Content uploaded by Shameema Khan
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Shameema Khan on Oct 03, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1939
http://jier.org
Impact of Task, Cognitive, and Relational Job Crafting on Faculty
Organizational Commitment: The Mediating Role of Person-Job Fit
Shameema Khan1, Dr. Ajaz Akbar Mir2, Shaista Syed3, Sumaira Farooq4, Ratiba Riyaz5, Peerzada Munaqib
Naseer6*
1,3,4,5,6 Research Scholar, Department of Management Studies, University of Kashmir, 190006
2 Professor, Department of Management Studies, University of Kashmir, 190006
Email addresses:
Shameemakhan05@gmail.com
Ajazakbar.dms@gmail.com
Shaistasyed14@gmail.com
Summaira.scholar@Kashmiruniversity.net
Ratibawani@gmail.com
Syedmunaqib7387@gmail.com
Abstract
The primary aim of this study was to explore the influence of task, cognitive, and relational job crafting on enhancing
faculty members' organizational commitment. The study also seeks to assess the intervening role of person-job fit. The
respondents of the study comprised 454 faculty members from various universities across Northern India. Descriptive
statistics were analyzed using SPSS 23 version, and PLS-SEM was utilized to test the structural relationship and validate
the research hypotheses. The findings demonstrated that all three facets of job crafting had a significant favorable influence
on faculty organizational commitment. Furthermore, the relationship between all the three aspects of job crafting and
faculty organizational commitment was found to be partially mediated by person job fit. The study indicates that allowing
flexibility to employees with respect to tailoring their societal, task, and perceptive precincts of their jobs to better align
with their preferences, passions, and interests, can improve their job meaningfulness and identity at work. This in turn,
leads to more positive organizational results.
Keywords: Empirical, Task Crafting, Cognitive Crafting, Relational Crafting, Organizational Commitment, Person-job
fit.
1. Introduction
Employees redesign their own work by altering the requirements of their roles, through a practice of "job crafting." The
ability to tailor a job to a person's abilities, values, motivations, and passion is something that employees take advantage
of. Employees at the individual and group level customize their job roles by engaging in a proactive bottom-up approach
known as “job crafting”. This approach involves altering how jobs are perceived, carried out, and interacted with in ways
that promote job satisfaction and involvement (Bakker et al., 2004; De Beer et al., 2016; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001).
Jobs can be crafted in two distinct ways. First, employees can modify the task-oriented boundaries of their roles (by altering
the physical parameters of the job), interpersonal-oriented (through shifting the manner or extent of social interaction), and
cognitive-oriented (by changing the perception of work (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). Wrzesniewski and Dutton,
recognized as the pioneering authors of this bottom-up method in job design theory, initially proposed the notion of job
crafting in 2001. The second approach to this theory involves employees striking a balance amongst the requirements and
resources of their jobs, enabling them to modify, adapt, or reorganize their positions (Tims et al., 2012). Tims et al., (2012)
established the concept underlying the theory of job demands and resources. Crafting a job according to them is done by
increasing challenging job demands (adding new challenging tasks), reducing deterring job demands (making work less
intense emotionally and mentally), increasing social job resources (building relationships with superiors and coworkers),
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1940
http://jier.org
and elevating structural job resources (opportunity for development and learning new things at work). Among these two
conceptualizations of job crafting, abundant research has been done on job crafting by taking into consideration the four
dimensions as suggested by the JD-R model (De Beer et al., 2016; Gordon et al., 2015; Mäkikangas et al., 2016; Petrou et
al., 2012; Siddiqi, 2015; Tims et al., 2013; Zahoor, 2018; Zito et al., 2019). While most studies have used the JD-R model's
dimensions to measure job crafting, limited research has examined job crafting through the original framework proposed
by Wrzesniewski & Dutton, (2001). Moreover, there is ample research that has revealed job crafting as a significant
antecedent in predicting various positive outcomes like job satisfaction, job engagement, job performance, organizational
citizenship behavior, and meaningfulness of work (De Beer et al., 2016; Karollah et al., 2020; Petrou et al., 2012; Siddiqi,
2015; Tims et al., 2015; Wrzesniewski et al., 2013). However, the relationship between job crafting and organizational
commitment remains underexplored, particularly in the educational sector (Ghitulescu, 2006; Iqbal, 2016; H. Kim et al.,
2018; Li et al., 2021; McNaughtan et al., 2022; Noesgaard & Jørgensen, 2023). While some studies have focused on
teachers, but they primarily targeted primary school level teachers in the USA and Italy, leaving room for further
investigation in the Indian higher education context (Ingusci et al., 2016; Leana et al., 2009). In addition, studies like
Moulik and Giri (2022) have demonstrated that person-job fit mediates the relationship between increasing social job
resources and the affective commitment among IT professionals in India, though this research only examined relational
crafting. Similarly, Li et al., (2021) and Abbas et al., (2022) explored person-job fit as an intervening variable in the
association between job crafting and outcomes of job satisfaction and organizational commitment. However, it is crucial
to evoke that the studies has conceptualized job crafting on the basis of the JD-R model. Given this background, there is a
need to revisit the original job crafting concept proposed by Wrzesniewski & Dutton, (2001), and unveil the relationship
of each dimension - physical , social , and cognitive crafting-with organizational commitment. The primary objective of
this study is to find out the relationship between the three dimensions of job crafting and the organizational commitment
of faculty members working in various universities in Northern India. Furthermore, the present study will contribute to the
existing literature by exploring the role of person-job fit as a mediator variable in the relationship between the three facets
of job crafting and the work commitment of faculty members. This research will be one of the earliest to examine the
mediating role of person-job fit in the relationship between task, relational, and cognitive crafting and organizational
commitment.
2. Review of Literature
2.1. Task Crafting and Organizational Commitment
The theory of job crafting was extended from individual job crafting to collaborative job crafting by Leana et al. (2009).
Collaborative crafting involves crafting the precincts of a job by workers who work together as a team. However, at both
individual and team levels, they focused only on crafting the task boundaries of jobs. According to Berg et al., (2013), task
crafting may entail adjusting, expanding, or decreasing the responsibilities specified in our formal job description. This
kind of craftsmanship may also entail altering the character of some duties or allocating different amounts of time to what
we already accomplish. Leana et al. (2009) revealed a favorable effect of collaborative task crafting on the commitment of
teachers and aides towards their schools. The research findings indicate that employees exhibit increased commitment to
their employment and display a decreased propensity to sever ties with their respective organizations when they redesign
the parameters of their roles in accordance with their personal conceptions of their tasks and the most optimal approach to
accomplishing them. This is because, either individually or collectively, the tasks have been modified, at least somewhat,
to better fit the employees. In consonance with the above study, Cheng et al., (2016) also measured job crafting based on
the basis of two constructs framed by Leana et al. in (2009). According to the findings, tour leaders' organizational
commitment has a substantial positive correlation with job crafting at both the individual and team level. Kim & Lee,(
2016) also demonstrated a positive association amongst task crafting and job commitment of sales consultants working in
diverse organizations in Korea. The study contended that organizations should allow employees to actively engross in
initiating job crafting behaviors at their workplace to keep them motivated and committed. Further , Ghitulescu, (2006)
study on autonomous teams working in manufacturing organizations found a robust positive association between task
crafting and organizational commitment. From the above-cited literature, the current study posits the ensuing hypothesis:
H1: Task Crafting positively impacts Organizational Commitment of faculty members.
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1941
http://jier.org
2.2. Relational Crafting and Organizational Commitment
Relational crafting entails alterations to the working environment's interpersonal interactions. Building and/or preserving
relationships with coworkers, minimizing or eluding contact with others, and investing time with favored people are all
examples of this type of work crafting (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). Building relationships with others enables workers
to engage in more gratifying and supportive interactions, which fulfils their sense of belonging (Vogel et al., 2016). The
qualitative case study conducted by Noesgaard and Jorgensen, (2023) has revealed relational crafting as a significant
precursor to organizational commitment. The study's findings have revealed that relational crafting promotes the emotional,
continuous, and normative commitment of service personnel employed in software firms, which ultimately exerts a positive
impact on retention. McNaughtan et al., (2022), after conducting an empirical study on faculty members, also revealed a
substantial correlation between work commitment and relational crafting. The study contended that faculty members would
be more dedicated and perhaps more productive if they were allowed to vigorously shape the social and interpersonal
precincts of their job. Further, Kim & Lee, (2016) found that crafting relational boundaries of the job positively affected
the work commitment of sales consultants. Crafting interpersonal relationships at work had a noteworthy positive influence
on increasing the commitment of sales consultants by way of increasing the perception level of salespeople towards
identification with their organization, which in turn reduced their turnover. Based on the research mentioned above, the
study assumes the following presumption
H2: Relational Crafting positively impacts Organizational Commitment of faculty members.
2.3. Cognitive Crafting and Organizational Commitment
Wrzesniewski & Dutton (2001), has defined cognitive crafting as the process of altering one's perspective of their work in
a way that makes it more evocative. It has to do with how hard a worker tries to understand and perceive their job in a
holistic way (Kirkendall, 2013; Wrzesniewski et al., 2013). Studies have indicated that when workers chip in crafting the
perceptive frontiers of their job by way of recognizing their job as having a significant impact on others , by way of
perceiving their job helping them to achieve the purpose of their life, it increases employee job satisfaction and
meaningfulness (Kim et al., 2018; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). The results of the study by Ghitulescu, (2006) has
demonstrated that cognitive crafting has a noteworthy influence on increasing the commitment of employees working in
both the manufacturing and service sectors of the USA. A recent investigation on faculty members of various universities
in USA has also exhibited the significant favorable effect of cognitive crafting on increasing the commitment level of
faculty members (McNaughtan et al., 2022) . Moreover, a qualitative longitudinal study by Noesgaard and Jørgensen,
(2023) suggested that employees who are engrossed in crafting the cognitive aspects of their jobs are more likely to show
high affective, normative, and continuance commitment towards the particular organization they work for. With the above
mentioned literature as a foundation, the current study puts forth the subsequent hypothesis:
H3: Cognitive Crafting positively impacts Organizational Commitment of Faculty members.
2.4. Job Crafting, Organizational Commitment, and Person-Job Fit
Person-job fit is defined as the orientation of a person's personality, aptitudes, and capabilities with their employment
(Iqbal, 2016). The alignment of a person's capabilities with the demands and constraints of their job (the demands-abilities
fit) or their requirements with the resources provided to them at work (the needs-supplies fit) is referred to as the "person-
job fit" (Edwards, 1991). Therefore, finding the right individuals with the proper talents and traits for the right jobs is what
is meant by "person-job fit." According to the literature, employees at work can acquire a better fit with their work when
they actively indulge in altering the features of their duties (i.e., job crafting). Tims et al., (2015) concentrated on the effects
of crafting a job on both the demands and capabilities fit (DA) and requirements and supply fit (NS). It was anticipated
that employees would value these employment traits to the point where they would take on more tasks or look for chances
to grow personally (i.e., craft their job). The three-wave research study results demonstrated a substantial favorable effect
of job crafting on the experienced DA and NS fit, showing that a job that is tailored to an individual's knowledge, skills,
abilities, and needs will have more resources, perplexing job demands, and fewer impeding job demands. The findings of
the study of Moulik and Giri (2022), demonstrated that increasing the social and relational boundaries of jobs has a
favorable relationship with person-job fit. The results further revealed a significant effect of person-job fit on the
commitment of 297 IT and ITES employees at the affective level working in diverse industries in India. In addition to this,
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1942
http://jier.org
the results of the study demonstrated that the association between affective organizational commitment and seeking out
social resources was mediated by person-job fit. The study concluded that crafting relational boundaries for jobs aids in
matching the employee with the position and achieving desired organizational results. Among knowledge workers, social
resource crafting is a strategy for overcoming job demands and achieving perceived job congruence. Another recent study
by Abbas et al.(2022) found that person-job fit fully acted as the mediator in the relationship among all four dimensions of
job crafting and organizational commitment of personnel working in the food and beverage departments of various five
star hotels in Egypt. Wong & Tetrick, (2017) had primarily focused on older workers at work. They have emphasized that
the bottom-up approach of shaping task, social, and cognitive limits of the job at work can improve the person-job misfit
of older workers whose motives, abilities, and competencies change after ageing leading to the person-job misfit among
the older workforce. They have specifically stressed the cognitive aspect of crafting, as it provides workers with an
additional tool to develop meaningful work identities and prioritizes job requirements that are relevant to them personally
for additional primary job-making. Another empirical study conducted by Li et al. (2021) on 397 Chinese employees also
found cognitive crafting had a momentous influence on the person-job fit of older workers, while task and relational
crafting were found to exert a substantial impact on person-job fit among young employees. The study also demonstrated
that the association among all three aspects of job crafting and work satisfaction is mediated by person-job fit. Additionally,
Farzaneh et al.(2014) revealed that person-job fit has a strong correlation with the organizational commitment of
employees, which in turn positively impacts the citizenship behavior of employees working for a gas company in Iran.
Further, Widodo et al, (2020) conducted research involving 180 government employees in Indonesia, discovering a positive
correlation between person-job fit and their commitment levels. The study suggests that when employees try to increase
their affinity for their personal aptitudes, skills, likings, needs, and job requirements, it ultimately increases their
commitment at work and improves performance. From the above studies, it is quite clear that crafting physical,
interpersonal, and cognitive boundaries of the job helps employees increase their fit with their duties, which ultimately
increases their commitment level. Thus, the study posits the following hypotheses
H4: The relationship between faculty members' organizational commitment and task crafting is mediated by person-job
fit.
H5: The relationship between faculty member’s organizational commitment and relational crafting is mediated by person-
job fit.
H6: The relationship between faculty member’s organizational commitment and cognitive crafting is mediated by person-
job fit.
Figure 1: Proposed Model of the study
Task Crafting
Relational Crafting
Cognitive Crafting
Person-job Fit
Organizational
Commitment
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1943
http://jier.org
3. Research Methodology
3.1. Participants and Sample Design
The respondents or participants of the study comprised the academic staff (Professors, Associate Professors, Assistant
Professors, and Lecturers) working in various universities in Northern India. Data was collected for the final analysis using
convenience sampling. A total of 500 faculty members across all ten sample universities were contacted for the present
study. The faculty members were contacted by mailing questionnaires to their respective email addresses. Out of 500
faculty members, only 461 responded, representing a response rate of 92%. After examining the data, seven cases were
found to have missing demographic responses. Researchers propose that missing data more than 5% can lead to biased
outcomes (Riedel, 2005). The missing response in the current study account for only 1.52 %, therefore eliminating these
cases would not alter the representativeness of the sample, given the data is missing at random. Thus, the sample for the
final study was restricted to 454 usable responses.
3.2. Measurement Instrument
All constructs were evaluated using a five-point Likert scale ranging from "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree.” The JCS
scale, that was developed by Slemp & Vella-Brodrick, (2013), was utilized to measure job crafting . Task crafting was
measured using four items, relational crafting was measured using four items, and cognitive crafting was measured using
5 items. The JCS scale has good consistency and has been employed recently to access the construct of job crafting in the
education sector (McNaughtan et al., 2022). Person-job fit was accessed using eight items derived from the study of Brkich
et al. (2002). The study assessed organizational commitment by using eight items derived from the scale of Mowday et al.
(1979). Along with these twenty-nine items, questions relating to the demographic profile of participants, such as gender,
age, designation, and work experience, was also obtained. The measurement items are shown in appendix I.
4. Results
4.1. Participant Demographics
The demographic data presented in table 1 provides a detailed breakdown of the gender, designation, work experience, and
age distribution among a sample population. The gender distribution is heavily skewed towards males, who make up 69.6%
(316 individuals) of the population, compared to 30.4% (138 individuals) who are female. This indicates a significant
gender disparity in the group. In terms of professional designation, most of the participants are Assistant Professors,
accounting for 54.8% (249 individuals) of the sample, followed by Associate Professors at 18.9% (86 individuals),
Lecturers at 14.8% (67 individuals), and Professors at 11.5% (52 individuals). This suggests that most individuals in this
group are in the early to mid-stages of their academic careers, with fewer at the senior levels. When examining work
experience, over half of the participants (55.3%, 251 individuals) have between 0-10 years of experience, indicating a
relatively young workforce. Those with 11-20 years of experience represent 28.4% (129 individuals), while those with over
20 years of experience make up 16.3% (74 individuals). Age distribution is consistent with the work experience data; the
largest age group is 30-35 years (37.4%, 170 individuals), followed by 36-40 years (21.6%, 98 individuals), and 41-45
years (18.9%, 86 individuals), with 22.0% (100 individuals) being above 45 years. This age and experience distribution
highlights a predominance of younger academics in the sample, which aligns with the high percentage of Assistant
Professors and early-career professionals.
Table 1: Participant demographics
Demographic
criteria
Category
Frequency
Percentage
Gender
Male
316
69.6
Female
138
30.4
Designation
Professors
52
11.5
Associate Professors
86
18.9
Assistant Professors
249
54.8
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1944
http://jier.org
Lecturers
67
14.8
Work
Experience
0-10 years
251
55.3
11-20 years
129
28.4
Above 20 years
74
16.3
Age
30-35 years
170
37.4
36-40 years
98
21.6
41-45 years
86
18.9
Above 45 years.
100
22.0
4.2. Assessment of study model
The evaluation of the model was done in two stages viz., measurement model followed by structural model assessment
using Smart PLS 4 (Ringle et al., 2014). The initial analysis included the measurement model assessment, which was done
by evaluating the model’s validity and reliability, then structural model assessment of path relationships was conducted to
support the put-out hypotheses.
4.3. Evaluation of Measurement Model: the measurement model of the study is displayed in figure 2. The assessment of
indicator consistency in the measurement model is accomplished through an examination of the factor loadings of each
item. A measurement model achieves a desirable level of indicator reliability when the loading estimates for each item fall
between.5 and.7 (Hair et al., 2011). Through analysis, it was determined that all indicators within the measurement model
displayed loadings exceeding .7 with a range of values between .757 and.901. Therefore, all items utilized in this study
exhibited acceptable indicator reliability. Furthermore, the two most commonly used techniques for evaluating a model’s
internal consistency reliability are Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability (CR). According to Hair et al. (2011) a
model is said to have achieved adequate internal consistency reliability when both reliability values are above .70. The
values displayed in Table 2 clearly show that both the composite reliability and Cronbach’s alpha of all the constructs are
above the threshold value of .70, thereby indicating sufficient internal consistency.
Figure 2: Measurement model
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1945
http://jier.org
Table 2: Measurement Model Parameters
Constructs
Items
Factor
loadings
Cronbach’s
alpha
Composite
Reliability
Average
Variance
Extracted
Task crafting (TC)
.863
.865
.710
TC1
.877
TC2
.874
TC3
.804
TC4
.812
Relational crafting (RC)
RC1
.858
.845
.846
.684
RC2
.844
RC3
.805
RC4
.799
Cognitive crafting (CC)
CC1
.823
.881
.884
.677
CC2
.821
CC3
.849
CC4
.804
CC5
.817
Person Job fit (PJF)
PJF1
.840
.946
.947
.726
PJF2
.886
PJF3
.861
PJF4
.835
PJF5
.824
PJF6
.834
PJF7
.853
PJF8
.880
Organisational commitment(OC)
OC1
.901
.922
.924
.648
OC2
.788
OC3
.800
OC4
.779
OC5
.757
OC6
.762
OC7
.822
OC8
.821
After analyzing the reliability of the constructs, the next step was to provide for the validity of the measurement instrument,
which was assessed through convergent and discriminant validity. For convergent validity establishment, it is necessary to
ensure that the AVE value is equal to or exceeds the prescribed threshold of .50 (Fornell & Larcker 1981). This pertains
to the degree to which multiple tries aimed at measuring the identical construct are in concurrence (Bagozzi et al., 1991).
The results provided in the table 2 depict that all the constructs AVE values are greater than the suggested limit of 0.5, thus
providing for the establishment of convergent validity.
Finally, discriminant validity was conducted using heterotrait-monotrait (HTMT) ratio instead of Fornell and Larcker
criteria, as HTMT ratio provides better results in case of PLS-SEM (Henseler, 2015). The thresholds for HTMT has been
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1946
http://jier.org
debated in previous works. While Kline, (2011) advocated for a criterion of .85 or below, some researchers supported a
more liberal threshold of .90 or lower. The results exhibited in Table 3, advise that the HTMT ratio is below the required
threshold of .90, thereby establishing discriminant validity.
Table 3: Discriminant Validity
4.4. Structural Model Assessment
Before assessing the path relationships in a structural model, the assessment of multicollinearity is necessary. The
multicollinearity of the constructs is frequently assessed using the variance inflation factor (VIF). Critical collinearity
difficulties among the constructs are indicated by VIF values of 5 or above (Hair et al., 2017). However, according to Hair
et al. (2019), collinearity problems can also arise at lower VIF values, like 3. All of the constructs' VIF values, as shown
in table 4, are less than 3, which suggests that multicollinearity is not present.
Table 4: Collinearity statistics
CC
OC
PJF
RC
TC
Cognitive
crafting (CC)
1.572
1.446
Organizational
commitment
(OC)
Person job fit
(PJF)
1.899
Relational
crafting (RC)
1.420
1.316
Task crafting
(TC)
1.754
1.506
After verifying the model’s reliability, validity and multicollinearity, the evaluation of the proposed relationships was
examined using PLS-SEM in Smart-PLS 4. The relationship among constructs is shown in figure 3. The results displayed
in table 5 clearly reveal that all the dimensions of job crafting (task β = .258, t = 5.409, p = 0.000**, relational β = 0.160, t
= 3.773, p = 0.000**, and cognitive crafting β = 0.158, t = 3.441, p = 0.001**) are having a significant positive impact on
the organizational commitment of faculty members. Thus, supporting H1-H3 hypotheses.
HTMT Ratio
CC
OC
PJF
RC
TC
CC
OC
.624
PJF
.589
.747
RC
.468
.601
.556
TC
.594
.732
.662
.522
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1947
http://jier.org
Figure 3: Structural model
Table 5: Structural path analysis results
4.5. Model fit assessment
According to Sarstedt et al., (2020), the predictive capability is used to establish model fit in PLS-SEM. The coefficient of
determination (R2) and predictive relevance (Q2) was used to establish the predictive capability of the model (Hair et al.,
2017). The predictive relevance of the model was established using blindfolding.
Task, relational, and cognitive crafting were shown to explain about 61.4% and 47.3%, of the variance in OC and PJF
respectively, with acceptable R2 statistics (.10) for both (Falk & Miller, 1992). Also, the Q2 values for Organizational
commitment (.530) and person job fit (.458) reveal a moderate predictive relevance of the PLS-SEM model (Hair et al.,
2017).
4.6. Mediation Analysis
The study conducted the mediation analysis by following the general guidelines proposed by Baron & Kenny (1986) and
the PLS-SEM-specific recommendations made by Hair et al.(2017). The objective was to assess the mediating role of
person job fit (PJF) in the association between all the three facets of job crafting and faculty organizational commitment.
The results, as presented in Table 6, indicate that PJF had a significant (p <.001) and partially mediating role (β =.132, t =
Paths
Beta Coefficients (β)
Standard
Deviation
T Statistics
P Values
CC -> OC
0.158
0.046
3.441
0.001
RC-> OC
0.160
0.042
3.773
0.000
TC->OC
0.258
0.052
5.409
0.000
R2
Organizational
commitment
(OC)
.614
Person job fit
(PJF)
0.473
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1948
http://jier.org
4.269, p =.000) in the TC→OC relationship. The total effect of task crafting on organizational commitment was also found
to be significant (β =.414, t = 7.710, p =.000). Further, the direct effect was still significant (β =.258, t = 5.409, p =.000)
even when the mediator variable was taken into account. Therefore, it can be inferred that person-job fit (PJF) acted as a
partial mediator in the TC→OC relationship. Moreover, the analysis results displayed in Table 6 revealed that PJF had a
significant (p <.001) partial mediating role (β =.085, t =3.599, p =.000) in the RC→OC relationship. The direct effect of
relational crafting (RC) on organizational commitment (OC) (β =.160, t = 3.694, p =.000) and the total effect of relational
crafting (RC) on organizational commitment (OC) (β =.245, t = 5.294, p =.000) both remained significant even when the
mediator variable was taken into consideration. This finding supports the conclusion that PJF serves as a partial mediator
in the RC-OC relationship.
Furthermore, the findings presented in Table 6 showed that PJF plays a significant (p <.001) partial mediating role in the
CC→OC relationship (β =.094, t = 3.706, p =.000). The direct effect of CC on OC was still momentous when the mediator
variable was included (β =.158, t = 3.443, p =.001). The total effect of CC on OC was also substantial (β =.252, t = 4.940,
p =.000). As a result, CC and OC's interactions are partially mediated by PJF.
Table 6 Results of Mediation
Note: P<.001**
5. Discussion
The outcomes of the present study have provided robust backing for the hypothesized model. The study results have shown
a substantial positive impact of task crafting on the commitment of faculty members, therefore confirming H1. The findings
are in consonance with the outcomes of already available literature (Cheng et al., 2016; Ghitulescu, 2006; G.-N. Kim &
Lee, 2016; Leana et al., 2009). When faculty members participate in crafting the physical precincts of their professions by
way of bringing out new methods of teaching, adding more challenging projects, altering the latitude of their job at work,
and spending more time on main responsibilities, it increases the meaningfulness of the job, leading to the, increase in
commitment level with regard to the institution they work for. Leana et al., (2009) also emphasized that engaging in task
crafting at the team level increases the satisfaction and commitment of teachers working in various childcare centers in the
USA. Also, Lee & Mcnaughtan, (2020) have highlighted the importance of implementing task crafting in higher education
because, through task crafting, faculty members can maintain a balance between various tasks like teaching, and research
and service , they have to juggle with. However, the study by McNaughtan et al. (2022) have found a negative influence
of task crafting on organizational commitment of faculty members, paving the way for more research studies on this topic
in order to bring out clarity in relationships. Regarding H2, relational crafting was also found to have a favorable effect on
the commitment of faculty towards their organizations, substantiating the findings of McNaughtan et al. (2022); Noesgaard
& Jørgensen, (2023) . Drawing on the conservation of resources theory (COR) by Hobfoll (1989), building inter-personal
relationships with people at work can turn out to be a momentous resource that employees can use to balance the
demands of their jobs and achieve positive outcomes both for themselves as well as for the organization . Regarding H3,
the results showed a noteworthy effect of cognitive crafting on faculty commitment level. Employees engaging in altering
the perceptions of their jobs in a positive way, like thinking that their job is having a significant impact on the organization
as well as society and that their job is giving their life a purpose , it will help them add more meaning to their job and
cultivate a positive identity at work, which in turn increases their commitment levels towards their jobs and organization
(Wrzesniewski et al., 2013). The findings corroborate the studies of Ghitulescu (2006), McNaughtan et al. (2022) and
Total Effect
Direct Effect
Indirect Effect
Decision
Paths
β
P value
Paths
β
P value
Paths
β
T
statistics
P value
TC ->OC
0.414
.000**
TC-----
OC
0.258
.000**
TC---PJF---
OC
0.132
4.269
.000**
Partial
Mediation
RC-----OC
0.245
.000**
RC-----
OC
0.160
.000**
RC---PJF---
OC
0.085
3.599
.000**
Partial
Mediation
CC-----OC
0.252
.000**
CC-----
OC
0.158
.001**
CC---PJF---
OC
0.094
3.706
.000**
Partial
Mediation
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1949
http://jier.org
Noesgaard & Jorgensen (2018). The current study is also intended to analyze the indirect relations by employing person-
job fit as an intervening variable in the relationship among faculty commitment and job crafting. The results indicate that
person-job fit partially mediated the association among job-crafting facets and faculty organizational commitment, thus
partly confirming H4-H6. The inferences suggest that person-job fit did not completely suppress the impact of all three
dimensions of crafting, as the size of the direct impact is much larger than the size of the indirect impact, indicating that
all three forms of crafting have a strong influence on faculty organizational commitment. The results are, to some extent,
in contradiction with the study of Moulik and Giri (2022), wherein the findings have shown that person-job fit fully
mediated the association between increasing social resources, which is crafting relational boundaries, and the affective
commitment of employees working in various IT companies across India. However, it is pertinent to mention that the study
has taken into account only one dimension of job crafting, which is relational crafting. Further, the study took into
consideration commitment only in an affective context. Furthermore, the outcomes also contradict the findings of the
research study by Abbas et al. (2022) which demonstrated that commitment (normative, and continuous) and the
components of job crafting based on JD-R model among food and beverage employees working in eight five-star hotels in
Egypt were fully mediated by person-job fit. The possible reasons for this contradiction could be attributed to the sectorial
and cultural differences prevalent in the studies. Also, there is a paucity of literature pertaining to the intervening function
of person-job fit in the association among task, cognitive crafting, and organizational commitment, which can limit the
generalization of findings to a wider population. However, the outcomes of the current study can prove to be a inception
to further unveil the role of person-job fit between all three dimensions of crafting a job and employee organizational
commitment thereby paving the way for more research in the future across various cultures and sectors to bring out more
clarity on the relationships between these variables.
6. Limitations and Directions for Further Studies
The present study was confined to only faculty members from various universities in North India. Accordingly, to spread
the generalizations to a wider population, future researchers should take into consideration a larger sample size across
diverse disciplines and settings. Another restraint was related to the data collection method used. The current study's use
of self-reported questionnaires to gather data may have contributed to the common method bias. Further, the present study
has used convenience sampling techniques that might hinder the generalizations of the results. The present study was
cross-sectional in nature failing to capture variations that occur over time, future researchers should conduct more
longitudinal studies on the subject in order to ascertain cause - effect relationships and account for variations over time.
The paucity of literature on the intervening role of person-job fit between the relationships of task, relational, cognitive
crafting, and organizational commitment was also a limitation. Apart from person-job fit, future studies should emphasize
on analyzing the mediator roles of other variables amongst the facets of job-crafting and employee organizational
commitment.
10. Conclusion
This study aimed to evaluate the individual impacts of the facets of crafting a job originally propounded by Wrzesniewski
& Dutton (2001), on faculty commitment working in different universities in Northern India. The study also reconnoitered
the intervening role of faculty fit with the job among the three facets of job crafting and faculty commitment. The study
revealed that the three dimensions of job crafting played a significant role in increasing the commitment level of faculty
towards their job and organization. When employees are given flexibility with respect to shaping their societal, task, and
perceptive precincts of their jobs to better fit their preferences, passions, and interests, it can improve their job
meaningfulness and identity at work, ultimately leading to constructive organizational results. Job crafting can help faculty
members get relief from the stress they encounter when juggling a lot of tasks by tailoring the job according to their needs,
skills, and passion. Additionally, the study discovered that the association between job crafting and organizational
commitment was somewhat mediated by person-job fit.
List of Tables/Figures
Figure 1
Conceptual framework
Figure 2
Measurement model
Figure 3
Structural model
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1950
http://jier.org
Table 1
Sample characteristics
Table 2
Measurement Model Parameters
Table 3
Discriminant Validity
Table 4
Collinearity statistics
Table 5
Structural path analysis results
Table 6
Results of Mediation
References:
1. Abbas, T. M., Mansour, N. M., & Elshawarbi, N. N. M. A. (2022). Job Crafting and Organizational Commitment:
the Mediating Role of Person-Job Fit in the Food and Beverage Sector. Tourism and Hospitality Management,
29(3), 319–333. https://doi.org/10.20867/thm.29.3.1
2. Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., Bagozzi, R. P., Yi, Y., & Phillips, L. W. (1991). Bagozzietal1991.pdf. In Administrative
Science Quarterly (Vol. 36, Issue 3, pp. 421–458).
3. Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Verbeke, W. (2004). Using the job demands-resources model to predict burnout
and performance. Human Resource Management, 43(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20004
4. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological
Research. Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
51(6), 1173–1182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173
5. Berg, J. M., Dutton, J. E., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2013). Job crafting and meaningful work. Purpose and Meaning
in the Workplace., January, 81–104. https://doi.org/10.1037/14183-005
6. Brkich, M., Jeffs, D., & Carless, S. A. (2002). A global self-report measure of person-job fit. European Journal of
Psychological Assessment, 18(1), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1027//1015-5759.18.1.43
7. Cheng, J. C., Chen, C. Y., Teng, H. Y., & Yen, C. H. (2016). Tour leaders’ job crafting and job outcomes: The
moderating role of perceived organizational support. Tourism Management Perspectives, 20, 19–29.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2016.06.001
8. De Beer, L. T., Tims, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2016). Job crafting and its impact on work engagement and job
satisfaction in mining and manufacturing. South African Journal of Economic and Management Sciences, 19(3),
400–412. https://doi.org/10.17159/2222-3436/2016/v19n3a7
9. Falk, R. F., & Miller, N. B. (1992). A Primer for Soft Modeling. The University of Akron Press, April, 80.
http://books.google.com/books/about/A_Primer_for_Soft_Modeling.html?id=3CFrQgAACAAJ
10. Farzaneh, J., Farashah, A. D., & Kazemi, M. (2014). The impact of person-job fit and person-organization fit on
OCB: The mediating and moderating effects of organizational commitment and psychological empowerment.
Personnel Review, 43(5), 672–691. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-07-2013-0118
11. Fornell, C., & Larcker F., D. (1981). CLAES FORNELL AND DAVID F. LARCKER* Evaluating Structural
Equation Models with Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research,
XVIII(February), 39–50.
12. Ghitulescu, B. (2006). Shaping tasks and relationships at work: Examining the antecedents and consequences of
employee job crafting. Unpublished, 259.
13. Gordon, H. J., Demerouti, E., Le Blanc, P. M., & Bipp, T. (2015). Job crafting and performance of Dutch and
American health care professionals. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 14(4), 192–202.
https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/A000138
14. Hair, J. F., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural
Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). Thousand Oaks. Sage, 165.
15. Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: Indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory
and Practice, 19(2), 139–152. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202
16. Hair, J. F., Risher, J. J., Sarstedt, M., & Ringle, C. M. (2019). When to use and how to report the results of PLS-
SEM. European Business Review, 31(1), 2–24.
17. Henseler, J., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2015). A New Criterion for Assessing Discriminant Validity in
Variance-Based Structural Equation Modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 43, 115-135.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-014-0403-8
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1951
http://jier.org
18. Hobfoll, S. E. (1989). Conservation of Resources: A New Attempt at Conceptualizing Stress. American
Psychologist, 44(3), 513–524. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.44.3.513
19. Ingusci, E., Callea, A., Chirumbolo, A., & Urbini, F. (2016). Job crafting and job satisfaction in a sample of italian
teachers: The mediating role of perceived organizational support. Electronic Journal of Applied Statistical
Analysis, 9(4), 675–687. https://doi.org/10.1285/i20705948v9n4p675
20. Iqbal, Q. (2016). Job-Crafting and Organizational Commitment: Person-Job Fit as Moderator in Banking Sector
of Pakistan. International Journal of Management, Accounting and Economics, 3(312), 837–851. www.ijmae.com
21. Karollah, B., Monita, Y., Vilzati, V., Muhammad, M., & Ibrahim, M. (2020). The practice of job crafting and its
impact on job outcomes. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147- 4478), 9(5),
192–199. https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v9i5.830
22. Kim, G.-N., & Lee, Y.-M. (2016). Towards High Performance Organization: The Impacts of Job Characteristics
and Job Crafting. International Journal of U- and e- Service, Science and Technology, 9(2), 85–100.
https://doi.org/10.14257/ijunesst.2016.9.2.10
23. Kim, H., Im, J., & Qu, H. (2018). Exploring antecedents and consequences of job crafting. International Journal
of Hospitality Management, 75(February), 18–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.02.014
24. Kirkendall, C. D. (2013). Job Crafting: the Pursuit of Happiness At Work. Browse All Theses and Dissertations,
53(9), 1689–1699. /citations?view_op=view_citation&continue=/scholar%3Fhl%3Dpt-
BR%26as_sdt%3D0,5%26scilib%3D1&citilm=1&citation_for_view=wS0xi2wAAAAJ:2osOgNQ5qMEC&hl=
pt-BR&oi=p
25. Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. In Canadian Graduate Journal of
Sociology and Criminology (Vol. 1, Issue 1). https://doi.org/10.15353/cgjsc.v1i1.3787
26. Leana, C., Appelbaum, E., & Shevchuk, I. (2009). Work process and quality of care in early childhood education:
The role of job crafting. Academy of Management Journal, 52(6), 1169–1192.
https://doi.org/10.5465/AMJ.2009.47084651
27. Lee, S., & Mcnaughtan, J. (2020). Music Faculty Role and Organizational Commitment Music Faculty Role and
Organizational Commitment Author ( s ): Sang-Hie Lee and Jonathan McNaughtan Published by : College Music
Society. May. https://doi.org/10.18177/sym.2019.59.sr.11460
28. Li, J., Yang, H., Weng, Q., & Zhu, L. (2021). How different forms of job crafting relate to job satisfaction: The
role of person-job fit and age. Current Psychology, 0123456789. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02390-3
29. Mäkikangas, A., Aunola, K., Seppälä, P., & Hakanen, J. (2016). Work engagement–team performance
relationship: shared job crafting as a moderator. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 89(4),
772–790. https://doi.org/10.1111/JOOP.12154
30. McNaughtan, J., Thacker, R., Eicke, D., & Freeman, S. (2022). Committed to their craft: Understanding the
relationship between job crafting and work commitment among faculty in the United States. Higher Education
Quarterly, 76(2), 367–384. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12293
31. Mowday, R.T., Steers, R.M. and Porter, L.W. (1979) The Measurement of Organizational Commitment. Journal
of Vocational Behaviour, 14, 224-247.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0001-8791 (79)90072-1
32. Moulik, M., & Giri, V. N. (2022). Impact of Increasing Social Resources on Work Engagement and Affective
Organizational Commitment: The Mediating Role of Person–Job Fit. Management and Labour Studies, 47(1), 59–
73. https://doi.org/10.1177/0258042X211026147
33. Noesgaard, M. S., & Jorgensen, F. (2018). Building Organizational Commitment through Cognitive and
Relational Job Crafting. Https://Doi.Org/10.5465/AMBPP.2018.13911abstract, 2018(1), 13911.
https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2018.13911ABSTRACT
34. Noesgaard, M. S., & Jørgensen, F. (2023). Building organizational commitment through cognitive and relational
job crafting. European Management Journal, January. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2023.01.002
35. Petrou, P., Demerouti, E., Peeters, M. C. W., Schaufeli, W. B., & Hetland, J. (2012). Crafting a job on a daily
basis: Contextual correlates and the link to work engagement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(8), 1120–
1141. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1783
36. Ringle, C. M., Da Silva, D., & Bido, D. D. S. (2014). Modelagem de Equações Estruturais com Utilização do
Smartpls. Revista Brasileira de Marketing, 13(2), 56–73. https://doi.org/10.5585/remark.v13i2.2717
Journal of Informatics Education and Research
ISSN: 1526-4726
Vol 4 Issue 3 (2024)
1952
http://jier.org
37. Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2020). Handbook of Market Research. In Handbook of Market Research
(Issue September). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05542-8
38. Siddiqi, M. A. (2015). Work Engagement and Job Crafting of Service Employees Influencing Customer
Outcomes. Vikalpa, 40(3), 277–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/0256090915598584
39. Slemp, G. R., & Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2013). The Job Crafting Questionnaire: A new scale to measure the extent
to which employees engage in job crafting. International Journal of Wellbeing, 3(2), 126–146.
https://doi.org/10.5502/ijw.v3i2.1
40. Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., & Derks, D. (2012). Development and validation of the job crafting scale.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2011.05.009
41. Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., & Derks, D. (2015). Job crafting and job performance: A longitudinal study. European
Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 24(6), 914–928.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2014.969245
42. Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., Derks, D., & van Rhenen, W. (2013). Job Crafting at the Team and Individual Level:
Implications for Work Engagement and Performance. Group & Organization Management, 38(4), 427–454.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601113492421
43. Vogel, R. M., Rodell, J. B., & Lynch, J. W. (2016). Engaged and productive misfits: How job crafting and leisure
activity mitigate the negative effects of value incongruence. Academy of Management Journal, 59(5), 1561–1584.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2014.0850
44. Widodo, S., Sahono, B., Agustina, E., Suryosukmono, G., & Pareke, F. (2020). Person-job fit, person-organization
fit and the effect on employee performance: Organizational commitment as mediator role. Psychology and
Education, 57(9), 5257–5269. www.psychologyandeducation.net
45. Wong, C. M., & Tetrick, L. E. (2017). Job crafting: Older workers’ mechanism for maintaining person-job fit.
Frontiers in Psychology, 8(SEP), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01548
46. Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). CRAFTING A JOB : AS ACTIVE EMPLOYEES REVISIONING
CRAFTERS OF THEIR WORK. 26(2), 179–201.
47. Wrzesniewski, A., Lobuglio, N., Dutton, J. E., & Berg, J. M. (2013). Job crafting and cultivating positive meaning
and identity in work. In Advances in Positive Organizational Psychology (Vol. 1, Issue 2013). Emerald Group
Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2046-410X(2013)0000001015
48. Zahoor, A. (2018). Teacher Proactivity Influencing Student Satisfaction and Loyalty Role of Job Crafting and
Work Engagement. Vikalpa, 43(3), 125–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/0256090918785046
49. Zito, M., Colombo, L., Borgogni, L., Callea, A., Cenciotti, R., Ingusci, E., & Cortese, C. G. (2019). The nature of
job crafting: Positive and negative relations with job satisfaction and work-family conflict. International Journal
of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(7). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16071176
