsistent relationship among stress and
performance is occurred because of previous
researches did not distinguishes among positive
and negative stress. Positive stress (challenge
stress) is a stressful demands viewed by manager/
organization as obstacles to be overcome in order
to learn and achieve. Negative stress (hindrance
stress) is a stressful demands viewed by manager/
organization as unnecessarily thwarting personal
growth and goal attainment. Therefore, Lepine et
al. (2005) suggests that in further research stress
must be distinguishes positive and negative stress.
In this research stress is treated as negative stress
and it may cause the insignificance of job stress on
job performance.
MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS
This research has an important implication to
managers in designing job. Specifically, the
implication designed to banking sector due to
recent research contects. First, grant high autonomy
will lead to increasing intrinsic motivation thereby
increasing self efficacy, job performance and
satisfaction. Consequently, managers must grant
salesperson the freedom in performing the job
in two facets; work method autonomy and work
schedule autonomy. Second, the significance
of job satisfaction in job performance has been
shown by this study. Consequently, manager
must find way to increase salesperson’s job
satisfaction. Job satisfaction can be increase by
granting job autonomy, provide a conducive work
REFERENCES
Bandura, Albert. (1997). Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control. W.H. Freemand and company.
Breaugh, James A. (1999). Futher Investigation of The Work Autonomy Scales: Two Studies. Journal of Business and
Psychology. Vol. 13, No. 3, Spring.
Claessens, Brigitte; Eerde, Wendelien; Rutte,Christel; Roe, Robert (2004). Planning Behavior and Perceived control of time at
Work. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Vol. 25, pp.937-950
Cohrs, J. Christopher; Abele, Andrea E. & Dette, Dorothea E. (2006). Integrating Situational and Dispositional Determinants of
Job Satisfaction: Findings From Three Samples of Professionals. The Journal of Psychology. Vol. 140, No. 4, pg. 363-395.
Cuyper, Nele De & Witte, Hans De (2006). Autonomy and Workload Among Temporary Workers: Their Effects on Job
Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment, Life Satisfaction, and Self-Rated Performance. International Journal of Stress
Management. Vol.13, No.4, pg. 441-459
- 215 -- 214 -
Susanti Saragih / The Effects of Job Autonomy on Work Outcomes: Self Efficacy as an Intervening Variable / 203 - 215International Research Journal of Business Studies vol. IV no. 03 (2011)
Denton, David W. & Lawrence S. Kleiman (2001). Job Tenure as a Moderator of The Relationship Between Autonomy and
Satisfaction. Applied H.R.M. Research. Vol. 21, No. 2, pg. 105-114.
DeCarlo, Thomas, E. & Sanjeev Agarwal (1999). Influence of Managerial Behaviors and Job Autonomy on Job Satisfaction of
Industrial Salespersons. Industrial Marketing Management. Vol. 28, pg. 51-62.
Engko, Cecilia (2006). Pengaruh Kepuasan Kerja Terhadap Kinerja Individual Dengan Self-Esteem dan Self-Efficacy sebagai
Variabel Intervening. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi 9 Padang. K-AMEN 06.
Elsass, Priscilla M. & Veiga, John F. (1997). Job Control and Job Strain: A Test of Three Models. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology. Vol. 2, No. 3, pg. 195-211
Finn, C.P. (2001) Autonomy: an important component for nurses’ job satisfaction. International Journal of Nursing Studies.
Vol.38, pg.349-357
Gellatly, Ian R. & Irving P., Gregory (2001). Personality, Autonomy and Contextual Performance for Managers. Human
Performance, Vol.43, No.3, pg. 231-245
Gist, Marilyn E., & Terence R. Mitchell. (1992). Self-efficacy: A Theoritical Analysis of Its Determinants and Malleability. Academy
of Management Review. Vol. 17, No. 2, pg. 183-211
Hair, J. F. Jr.; Anderson, R.E.; Tatham, R.L. & Black, W.C. (2006). Multivariate Data Analysis, 6th edition. Upper Saddle River,
Prentice Hall International, Inc.
Karasek, R. A. (1979). Job Demands, Job Decision Latitude and Mental Strain: Implications for Job Redesign. Administrative
Science Quarterly. Vol. 24. pg. 285-310.
Kauffeld, Simone. (2006). Self-directed Work Groups and Team Competence. Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology. Vol. 79, pg. 1-21.
Kreitner, Robert and Angelo Kinicki (2004). Organizational Behavior. 6th edition. McGraw Hill Companies, Inc.
Langfred, Claus W. & Moye Neta, A. (2004). Effects of Task Autonomy on Performance: An Extended Model Considering
Motivational, Informational and Structural Mechanisms. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.89, No.6, 934-945
LePine, Jeffery; Podsakoff, Nathan & LePine, Marcie. (2005). A Meta Analytic Test of The Challenge Stressor-Hindrance
Stressors Framework: An Explanation For Inconsistent Relationships Among Stressors and Performance. Academy of
Management Journal. Vol. 48, No. 5, pg. 764-775.
Liu, Cong; Spector, Paul E.; Jex, Steve (2005). The relation of job control with job strains: A comparison of multiple data
sources. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. Vol. 78 pg. 325-336
Miao, C. Fred; Evans, Kenneth R. & Zou, Shaoming. (2007). The Role of Salesperson Motivation in Sales Control Sysytem-
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation Revisted. Journal of Business Research. Vol. 60, pg. 417-425.
Moncrief, William; Babakus, Emin; Craven, David & Johnston, Mark. (1997) Examining the Antecedents and Consequences of
Salespersons Job Stress. European Journal of Marketing. Vol. 31, No. 11/12, pg. 786-798
Morrison, David; Cordery John; Antonia Girardi & Roy Payne (2005). Job design, Opportunities For Skill Utilization and Instrinsic
Job Satisfaction. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology. Vol. 14, No.1, 59-79
Narayanan, Lakshmi; Menon, Shanker & Spector, Paul E. (1999). Stress in the Workplace: A Comparison of Gender and
Occupations. Journal of Organizational Behavior. Vol. 20, No. 1, pg. 63-73
Nguyen, Anh Ngoc., Jim Taylor & Steve Bradley. (2003). Job Autonomy and Job Satisfaction: A New Evidence. Working Paper.
Petty, M.,M., Gail, W. McGee & Jerry W. Cavender (1984). A Meta Analysis of The Relationship Between Individual Job
Satisfaction and Individual Performance. Academy of Management Review. Vol. 9, No. 4, pg. 712-721.
Sager, J.K. (1994). A Structural Model Depicting Salespeople’s Job Stress. Journal of The Academy Of Marketing Science. Vol.
22, No. 1. pg. 74-84.
Simmering, Marcia, J.; Noe, Raymond, A; Colquitt, Jason, A.; Porter, Christopher (2003). Conscientiousness, Autonomy Fit and
Development: A Longitudinal Study. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 88, No. 5. pg. 954-963
Singelmann, Joachim, & Mencken F. Carson (1992). Job Autonomy and Industrial Sector in Five Advanced Industrial
Coountries. Social Science Quarterly, Vol.73, No. 4.
Smith, Eugene Sadler; Ghada El-Kod; Mike Leat (2003). Differentiating work autonomy facets in a Non-Western Context.
Journal of Organizational Behavior. Vol.24, Iss.6, pg. 709
Spector, P. E. (1986). Perceived Control by Employee: A Meta-analysis of studies concerning autonomy and participation at
work. Human Relations. Vol. 39. pg. 1005-1016.
Thompson, Cynthia A., & David J. Prottas (2005). Relationship Among Organizational Family Support, Job Autonomy, Perceived
Control, and Employee Well-Being. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology. Vol. 10, No. 4, pg. 100-118.
Wang, Guangping & Netemeyer, Richard (2002). The Effects of Job Autonomy, Customer Demandingness, and Trait
Competitiveness on Salesperson Learning, Self efficacy and Performance. Journal of The Academy of Marketing
Science. Vol. 30, No.3, pg. 217-228.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Strongly
disagree Disagree Rather
disagree Neutral Rather
agree Agree Strongly
agree
Please check list to the one number which best describe your condition.
JOB AUTONOMY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 I am allowed to decide how to go about getting my job done (the
methods to use)
2I am able to choose the way to go about my job (the procedures
to utilize).
3 I am free to choose the methods to use in carrying out my work
4 I have control over the scheduling of my work
5I have some control over the sequencing of my work activities
(when I do what).
6My job is such that can decide when to do particular work
activities.
7My job allows me to modify the normal way we are evaluated
so that I can emphasize some aspects of my job and play down
others.
8I am able to modify what my job objectives are (what I am
supposed to accomplish).
9I have some control over what I am supposed to accomplish
(what my supervisor sees as my job objectives)
SELF-EFFICACY 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 My new job is well within the scope of my abilities
2I do not anticipate any problem in adjusting to work in this
organization
3 I feel I am overqualified for the job I will be doing
4I have all the technical knowledge I need to deal with my new job,
all I need now is practical experience.
5I fell confident that my skill and abilities equal or exceed those of
my future colleagues
6My past experiences and accomplishments increase my
confidence that I will be able to perform successfully in this
organization.
7I could have handled a more challenging job than the one I will
be doing
8Professionally speaking, my new job exactly satisfies my
expectations of my self (R)
JOB STRESS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 I feel fidgety or nervous because of my job
2 Problems associated with work kept me awake at night
3 My job tends to directly affect my health
4 If I had a different job, my health would probably improve
5I often take my work home with me in the sense that I think about
it when doing other things
6 I fell nervous before attending meetings in the organization
7 I sometimes feel weak all over
8 I feel fidgety or nervous because of my job
JOB PERFORMANCE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 I am very effective in contributing to my firm’s market share
2 I am very effective in generating a high level of dollar sales
3 I am very effective in selling to major accounts
4I am very effective in exceeding annual sales targets and objectives
JOB SATISFACTION 1 2 3 4 5 5 5
1 Generally speaking, I am very satisfied with this job
2 I frequently think of quitting this job (reverse-coded)
3 I am generally satisfied with the kind of work I do in this job
4 Most people on this job are very satisfied with this job
5 People on this job often think of quitting (reverse-coded)
Appendix
... Such freedom revolves around clearing the way for employees to work in a manner that is most conducive to excellent performance. Promoting autonomy at work means empowering employees to exercise self-control, granting them stewardship over their work and environment and providing them with support instead of exerting control over them [5]. Autonomy at work can also help employees feel valued and accountable for the tasks that they oversee, and when they feel trusted, they are likely to perform exceptional work. ...
... Previous studies emphasised the important role of WA in enhancing work performance [1,2,5] and demonstrated a consistent and positive relationship between these variables. For instance, researchers asserted that high autonomy improves employees' work performance because under such conditions, they perceive themselves as capably and resourcefully performing a task [24]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Work autonomy (WA) is an important factor in improving work performance, yet such freedom and its role in construction workforce management have rarely been discussed. To address this gap, this study quantitatively measured the WA of onsite construction workers in Vietnam, developed a new model by which to discover the function of WA in increasing construction labour productivity (CLP) and determined the ways through which WA can be cultivated and maintained. The WA of 215 workers was measured using the relative autonomy index (RAI) and an aggregated motivation index (AMI) that was developed in this research. Structural equation modelling (SEM) was conducted to examine the effects of WA on CLP. The SEM results indicated that WA positively and significantly contributed to CLP. Promoting WA required paying attention to the competence and relatedness satisfaction of the workers. Furthermore, latent and potentially extensive labour management-related problems were identified, namely, unsuccessful career development and the underutilisation of experienced workers. Three meaningful policy recommendations were put forward to solve the aforementioned problems and improve CLP: the effective organisation of crew members, the improvement of training and the improvement of site amenities. This study expands theoretical knowledge by (1) developing and justifying the AMI as an auxiliary to conventional indices, (2) proposing five conditions necessary for optimal scoring in WA measurement and (3) developing a motivation matrix that identifies and distinguishes the attributes of different groups. In practical terms, the findings support the introduction of reasonable policies that advance the career development of workers, promote WA and improve CLP. These achievements, in turn, significantly advance effective and sustainable construction workforce management.
... Constructs which contribute towards job resources include occupational self-efficacy and job autonomy, whilst workload contributes towards job demands [34]. Job autonomy, defined as the degree to which employees have control and discretion over how to carry out duties [83] and occupational self-efficacy, defined as employees' belief in their own competence to successfully and effectively perform across different situations and tasks in a job [87], have both shown to be significantly correlated with resilience [34]. Whilst workload is associated with poorer outcomes [34] studies have shown that greater resilience is associated with lower levels of heavy workload-induced distress [50]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background Resilience refers to the process through which individuals deal with the adversity they experience. Previous research has shown there are multiple factors that contribute to individuals’ resilience, leading to increasing interest in the development of multidimensional resilience models. Once such recently proposed model is The Resilience Shield, which clusters groups of protective factors into different shield layers. The stronger these layers, the better the protection against adversity (Pronk et al. in The Resilience Shield, Pan Macmillan Australia, 2021). While this model was based in part on existing literature, no empirical evaluation has occurred to date. The aim of this study was therefore to evaluate the model fit for each of the modifiable shield layers and the overall model, and to examine whether each of the constructs included contributes to observed resilience scores. Methods Participants completed a series of questionnaires via The Resilience Shield website assessing constructs relevant to each resilience shield layer. Data from 3337 participants was analysed using Structural Equation Modelling and regression analyses. Results The results showed acceptable fit of the measurement model for the Social, Mind, and Professional Layers, but poor fit for the Body Layer. There was also good fit for the overall model. In addition, all but one of the constructs included in The Resilience Shield survey explained independent variance in either dispositional resilience scores, or dispositional vulnerability scores. Conclusion These results broadly support the multidimensional structure proposed by The Resilience Shield model and suggest that (at least in the population in which it was tested) this may be an acceptable model to index individuals’ performance on a range of indicators that contribute to resilience.
... Some teachers view autonomy as their freedom to develop their academic qualifications for managing the classroom, while others view autonomy as freedom from obstruction and control (Muhammad et al., 2020). The HTFT positions the practices of autonomy with a sense of responsibility and accountability, which contributes to excellence in the institution academic, government, and finance (Saragih, 2017). Self-empowerment among lecturers has a considerable impact on intrinsic regulation as compared to self-determined regulation. ...
Article
Full-text available
The competition in higher education has increased, while lecturers are involved in multiple assignments that include teaching, research and publication, consultancy, and community services. The demanding nature of academia leads to excessive work load and stress among academicians in higher education. Notably, offering the right motivational mix could lead to job satisfaction and performance. The current study aims to demonstrate the effects of extrinsic and intrinsic motivational factors influencing job satisfaction and job performance among academicians working in Malaysian private higher educational institutions (PHEIs). Cross-sectional data were collected from the Malaysian PHEIs and the randomly selected 343 samples. The data analysis was performed with the dual analysis of partial least square structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) and artificial neural network (ANN) analysis. As a result, it was found that financial rewards, promotion, performance appraisal, classroom environment, and code of conduct significantly predicted job satisfaction. The code of conduct, autonomy, and self-efficacy strongly influenced job performance. The relationship between job satisfaction and job performance was highly moderated by self-efficacy. It was suggested from the ANN analysis that the three prominent factors influencing job satisfaction are financial rewards, performance appraisal, and code of conduct. The analysis supported three significant factors influencing job performance: self-efficacy, performance appraisal, and code of conduct. The management of PHEIs should build the correct policies to transform job satisfaction into job performance. Self-efficacy plays an essential role in activating job performance. Other significant motivating factors that promote job satisfaction and performance, such as emotional intelligence, mindfulness, and other personal traits, should be included in future studies. In addition, future research could use a mixed-method or multi-respondent approach to investigate the important variables and their impact on lecturers’ job satisfaction and performance.
Article
Introduction Job autonomy (JA), a task-level job resource has the potential to motivate individual behavior; it is indecisive, however, whether JA promotes or hinders extra-role behavior. Objective The study aims to examine the effect of JA on innovative work behavior (IWB) directly and indirectly through cognitive appraisal and work engagement (WE) while considering the organization type and age as control variables. Methods Self-administered questionnaires were used to collect the data from 326 nurses. SPSS and Amos 21 software was used to analyze the data. Data was collected between September, 2021 to January, 2022. Results According to the findings, JA can both stimulate and impede IWB indirectly through cognitive appraisal and WE depending on how it is appraised as a challenge and a threat (ρ = .089, p <.001); (ρ = −.038, p <.001), respectively. Conclusion The current study revealed that JA significantly influences the IWB of nurses directly and indirectly through cognitive appraisal and WE. Therefore, nursing management should find ways to influence nurse's appraisal of JA as a challenge rather than a threat to improve their extra-role behavior.
Article
Building on Agency Theory and Job Characteristics Theory, this study examines how the autonomy of work interacts with individual proactivity and jointly enhances hotel frontline employees’ self-affirmation and performance. Using a longitudinal research design of three-wave data collection, the findings of this study suggested that the autonomy of work enhances employees’ perceived self-efficacy and sense of personal control. Although the perceived sense of control did not lead to employees’ organizational citizenship behaviors (OCBs), self-efficacy can facilitate employees’ OCBs directed toward both internal and external customers. In addition, the autonomy of work’s influence on employees’ perceived self-efficacy and sense of control was stronger among employees with relatively proactive personalities. The study adds empirical evidence to Agency Theory and Job Characteristics Theory and supports the importance of autonomy at the workplace as a necessary factor to encourage employees’ OCBs.
Article
The purpose of this research is to explore the extent to which internal corporate social responsibility activities affect employees’ normative organizational commitment during the COVID-19 crisis and to survey the role of the administrative level as a moderator between the two of them. A survey in the form of a self-completed questionnaire was conducted on a sample of employees in hospitality and tourism establishments in Hail city, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. 213 employees voluntarily participated in the current study. Their responses were examined by using linear regression and exploratory factor analyses. The findings revealed that internal corporate social responsibility is a positive predictor of normative organizational commitment. The total effect of internal corporate social responsibility on normative organizational commitment could not be enhanced through the moderation of the administrative position. This study has important implications for both academics and professionals. Theoretical and managerial implications, contributions, limitations, and future study objectives were reviewed in light of the findings.
Article
Full-text available
This research aims to assess the influence of supervisor work-life support on bank employees' performance linking work autonomy and employee workload in this relationship. A survey was conducted among bank employees in the Central Zone regions of Tanzania. Bank workers completed 417 survey questionnaires in total. The data was then analysed using structural equation modelling. The researchers use Smart PLS, a data analysis tool, to see if there are any theoretically supported connections between variables of interest. SPSS, on the other hand, handled data coding and descriptive statistics. The study results revealed that work autonomy mediated significantly the association among supervisor work-life support and work performance. Contrary to expectation, the linking of workload in the correlation between supervisor work-life support and work performance was negative and insignificant. Moreover, work autonomy and workload significantly influence bank employees’ job performance in this study. Similarly, the study findings indicated that supervisor work-life support positively impacts employee performance. The study has important implications for managers since it improves understanding of the strengths of their organizations' work-life practices. Such as workload and work autonomy when linked with supervisor work-life support on influencing employee job performance and developing new strategies that may enhance employee's well-being. Again, the findings imply that there should be supportive work-life practices that moderate the balance between home and work realms to attain effective organizational performance.
Article
Over the last century, technological innovation (TI) has driven an evolution in numerous industries. It is established that organizations can enhance their performance via process and product innovation; however, the psychological foundations of TI, and the way this affects employees, are underexplored in the organization and management literature. Drawing on organismic integration theory, we aim to enrich the field of innovation and employee branding studies by examining the role of innovation capabilities in employees' motivation at work and wellbeing, which results in employee brand ambassadorship. A mixed-method approach is employed. Study 1 uses a case study to explore how employees acquire knowledge as part of their exposure to TIs. A research model that captures the underlying mechanism of how TI capabilities influence employee brand ambassadorship is then developed based on findings in Study 1. Based on Study 1 results, Study 2 conducts surveys (n = 300) to test the hypothesized framework in high-tech organizations with employees in China. Results show that both product and process innovation capabilities increase employees' psychological empowerment and autonomy, which subsequently increase their psychological wellbeing. Further, employees satisfied with their jobs are more likely to act as ambassadors for their organizational brands. The paper concludes by discussing the theoretical contributions and managerial implications of these findings.
Article
Bu çalışmanın amacı, narsist liderlik algısının çalışanların psikolojik iyi oluşları üzerindeki etkisini ve bu ilişkide işe yabancılaşmanın aracı rolünü anlamaktır. Ayrıca işe yabancılaşmanın psikolojik iyi oluş üzerindeki etkisinde iş özerkliğinin düzenleyici rolü olduğu düşünülmektedir. Bu bağlamda İstanbul / Türkiye’de farklı işletmelerde çalışan 272 kişinin katılımıyla kesitsel bir çalışma yapılmıştır. Araştırmanın verileri, katılımcılara e-posta yoluyla gönderilen anket linkleri ile çevrimiçi olarak toplanmıştır. Kolayda örnekleme yöntemiyle elde edilen veriler üzerinde geçerlik ve güvenirlik analizleri yapıldıktan sonra hipotez testlerine geçilmiştir. Bulgular, narsist liderliğin çalışanların psikolojik iyi oluşları üzerinde olumsuz etkisi olduğunu doğrulamaktadır. Ayrıca işe yabancılaşmanın narsist liderlik ile psikolojik iyi oluş arasındaki ilişkide aracı rolü olduğunu doğrulamıştır. Aynı zamanda elde edilen sonuçlar, işe yabancılaşmanın psikolojik iyi oluş üzerindeki etkisinde iş özerkliğinin önemli bir düzenleyici rolü olduğunu göstermiştir.
Article
p style="text-align: justify;">Women’s work has been acknowledged as an important tool towards effective leadership and economic development in Nigeria and Africa in general. It is important therefore, to accept their presence and encourage the active role they play in the labour force which at the long run impacts the economy positively knowing full well that they make up noticeable portion of the world’s population. This study evaluated the contribution of job autonomy, workload and home-work conflict to the job satisfaction of employed women in universities in Ogun State, Nigeria. A descriptive survey design was used to draw 200 women through multi-stage sampling technique. Standardized questionnaires were used to obtain responses from respondents. Four hypotheses postulated were analyzed using correlation matrices and multiple regression analysis and the level of significance was at 0.05 level. Findings show that job autonomy, workload, and home-work conflict jointly contributed to job satisfaction with 10.1% variance (Adj. R2 = .101) while workload predicted female employees job satisfaction the most. It was concluded that university management should introduce flexibility in work schedules and restructure job descriptions to allow female employees have more autonomy so as to reduce the effect of home-work conflict and pressure associated with workload.</p
Article
Full-text available
Arguably, job designs that provide for high levels of employee control also provide increased opportunities for the development and exercise of skill. Perceived skill utilization has consistently been found to be amongst the strongest predictors of job-related affective well-being, yet is frequently neglected in studies of work redesign. In this article, a theoretical framework linking the key job characteristics of perceived control and perceived cognitive demand to perceived skill utilization and intrinsic job satisfaction is presented. Results from one cross-sectional study and one longitudinal study are reported that support the mediational influence of perceived skill utilization on the perceived job control – job satisfaction relationship only. The relationship between perceived job demand and perceived skill utilization was mixed but no mediating effect was evident. It is argued that the level of both perceived demand and perceived control dictates the nature of the joint influence of both job characteristics on perceived skill utilization and work attitudes such as job satisfaction.
Article
Full-text available
Although self-efficacy has been demonstrated to be positively associated with performance-related variables, few studies have looked at its possible antecedents in the context of personal selling. Applying social cognitive theory, this study posits that while self-efficacy positively affects performance, the salesperson's learning effort directly affects self-efficacy. Furthermore, two task-related factors (perceived job autonomy and customer demandingness) and one individual difference variable (trait competitiveness) are proposed to affect salesperson learning effort and self-efficacy. Two empirical studies show consistent results regarding the positive effects of learning on efficacy and efficacy on performance as well as the influences of three exogenous constructs on learning and efficacy. Implications and future research directions are discussed.
Article
The correlational literature concerning the relationships between individual job satisfaction and individual performance was analyzed, using the meta-analysis techniques of Hunter, Schmidt, and Jackson (1982). Higher and more consistent correlations between overall job satisfaction and performance were indicated than those previously reported. Relationships between JDI measures of job satisfaction and performance were not as high or as consistent as those found between overall job satisfaction and performance.
Article
The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which job tenure moderates the relationship between autonomy and job satisfaction. Autonomy was operationally defined using Breaugh's (1985) work autonomy scale, which measures three facets of autonomy, while job satisfaction was measured using three scales from the Job Descriptive Index (Smith, Kendall, & Hulin, 1969). Data were collected from a sample of 76 production workers. It was found that job tenure does moderate the relationship between job satisfaction and both criteria autonomy and scheduling autonomy. The findings reported in this paper suggest that employers should proceed cautiously when introducing empowerment programs to new production workers. A complete PDF version of this article can be found at www.radfdord.edu/~applyhrm. ____________________________________________________________________ Employee empowerment is a topic of great interest in the popular business press. For example, a search of the on-line book retailer Amazon.com under the topic "employee empowerment" generated a list of 66 book titles currently in print, most of which have been published in the last five years. Similarly, it is not uncommon to talk with business executives who have been bitten by the empowerment bug. There is an unspoken assumption among many that employee empowerment is a universally effective management strategy (Quinn & Spreitzer, 1997). The benefits of such a strategy are said to include increased employee loyalty, increased job satisfaction, increased job performance, and a greater sense of ownership over the business (e.g., Bowen & Lawler, 1992). Popular press books and articles on the subject more often than not offer advice on the best approach for empowering employees with little discussion of the appropriateness of doing so. Furthermore, there are few empirical articles that support such prescriptions (Quinn & Spreitzer, 1997). This research seeks to examine the extent to which employee empowerment is appropriate for all types of employees and will thus generate the promised outcomes. Specifically, this study examines a critical aspect of empowerment, autonomy, and its relationship to job satisfaction and the extent to which that relationship is moderated by job tenure. The results of this research can help clarify the circumstances under which it might be appropriate to promote employee empowerment.
Article
The present study examines the effects of managerial behaviors (i.e., initiation of structure and consideration) and job autonomy on industrial salespersons’ job satisfaction. The study also investigates the generalizability of our theoretical model developed for U.S. salespersons to salespersons in Australia and India. In general, the study findings suggest perceived job autonomy is an important antecedent to job satisfaction among salespersons from all three countries. Surprisingly, little differences were observed in the impact of managerial initiation of structure and consideration on job satisfaction among the sales personnel from all three countries. Implications of the importance of managerial behaviors and job autonomy are developed for research and practice.
Article
The construct of self-efficacy has received increasing empirical attention in the organizational behavior literature. People who think they can perform well on a task do better than those who think they will fail. Differences in self-efficacy are associated with bona fide differences in skill level; however, efficacy perceptions also may be influenced by differences in personality, motivation, and the task itself. This article reviews theoretically the antecedent processes and information cues involved in the formation of self-efficacy. A model of the determinants of self-efficacy is proposed that enhances understanding of both the complexity and malleability of the construct. Determinants that facilitate the most immediate change in self-efficacy are identified, and appropriate change strategies are highlighted. Implications and propositions pertaining to future research are discussed at the end of the article.