Development and field evaluation of an interdisciplinary measure of job design.

Abstract

The development of an interdisciplinary job design questionnaire and a study of its interrelationships with a variety of outcomes is described. A taxonomy of job design approaches was developed from literature of different disciplines: (a) a motivational approach from organizational psychology; (b) a mechanistic approach from classic industrial engineering; (c) a biological approach from work physiology and biomechanics; and (d) a perceptual/motor approach from experimental psychology. The Multimethod Job Design Questionnaire (MJDQ) was developed reflecting these approaches. A corresponding taxonomy of job outcomes was developed, and hypotheses were generated as to relationships between job design approaches and outcomes. A field study involved 121 jobs, 215 incumbents, and 23 supervisors from five plants. Results indicated the MJDQ was reliable, and most hypotheses were supported. Different job design approaches influence different outcomes and may have some costs as well as benefits; an interdisciplinary perspective is needed to integrate major theories of job design. Even a cursory examination of the job design literature reveals many different schools of thought: industrial engineering approaches of scientific management and time and motion study, the psychological approaches of job enrichment and motivating job characteristics , the human factors or ergonomics approaches, and sociotechnical approaches to job design. Although there is some overlap in the recommendations made for proper job design, there is considerable divergence in focus and even some direct conflict in advice. Proponents, however, claim that their job designs positively influence most of the outcome spectrum for both the individual and the organization.

Integrating motivational, social, and contextual work design features: A meta-analytic summary and theoretical extension of the work design literature.

“…First, physical demands, work conditions, and ergonomics reflect the extent to which the job is designed in terms of biological concerns (Campion & Thayer, 1985). If physical demands increase and work conditions or ergonomics decrease, job incumbents will become increasingly physically uncomfortable (Campion, 1988), which in turn will hurt attitudinal outcomes such as job satisfaction.…”

“…However, researchers in related fields such as work physiology, ergonomics, human factors engineering, and biomechanics have studied the physical and environmental context (Campion & Thayer, 1985). Three work context characteristics are pertinent for our discussion: physical demands, work conditions, and ergonomics.…”

“…Compared to Fried and Ferris, our analyses include almost 20 years of additional research studies, 14 additional work design outcomes, and the first formal meta-analytic test of mediation model. Second, we develop a theoretical model examining four social characteristics of work, an area long neglected in work design research (Grant, 2007;Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006), and three work context characteristics that have traditionally been examined in the human physiology and engineering literatures (Campion & Thayer, 1985;). This expanded model is summarized in Figure 2.…”

The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work.

“…The dominant theoretical model in work design remains Oldham's (1975, 1976) Job Characteristics Theory, forwarded 30 years ago. The most recent attempt to offer a new theoretical perspective was Campion's (1988;Campion & Thayer, 1985) interdisciplinary model. Thus, there has been little new theoretical work in this area over the past 20 years.…”

“…In an attempt to address some of these weaknesses, Campion (1988;Campion & Thayer, 1985) developed the more comprehensive Multimethod Job Design Questionnaire (MJDQ). Although this included a greater variety of job characteristics, it too suffered from measurement problems and gaps in construct measurement (Edwards, Scully, & Brtek, 1999, 2000.…”