Tomayto, Tomahto?

Abstract

Abstract. Although job crafting finds widespread application as a leading approach to bottom-up work design, the foundation of the construct is rather shaky: two different theoretical perspectives exist within the research field that have largely been treated separately. An empirical examination of their congruency is missing so far, threatening construct validity, the informative value of the emerging literature, and comparability of effects in practice. In two studies, we investigated the comparability and possible integrative approaches for the two perspectives, including different versions of existing measurement instruments. Our results, based on two large samples of employees stemming from diverse backgrounds and countries ( N1 = 295, N2 = 557), indicate distinct differences in terms of the internal structure of existing job crafting measures and with regard to theoretically anticipated relationships between subdimensions. A first empirical attempt to integrate both perspectives provided promising results for overarching approach/avoidance as well as targets of crafting factors. In general, our results provide cause for concern that the two perspectives should not be regarded as one uniform construct, nor should they be used interchangeably in theory or practice.

The Approach-Avoidance Job Crafting Scale: Development and Validation of a Measurement of the Hierarchical Structure of Job Crafting

“…Considering the partially contrasting effects of approach-and avoidance-oriented job crafting and the already confirmed claim that role-and resource-based job crafting overlap (Ebert & Bipp, 2022;Hu et al, 2020), more theoretical and empirical clarification of job crafting is necessary. The overlap between the two previous job crafting concepts already mentioned suggests that both concepts can be reduced to higher-order underlying factors (Naragon-Gainey et al, 2017).…”

“…Instead, we considered approach and avoidance crafting to be two independent factors at the highest level of the hierarchical structure that do not result in a global job crafting factor when aggregated. Given the theoretically proposed and empirically demonstrated independence of approach and avoidance crafting, it is implausible to assume a unified job crafting construct (Ebert & Bipp, 2022;Zampetakis, 2022). A global job crafting factor would be formed by the aggregation of the opposing contributions of approach and avoidance crafting (Costantini et al, 2021).…”

“…Despite the conceptualization of two opposing job crafting directions (approach-vs. avoidance-directed), research on this topic has mainly focused on one global job crafting factor (i.e., a formative factor). We regard this focus as problematic, given the empirical evidence suggesting that approach and avoidance crafting are independent from one another (Ebert & Bipp, 2022;Zampetakis, 2022). In addition, these directions have opposing effects on workrelated outcomes (e.g., work engagement and performance; Lee & Lee, 2018;Rudolph et al, 2017).…”

“…Although job crafting scales that focus on similar concepts have recently been published (e.g., role vs. resource crafting or promotion vs. prevention crafting) (Bindl et al, 2019;Bruning & Campion, 2018), these scales capture job crafting as a multidimensional construct with different job crafting strategies that are all located at the same level. Due to different levels of abstraction (Ebert & Bipp, 2022), we believe that job crafting must be conceptualized and assessed at different levels. Third, our AAJCS facilitates the measurement of eight job crafting dimensions 1 that arise from the proposed hierarchical structure.…”

The Approach‐Avoidance Job Crafting Scale: Development and validation of a measurement of the hierarchical structure of job crafting

“…Despite the conceptualization of two opposing job crafting directions (approach‐ vs. avoidance‐directed), research on this topic has mainly focused on one global job crafting factor (i.e., a formative factor). We regard this focus as problematic, given the empirical evidence suggesting that approach crafting and avoidance crafting are independent from one another (Ebert & Bipp, 2022; Zampetakis, 2022). In addition, these directions have opposing effects on work‐related outcomes (e.g., work engagement and performance; Lee & Lee, 2018; Rudolph et al, 2017).…”