Predicting ProMES Effectiveness with Core Job Characteristics

Presented by Mike and Brandon Predicting ProMES Effectiveness with Core Job Characteristics

Overview • Job Characteristics Model • Pritchard Ashwood and ProMES • Model • Methods • Planned Analyses

Job Characteristics Model Core Job Characteristics Skill Variety Task Identity Task Significance • Skill Variety • Extent to which the job requires worker to perform different activities when accomplishing tasks. • Requires range in skills and abilities. • Related to: • Subjective performance • Objective performance • Work motivation • Job satisfaction • Growth satisfaction • Intrinsic motivation • Productivity Autonomy Feedback Dealing with Others

Job Characteristics Model Core Job Characteristics Skill Variety Task Identity Task Significance • Task Identity • Degree to which the job entails a whole or complete piece of work with a visible outcome. • Involves a sense of completion. • Related to: • Subjective performance • Objective performance • Work motivation • Job satisfaction • Growth satisfaction • Organizational commitment • Productivity Autonomy Feedback Dealing with Others

Job Characteristics Model Core Job Characteristics Skill Variety Task Identity TaskSignificance • Task Significance • Extent that work tasks are of importance and impactful in nature to the organization and its stakeholders. • As outcomes increase in personal and interpersonal importance, the motivation to perform increases. • Related to: • Subjective performance • Objective performance • Work motivation • Job satisfaction • Growth satisfaction • Absenteeism Autonomy Feedback Dealing with Others

Job Characteristics Model Core Job Characteristics Skill Variety Task Identity Task Significance • Autonomy • Level of decision making power and control regarding one’s work. • Related to: • Subjective performance • Work motivation • Productivity • Job satisfaction • Growth satisfaction • No significant relationship with objective job performance (Humphrey, Nahrgang, & Morgeson, 2007) Autonomy Feedback Dealing with Others

Job Characteristics Model Core Job Characteristics • Feedback • From other agents • Degree of information regarding job performance provided by supervisors and coworkers. • From the job itself • Extent that job activities themselves provide information useful information regarding effectiveness. • Related to: • Subjective performance • Objective performance • Work motivation • Job satisfaction • Growth satisfaction Skill Variety Task Identity Task Significance Autonomy Feedback Dealing with Others

Job Characteristics Model Core Job Characteristics Skill Variety Task Identity Task Significance • Dealing with Others • Extent that the job requires employees to deal with other people to complete work (customers, other employees, both). • Not considered a “core dimension” because they are not centrally related to job satisfaction. • Included in the Job Diagnostic Survey to: • Enables exploration of the impact of interpersonal characteristics of job design (Hackman & Lawler, 1971). Autonomy Feedback Dealing with Others

Job Characteristics Model Core Job Characteristics Critical Psychological States Work Outcomes Skill Variety Task Identity Task Significance Experienced Meaningfulness of Work High Internal work Motivation Experienced Responsibility High Satisfaction Autonomy Feedback Knowledge of Actual Results of Work Activities High Work Effectiveness Dealing with Others Growth-Need Strength

Motivation Potential Score Core Job Characteristics Critical Psychological States Work Outcomes Skill Variety Task Identity Task Significance Experienced Meaningfulness of Work High Internal work Motivation Experienced Responsibility High Satisfaction Autonomy Feedback Knowledge of Actual Results of Work Activities High Work Effectiveness Dealing with Others Growth-Need Strength

Motivation Potential Score Core Job Characteristics Skill Variety Task Identity Task Significance Autonomy Feedback Dealing with Others

Motivation Potential Score • MPS • Overall summary score • Based on core job characteristics from the Job Diagnostic Survey • Provides motivation potential of a given job • All factors impact MPS • For optimal outcome, all factors must be at highest possible level Job Management Related Task Related Skill Variety Task Identity Task Significance Autonomy Feedback (average)

Pritchard-Ashwood Model FIGURE 3-1. THE EXPANDED MOTIVATION MODEL

ProMES • System for productivity measurement and feedback • Based on Naylor, Pritchard, and Ilgen (1980) • Expanded by Pritchard & Ashwood (2008)

Model

Skill Variety • How much variety did the job contain? That is, to what extent did the job require group members to do many different things at work, using a variety of skills and talents? • From 1 (Very little, the job required group members to do the same routine things over and over again.) • To 5 (Very much, the job required group members to do many different things, using a number of different skills and talents.)

Skill Variety-ProMES • By identifying the most effective processes and explicit task strategies, employees become aware that they may need to use a new broader range of skills than they had previously

Task Identity • To what extent did the job involve individuals within the group doing a "whole" and identifiable piece of work? That is, was the work performed by individuals within the group a complete piece of work that had an obvious beginning and end? Or did it only comprise a small part of the overall piece of work, which was finished by other members of the group or automatic machines? • From 1 (The individual‘s job was only a tiny part of the overall piece of work performed by the group, the results of their labor could not be seen in the final product or service.) • To 5 (The individual‘s job involved doing a whole piece of work from start to finish, the results of their activities were easily seen in the final product or service.)

Task Identity-ProMES • ProMES indicators should be indicative of the whole job • Contributions of the job to the overall product or service may become more salient

Task Significance • In general, how significant or important was the job? That is were the results of the group's work likely to significantly affect the lives or well-being of other people? • From 1 (Not very significant, the outcomes of the group's work were not likely to have important effects on other people.) • To 5 (Highly significant, the outcomes of the group's work could affect other people in very important ways.)

Task Significance-ProMES • ProMES contingencies are organized in terms of positive and negative contribution • Delineates which tasks contribute most to effectiveness • Awareness of contributions at not only the unit level but also the organizational level

Autonomy • How much individual autonomy was there in the job? That is, to what extent did the job allow individual group members to decide on their own how to do the job? • From 1 (Very little, the job allowed individual group members almost no personal "say" about how and when the work was done.) • To 5 (Very much, the job allowed individual group members almost complete responsibility for deciding how and when the work was done.

Autonomy-ProMES • ProMES relies on performance measures that are mostly under the employees’ control • Degree to which variation in amount of effort allocated to tasks underlying performance measures results in actual variation in performance measure • Measures’ variance is primarily determined by employee effort • Feedback meetings allow employees to provide input

Feedback from Job • To what extent did the job itself provide group members with information about their performance? That is, did the actual work itself provide clues about how well the group was doing - aside from any feedback provided by supervisors or co-workers? • From 1 (Very little, the job itself provided almost no feedback, so the group could work forever without finding out how well they were doing.) • To 5 (Very much, the job was set up so that group members received almost constant feedback.)

Feedback from Job-ProMES • ProMES is based on feedback • Employees receive a greater amount of quality feedback from the job

Feedback from Agents • To what extent did managers or co-workers let group members know how well they were doing on the job? • From 1 (Very little, people almost never let group members know how well they were doing.) • To 5 (Very much, managers or co-workers provided group members with almost constant feedback about how well they were doing.)

Feedback from Agents-ProMES • ProMES is based on feedback • Employees receive a greater amount of quality feedback from the supervisors and coworkers

Dealing with Others Inside • To what extent did the job require individuals within the group to work with each other. • From 1 (Very little, dealing with other group members was not at all necessary in doing the job.) • To 5 (Very much, dealing with other group members was an absolutely essential and crucial part of doing the job.)

Dealing with Others Inside-ProMES • ProMES reshapes what is thought to be important • Focus is shifted to what can be controlled • Focused priorities for everyone within the group

Dealing with Others Outside • To what extent did the job require individuals within the group to work with individuals outside of the group (either within or outside the organization). • From 1 (Very little, dealing with individuals outside of the group was not at all necessary in doing the job.) • From 5 (Very much, dealing with individuals outside of the group was an absolutely essential and crucial part of doing the job.)

Dealing with Others Outside-ProMES • When dealing with others outside of the group, unit priorities may become less clear • Spending more time outside the group may result in less focus on priorities within the group

MPS-ProMES • Derived from core job characteristics • Compatibility principle – prediction of ProMES effectiveness should be stronger than any single job characteristic

Method • ProMES database (meta-analysis instrument) • Items adapted from the items in section 1 of Hackman & Oldham's 1975 Job Diagnostic Survey

Planned Analyses • Multiple regression • DV – Productivity Improvement (d) • Predictors – JDS variables, MPS • Control for Degree of Match • “Overall, how closely did the development and implementation of the system in this setting match the process outlined in the 1990 ProMES book?”

Potential Analyses • Hierarchical linear regression • Organization is nested variable

Predicting ProMES Effectiveness with Core Job Characteristics