Why Do Some Employees Fall into and Fail to Exit a Job-Lock Situation?

Abstract

Previous studies have paid little attention to the employees' ability to exit a job-lock situation and factors that determine this ability. It remains unclear why some employees who experience job lock are able to exit this state while others remain in job lock. We use longitudinal data to identify employees who have fallen in the state of job lock and their subsequent behavior—exiting or remaining in job lock. By use of a first-order Markov transition models, we analyze the relevance of sociodemographic features, employment, occupational, sectoral, and contextual factors, as well as personality characteristics in explaining the transition or its absence. Overall the results show that both demographic factors and work-related aspects increase the likelihood that an employee enters the long-term job lock state (especially for older, married, full-time employed, those in a craft occupation and governmental sector, and in a region with high unemployment). Mental health problems and personality characteristics (low peak-end self-esteem and decisional procrastination) have a significant effect on the probability to stay in long-term job lock. On the contrary, having a managerial, service, or associate occupation, working in the private sector, and having promotion opportunities increase the chance of an exit from the state of job lock.

Trapped at Work: The Barriers Model of Abusive Supervision

“…Indeed, people are dependent on their income to feed their family and pay the rent/mortgage as well as other costs of living. As such, targetsʹ continuance commitment, denoting the perceived costs associated with leaving the organization (for lack of alternatives or investments made; see Meyer & Allen, 1991), may explain employees' decision to remain in the same job while being dissatisfied with it (Huysse-Gaytandjieva, Groot, & Pavlova, 2013).…”

Strategi Organisasi Penanganan Turnover Melalui Pemberdayaan Karyawan

“…1 , Januari 2021, Hal 102-116 Fakultas Ekonomi Universitas Semarang P-ISSN : 1412-5331, E-ISSN : 2716-2532 http://journals.usm.ac.id/index.php/solusi mentalnya mungkin terganggu. Ia merasa terpenjara oleh pekerjaan dan organisasinya (Huysse-Gaytandjieva, Groot, & Pavleva, 2013).…”

İş Güvencesi̇zli̇ği̇ İle İşyeri̇ Prokrasti̇nasyonu (Erteleme Alişkanliği) İli̇şki̇si̇

“…Davranışsal yaklaşım, prokrastinasyonu bir öğrenme biçimi, kalıplaşan bir davranış şekli; sorumluluktan (Ferrari, Johnson & McCown, 1995) ve/veya öğrenmeyle ilgili kaygıdan (Solomon & Rothblum, 1984) kaçınma yöntemi şeklinde betimlemektedir (Klimova, 2014;Shamsutdinova & Rybakova, 2015). Bilişsel yaklaşım, prokrastinasyonu, irrasyonel inançlar (Balkis, Duru & Bulus, 2013; Bridges & Roig, 1997;Ellis & Knaus, 1977;Sirois & Tosti, 2012), düşük özsaygı (Gohil, 2014;Huysse-Gaytandjieva, Groot & Pavlova, 2013;Klassen, Krawchuk & Rajani, 2008) ve bağımsız karar alma yetersizliği (Anissa, Nabil & Olfa, 2008;Ferrari & Dovidio, 2000;Habelrih & Hicks, 2015) ile açıklamaktadır. Zaman motivasyonu kuramına göre, her insan belirli bir zaman çerçevesinde kendisi için en çok yarar sağlayacak iş/eylem/göreve öncelik verir.…”