nach oben

Journal of Business and Psychology

Erschienen in:

28.07.2023 | Original Paper

The Development and Validation of an Ideal Point Measure of Work Engagement

verfasst von: Michael M. DeNunzio, Rachel Williamson Smith, Loren J. Naidoo

Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology | Ausgabe 2/2024

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config

KI-gestützte Suche

Aus

Abstract

Work engagement has been an extremely popular area of research and practice over the past two decades. However, organizational scholars have yet to consider potentially more appropriate ways of modeling how individuals report their work engagement and, relatedly, of measuring it. This article seeks to (1) establish that individuals use an ideal point (vs. dominance) process to respond to work engagement items, (2) develop a construct valid work engagement scale with good psychometric properties using the ideal point framework, and (3) demonstrate the potential advantages that our ideal point scales can offer over existing dominance scales for work engagement research and practice. These goals were accomplished using a multi-phase approach. In Phase 1 we constructed a new ideal point work engagement scale (the IPWES), a short form (the IPWES–SF), and a dominance-style scale for comparisons (the DWES). In Phase 2, the psychometric performance of the IPWES was compared with that of the DWES and existing work engagement scales. Consistent with theory, the IPWES exhibited better fit, a more equal distribution of test information across the latent continuum, and different latent estimates towards the positive and negative ends of the continuum. Finally, Phase 3 established the construct validity of the IPWES and demonstrated its utility for uncovering curvilinear relationships with correlates of engagement over existing dominance-based scales. Notably, our findings were replicated with the IPWES–SF, supporting the use of the short version even in the study of complex relationships.

Vorheriger Artikel A Meta-analytic Systematic Review and Theory of the Effects of Perceived Listening on Work Outcomes

Nächster Artikel To Thine Own (Good and Bad) Self Be True? Trait-State Voluntary Work Behavior (Mis)Fit Influences Future Voluntary Work Behavior

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 102.000 Bücher
über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Automobil + Motoren
Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

über 67.000 Bücher
über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

Bauwesen + Immobilien
Business IT + Informatik
Finance + Banking
Management + Führung
Marketing + Vertrieb
Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Thank you to an anonymous reviewer for suggesting we create the short form and include it in our analyses.

Please see our online Supplemental Material #1 for a detailed comparison of the scoring implications of the GRM and the GGUM.

The fourth and final job crafting dimension involves decreasing hindering job demands. The relationship between this form of job crafting and engagement has received far less attention in the literature, with few studies finding a significant relationship. Therefore, it was not investigated in the present study.

Thank you to an anonymous reviewer for suggesting this additional analysis.

Double-barreled items are appropriate for ideal point scales if written in this way because it is assumed that respondents will disagree with the item unless both parts of the statement are accurate (Huang & Mead, 2014). However, although research has found this to be a successful item-writing tactic for intermediate ideal point items, none of the double-barreled items were retained in the final version of the IPWES.

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Sage.

Bakker, A. B. (2009). Building engagement in the workplace. In R. J. Burke & C. L. Cooper (Eds.), The peak performing organization. Routledge.

Bakker, A. B., Demerouti, E., & Sanz-Vergel, A. I. (2014). Burnout and work engagement: The JD–R approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1(1), 389–411. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-031413-091235CrossRef

Bouckenooghe, D., De Clercq, D., Naseer, S., & Syed, F. (2022). A curvilinear relationship between work engagement and job performance: The roles of feedback-seeking behavior and personal resources. Journal of Business and Psychology, 37(2), 353–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-021-09750-7CrossRef

Byrne, Z. S., Peters, J. M., & Weston, J. W. (2016). The struggle with employee engagement: Measures and construct clarification using five samples. Journal of Applied Psychology, 101(9), 1201–1227. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000124CrossRefPubMed

Caesens, G., Stinglhamber, F., & Marmier, V. (2016). The curvilinear effect of work engagement on employees’ turnover intentions. International Journal of Psychology, 51(2), 150–155. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12131CrossRefPubMed

Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56(2), 81–105. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0046016CrossRefPubMed

Cao, M., Drasgow, F., & Cho, S. (2015). Developing ideal intermediate personality items for the ideal point model. Organizational Research Methods, 18(2), 252–275. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114555993CrossRef

Carter, N. T., & Dalal, D. K. (2010). An ideal point account of the JDI Work satisfaction scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(7), 743–748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.06.019CrossRef

Carter, N. T., Dalal, D. K., Boyce, A. S., O’Connell, M. S., Kung, M. C., & Delgado, K. M. (2014). Uncovering curvilinear relationships between conscientiousness and job performance: How theoretically appropriate measurement makes an empirical difference. Journal of Applied Psychology, 99(4), 564–586. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034688CrossRefPubMed

Carter, N. T., Dalal, D. K., Guan, L., LoPilato, A. C., & Withrow, S. A. (2017). Item response theory scoring and the detection of curvilinear relationships. Psychological Methods, 22(1), 191–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000101CrossRefPubMed

Chalmers, R. P. (2012). Mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i06CrossRef

Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S., Drasgow, F., & Roberts, B. W. (2007). Constructing personality scales under the assumptions of an ideal point response process: Toward increasing the flexibility of personality measures. Psychological Assessment, 19(1), 88–106. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.19.1.88CrossRefPubMed

Christian, M. S., Garza, A. S., & Slaughter, J. E. (2011). Work engagement: A quantitative review and test of its relations with task and contextual performance. Personnel Psychology, 64(1), 89–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2010.01203.xCrossRef

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Erlbaum.

Coombs, C. H. (1964). A theory of data. Wiley.

Crawford, E. R., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2010). Linking job demands and resources to employee engagement and burnout: A theoretical extension and meta-analytic test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(5), 834–848. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019364CrossRefPubMed

Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040957CrossRefPubMed

Dalal, D. K., & Carter, N. T. (2015). Consequences of ignoring ideal point items for applied decisions and criterion-related validity estimates. Journal of Business & Psychology, 30(3), 483–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-014-9377-2CrossRef

Dalal, D. K., Carter, N. T., & Lake, C. J. (2014). Middle response scale options are inappropriate for ideal point scales. Journal of Business & Psychology, 29(3), 463–478. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-013-9326-5CrossRef

Davison, M. L. (1977). On a metric, unidimensional unfolding model for attitudinal and developmental data. Psychometrika, 42(4), 523–548. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02295977CrossRef

Drasgow, F., Levine, M. V., Tsien, S., Williams, B. A., & Mead, A. D. (1995). Fitting polytomous item response theory models to multiple-choice tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19(2), 143–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662169501900203CrossRef

Drasgow, F., Chernyshenko, O. S., & Stark, S. (2010). 75 years after Likert: Thurstone was right! Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3(4), 465–476. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2010.01273.xCrossRef

Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory of psychologists. Lawrence Erlbaum.

Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146CrossRefPubMed

Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology, 60(2), 159–170. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076546CrossRef

Hagel, J., Brown, I. I. I., Wooll, J. S., M., & Ranjan, A. (2017, June 6). If you love them, set them free: Why building the workforce you need for tomorrow means giving them wings to fly today. https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/topics/talent/future-workforce-engagement-in-the-workplace.html

Hair, J. F. Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis (5 ed.). Prentice Hall.

Harris, A. M., McMillan, J. T., & Carter, N. T. (2021). Test-taker reactions to ideal point measures of personality. Journal of Business and Psychology, 36(3), 513–532. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-020-09682-8CrossRef

Harter, J. K., Schmidt, F. L., & Hayes, T. L. (2002). Business-unit-level relationship between employee satisfaction, employee engagement, and business outcomes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(2), 268–279. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-9010.87.2.268CrossRefPubMed

Heinrichs, K., Angerer, P., Li, J., Loerbroks, A., Weigl, M., & Müller, A. (2019). Changes in the association between job decision latitude and work engagement at different levels of work experience: A 10-year longitudinal study. Work & Stress. Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2019.1577310

Hobfoll, S. E., & Shirom, A. (2000). Conservation of resources theory: Applications to stress and management in the workplace. In R. T. Golembiewski (Ed.), Handbook of Organization Behavior (2nd ed., pp. 57–81). Dekker.

Huang, J., & Mead, A. D. (2014). Effect of personality item writing on psychometric properties of ideal-point and likert scales. Psychological Assessment, 26(4), 1162–1172. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037273CrossRefPubMed

Imamura, K., Kawakami, N., Tsuno, K., Tsuchiya, M., Shimada, K., Namba, K., & Shimazu, A. (2017). Effects of web-based stress and depression literacy intervention on improving work engagement among workers with low work engagement: An analysis of secondary outcome of a randomized controlled trial. Journal of Occupational Health, 59(1), 46–54. https://doi.org/10.1539/joh.16-0187-OACrossRefPubMed

Jones, L. V., & Thissen, D. (2007). A history and overview of psychometrics. In C. R. Rao & S. Sinharay (Eds.), Psychometrics: Vol. 26, handbook of statistics (pp. 1–28). Elsevier.

Kahn, W. A. (1990). Psychological conditions of personal engagement and disengagement at work. Academy of Management Journal, 33(4), 692–724. https://doi.org/10.2307/256287CrossRef

Kibatta, J. N., & Samuel, O. M. (2021). Curvilinear effects of work engagement on job outcomes. Personnel Review, 51(3), 1041–1060. https://doi.org/10.1108/PR-10-2019-0547CrossRef

King, D. R., & Roberts, J. S. (2015). ScoreGGUM: An R package for estimating GGUM person parameters using pre-calibrated item paramters and disagree-agree response data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 39(6), 494–495. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621615570469CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Knight, C., Patterson, M., & Dawson, J. (2016). Building work engagement: A systematic review and meta-analysis investigating the effectiveness of work engagement interventions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, Advanced online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2167

Kulikowski, C. K. (2017). Do we all agree on how to measure work engagement? Factorial validity of Utretch Work Engagement Scale as a standard measurement tool – A literature review. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 30, 161–175. https://doi.org/10.13075/ijomeh.1896.00947CrossRefPubMed

Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, 5–53.

Lodewick, C. (2022, April 4). The great resignation could last for years, says the expert who coined the term. Fortune. https://fortune.com/2022/04/04/great-resignation-could-last-years-expert-says/

Lopper, E., Dettmers, J., & Hoppe, A. (2022). Examining nonlinear effects of crafting social resources on work engagement–the moderating role of exhaustion. Occupational Health Science, 6(4), 585–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41542-022-00124-wCrossRef

Macey, W. H., & Schneider, B. (2008). The meaning of employee engagement. Industrial & Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.0002.xCrossRef

Maslach, C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Leiter, M. P. (2001). Job burnout. Annual Review Of Psychology, 52, 397–422. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.397CrossRefPubMed

Mazzetti, G., Robeldo, E., Vignoli, M., Topa, G., Guglielmi, D., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2023). Work engagement: A meta-analysis using the job demands-resources model. Psychological Reports. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941211051988

Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. (2006). The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ): Developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the nature of work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1321–1339. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.6.1321CrossRefPubMed

Newman, D. A., & Harrison, D. A. (2008). Been there, bottled that: Are state and behavioral work engagement new and useful construct “wines”? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1(1), 31–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2007.00003.xCrossRef

Newman, D. A., Joseph, D. L., & Hulin, C. L. (2010). Job attitudes and employee engagement: Considering the attitude “A-factor. In S. L. Albrecht (Ed.), Handbook of employee engagement: Perspectives, issues, research, and practice (pp. 43–61). Edward Elgar.

Nimon, K., Shuck, B., Fulmore, J., & Zigarmi, D. (2021). Testing the redundancy between work engagement and job attitudes: A replication and extension of the affective events theory in human resource development. Human Resource Development Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.21464. Advance online publication.CrossRef

Ouweneel, E., Le Blanc, P. M., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2013). Do-it‐yourself: An online positive psychology intervention to promote positive emotions, self‐efficacy, and engagement at work. Career Development International, 18(2), 173–195. https://doi.org/10.1108/CDI-10-2012-0102CrossRef

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879CrossRefPubMed

Rich, B. L., LePine, J. A., & Crawford, E. R. (2010). Job engagement: Antecedents and effects on job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 53(3), 617–635. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2010.51468988CrossRef

Roberts, J. S., Donoghue, J. R., & Laughlin, J. E. (2000). A general item response theory model for unfolding unidimensional polytomous responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24(1), 3–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/01466216000241001CrossRef

Roberts, J. S., Fang, H., Cui, W., & Wang, Y. (2006). GGUM2004: A Windows-based program to estiamte paramteres of the generalized graded unfolding model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30(1), 64–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621605280141CrossRef

Russell, J. A., & Carroll, J. M. (1999). On the bipolarity of positive and negative affect. Psychological Bulletin, 125(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.125.1.3CrossRefPubMed

Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores (18 vol.). Psychometric Society. Psychometric Monograph No.

Sawang, S. (2012). Is there an inverted U-shaped relationship between job demands and work engagement: The moderating role of social support? International Journal of Manpower, 33(2), 178–186. https://doi.org/10.1108/01437721211225426CrossRef

Schaufeli, W. B., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Defining and measuring work engagement: Bringing clarity to the concept. In A. B. Bakker (Ed.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 10–24). Psychology Press.

Schaufeli, W. B., Leiter, M. P., Maslach, C., & Jackson, S. E. (1996). The Maslach Burnout Inventory-General Survey. In C. Maslach, S. E. Jackson, & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), MBI manual (3rd ed.). Consulting Psychologists Press.

Schaufeli, W. B., Salanova, M., González-Romá, V., & Bakker, A. B. (2002). The measurement of engagement and burnout: A two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. Journal of Happiness Studies, 3(1), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1015630930326CrossRef

Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Salanova, M. (2006). The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: A cross-national study. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 66(4), 701–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164405282471MathSciNetCrossRef

Schmitt, A., Ohly, S., & Kleespies, N. (2015). Time pressure promotes work engagement: Test of illegitimate tasks as boundary condition. Journal of Personnel Psychology, 14, 28–36. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000119CrossRef

Sheng, X., Wang, Y., Hong, W., Zhu, Z., & Zhang, X. (2019). The curvilinear relationship between daily time pressure and work engagement: The role of psychological capital and sleep. International Journal of Stress Management, 26(1), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/str0000085CrossRef

Siegel, A. L., & Ruh, R. A. (1973). Job involvement, participation in decision making, personal background and job behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 9(2), 318–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(73)90055-XCrossRef

Smith, R. W., & DeNunzio, M. M. (2020). Examining personality—job characteristic interactions in explaining work outcomes. Journal of Research in Personality, 84(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2019.103884CrossRef

Spearman, C. (1904). General intelligence,” objectively determined and measured. American Journal of Psychology, 15, 201–292. https://doi.org/10.1037/11491-006CrossRef

Stark, S. (2001). MODFIT: A computer program for model–data fit. Unpublished manuscript. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champagne.

Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., Drasgow, F., & Williams, B. A. (2006). Examining assumptions about item responding in personality assessment: Should ideal point methods be considered for scale development and scoring? Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(1), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.1.25CrossRefPubMed

Tay, L. (2011). The psychometric principles of affect: Are they ideal?, (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Tay, L., & Drasgow, F. (2012). Theoretical, statistical, and substantive issues in the assessment of construct dimensionality: Accounting for the item response process. Organizational Research Methods, 15(3), 363–384. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428112439709CrossRef

Tay, L., Drasgow, F., Rounds, J., & Williams, B. A. (2009). Fitting measurement models to vocational interest data: Are dominance models ideal? Journal of Applied Psychology, 94(5), 1287–1304. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015899CrossRefPubMed

Tay, L., Ali, U. S., Drasgow, F., & Williams, B. A. (2011). Fitting IRT models to dichotomous and polytomous data: Assessing the relative model–data fit of ideal point and dominance models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 35(4), 280–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621610390674CrossRef

Thissen, D. (1991). MULTILOG user’s guide: Multiple, categorical item analysis and test scoring using item response theory. Scientific Software, Inc.

Thurstone, L. L. (1928). Attitudes can be measured. The American Journal of Sociology, 33(4), 529–554. https://doi.org/10.1086/214483CrossRef

Van der Heijden, B. I. J. M., Van Vuuren, T. C. V., Kooij, D. T. A. M., & de Lange, A. H. (2015). Tailoring professional development for teachers in primary education: The role of age and proactive personality. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 30(1), 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-07-2014-0211CrossRef

Van der Vegt, G. S., Emans, B. J., & Van De Vliert, E. (2001). Patterns of interdependence in work teams: A two-level investigation of the relations with job and team satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 54(1), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.2001.tb00085.xCrossRef

van Schuur, W. H., & Kiers, H. A. L. (1994). Why factor analysis often is the incorrect model for analyzing bipolar concepts, and what model to use instead. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18(2), 97–110. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662169401800201CrossRef

Vroom, V. H. (1959). Projection, negation, and the self concept. Human relations, 12(4), 335–344. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675901200404CrossRef

Walter, S. L., Seibert, S. E., Goering, D., & O’Boyle, E. H., Jr. (2019). A tale of two sample sources: Do results from online panel data and conventional data converge? Journal of Business & Psychology, 34, 425–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-018-9552-yCrossRef

Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.54.6.1063CrossRefPubMed

Weiss, H. M., Nicholas, J. P., & Daus, C. S. (1999). An examination of the joint effects of affective experiences and job beliefs on job satisfaction and variations in affective experiences over time. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 78(1), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1006/obhd.1999.2824CrossRefPubMed

Zickar, M. J., & Broadfoot, A. A. (2009). The partial revival of a dead horse? Comparing classical test theory and item response theory. In C. E. Lance & R. J. Vandenberg (Eds.), Statistical and methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity and fable in the organizational and social sciences (pp. 37–59). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

Titel: The Development and Validation of an Ideal Point Measure of Work Engagement
verfasst von: Michael M. DeNunzio
Rachel Williamson Smith
Loren J. Naidoo
Publikationsdatum: 28.07.2023
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Journal of Business and Psychology / Ausgabe 2/2024
Print ISSN: 0889-3268
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-353X
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-023-09901-y

Springer Professional

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu Ihrer Lizenz zu erhalten.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2024

The Bright, Dark, and Gray Sides of Risk Takers at Work: Criterion Validity of Risk Propensity for Contextual Work Performance

It is Tough to Detach from Gossip: The Impact of Perceived Negative Workplace Gossip on Life Satisfaction

To Thine Own (Good and Bad) Self Be True? Trait-State Voluntary Work Behavior (Mis)Fit Influences Future Voluntary Work Behavior

Supervisor Ostracism and Employees’ Emotional Labor: The Moderating Effect of Interpersonal Harmony

A Meta-analytic Systematic Review and Theory of the Effects of Perceived Listening on Work Outcomes

High Performers = Better Leaders? Evidence From 55 Years of Professional Soccer on the Validity of Performance-based Promotion to Leader Positions

Premium Partner