Work Motivation in the Rhetoric of Component Content Management

Abstract

This article describes a 12-month qualitative study that analyzes how a company’s transition to component content management (CCM)—a set of methodologies, processes, and technologies that allows working with texts as small components rather than complete, static documents—influences the work motivation of its technical communicators. The analysis is based on actor-network theory and the theories of work motivation from economics. When technical communicators felt that CCM’s only focus was efficiency and savings and that they were not recognized and connected to the fruits of their labor, their motivation decreased. But their motivation increased when they were engaged in job crafting—reshaping their understanding of the fruits of their labor and gaining recognition through prosocial behavior.

Cognitive job crafting: A possible response to increasing job insecurity and declining professional prestige

“…Cognitive crafting essentially implies an individual developing a new way of looking at his or her job (Wrzesniewski et al, ). For example, cognitively crafting one's job could consist of reframing the purpose of one's job to align more with personal passions and preferences (Batova, ), emphasising the positive aspects of one's profession (Vuori, San, & Kira, ), forging an “esteem enhancing” identity (Fuller & Unwin, ), and/or distancing mentally or physically from a person, situation, event, or unpleasant work environment that threatens the image of the job (Bruning & Campion, ). Cognitive job crafting is also an important strategy to modify jobs where there is little opportunity for other forms of job crafting (Zhang & Parker, ).…”

The Process of Reinventing a Job: A Meta–Synthesis of Qualitative Job Crafting Research

“…Cognitive crafting regards changing the way one views the job, which changes how individuals approach their jobs. For example, employees who reframe the purpose of their work to align it with their passions (Batova, 2018), or who cognitively emphasize the positive aspects of their jobs (Vuori et al, 2012), engage in cognitive crafting.…”

“…In the relational crafting subdomain, the notions of actively changing relationships with others at work (e.g., Berg et al, 2010b;Grant-Vallone & Ensher, 2017;Piekkari, 2015) and creating additional relationships (e.g., Batova, 2018;Murray, 2014;Piekkari, 2015) were the most cited behaviors, although additional relational forms of crafting emerged. For example, Bruning and Campion (2018) introduced social expansion as workers' attempt to systematically seek feedback, change interactions with others or take on self-adopted team roles.…”

“…Piekkari (2015) described individuals who focus on the impact of their job on other people's lives or on overall organizational success. In some cases, people may reframe the purpose of their jobs (Batova, 2018;Singh & Singh, 2016) or of the work role (Berg et al, 2010b). Additionally, managers were perceived as cognitively crafting their jobs by changing their mental relationships (Kira, Balkin, & San, 2012).…”

“…Desirable goals in the proactive domain were determined to be individual or jobrelated. For example, those trying to pursue individual goals may be motivated by the need to satisfy additional callings (Batova, 2018;Berg et al, 2010a), improve self-image (Singh & Singh, 2016), increase meaningfulness (Piekkari, 2015;Vuori et al, 2012), improve person-job fit (Van Wingerden et al, 2013), create a positive occupational identity (Janssen et al, 2016), or rethink their roles (Grant-Vallone & Ensher, 2017). Furthermore, desirable goals related to the job are adapting a part-time job by proactively reducing time and workload (Gascoigne & Kelliher, 2018), improving work performance (Lyons, 2008), connecting more effectively with customers (Lyons, 2008), developing knowledge (Singh & Singh, 2016), reaching a better work-life balance (Sturges, 2012), and working toward realizing career aspirations (Batova, 2018;Singh & Singh, 2016).…”