AN EXAMINATION OF THE INFLUENCE OF
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE VARIABLES
AND PERCEIVED JOB STIMULATION

0N I03 INVOLVEMENT

Thesis for the Degree of M. A.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
SAMUEL RABIIIOWIT Z
1975

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIIIIIII

UHF-5‘5 31293

 

 

 

III IIllllI- I

ABSTRACT

AN EXAMINATION OF THE INFLUENCE OF
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE VARIABLES
AND PERCEIVED JOB STIMULATION
ON JOB INVOLVEMENT

BY

Samuel Rabinowitz

This study was designed to investigate relation-
ships between individual difference variables and job
stimulation (a type of situational measure) with job
involvement. Additionally, an hypothesized causal rela-
tionship between job involvement and job stimulation was
investigated.

Data was collected at three points in time. The
initial subject sample consisted of 332 employees of a
Canadian government ministry. Of these, 233 responded to
the second questionnaire and 162 to the third. Analysis
of variance techniques and cross-lagged correlations were
employed in testing the hypotheses.

Support was found for hypotheses which predicted
relationships between job involvement and job stimulation,
age, and years with the organization. An hypothesis pre-

dicting no relationship between job involvement and marital

Samuel Rabinowitz

status was also supported. High need strength individuals
were more job involved than low need strength persons, but
this was not limited to only highly stimulating jobs (as
was predicted). Males and females were equally involved in
their jobs when job level and years in the organization
were held constant.

The remaining hypotheses were not supported in that
locus of control, belief in the Protestant ethic, and
education did not relate to job involvement. Additionally,
no support was found for the predicted causal relationship
between job involvement and job stimulation.

The variables found to significantly relate to job
involvement did, however, account for only 23.8 percent of
the variance in job involvement. Additional work should
address itself to other variables which might explain more
concerning the nature of job involvement. Finally, atten-
tion should be given to recognizing and reconciling

differences among measures of job involvement.

Thesis committee:
Dr. Douglas T. Hall, Chairman

Dr. Neal W. Schmitt

 

 

Dr. Carl Frost

AN EXAMINATION OF THE INFLUENCE OF
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE VARIABLES
AND PERCEIVED JOB STIMULATION

ON JOB INVOLVEMENT

BY

Samuel Rabinowitz

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS

Department of Psychology

1975

"I

DED ICATION

To Julie, Syd, Joel and Iris:

Thanks for being!

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Situational variables are spoken of in this study
as being related to job involvement. In my case, encourage-
ment and cooperation by those persons whose help I wish to
acknowledge made involvement in this project a beneficial
experience.

My committee members, in particular, could be
counted on for assistance whenever needed. Dr. Tim Hall,
my chairman, successfully convinced me that I could conquer
the "unconquerable," if I wanted to. His friendship and
ability to know when words of encouragement should be
offered will always be remembered. Dr. Neal Schmitt could
always be counted on to have an open door whenever his
aid was sought. Dr. Carl Frost proved to be a major help
in the formative stages of this project turning abstract
ideas into practical research.

It is also a pleasure to thank the collectors of
the data used in my thesis, Dr. Jim Goodale and Dr. Tim
Hall, for allowing me to use it in my study. The coopera-
tion of the ministry workers in responding to three

different questionnaires is also appreciated.

iii

Finally, my appreciation is expressed for a lifetime
of encouragement, cooperation, and love from those closest
to me, my parents, brother and wife (in order of appear-

ance).

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
LIST OF TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . . Vii
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . . . . . . . 1
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . 1
Job Involvement as an Individual Difference
Variable . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Job Involvement and Individual Difference
Variables: An Empirical View. . . . . . . 4
Locus of Control. . . . . . . . . . . 4
The Protestant Ethic . . . . . . . . . . 5
Higher Order Need Strength . . . . . . . . .6
Relationship of Job Involvement to Age . . . . 9
Relationship of Job Involvement and Education. . 12
Relationship of Job Involvement to Tenure . . . 14
Relationship between Marital Status and Job
Involvement . . . . . . . . . 15
Relationship between Sex and Job Involvement . . 16
Job Involvement as a Function of the
Situation . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Job Involvement as an Individual- -Situation
Interaction . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Hypotheses . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
METHOD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Subjects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Data Collection. . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Data Coding . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Data Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Multiple Regression . . . . . . . . . . 53
Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Page

DISCUSSION. 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 58
General Findings . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Practical Significance . . . . . . . . . 63
Limitations. . . . . . . . . . . . . 66
Future Research . . . . . . . . . . . 67

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

vi

Table

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Distribution of all employees according to
sex and job level. . . . . . . . . . 30

Summary of analysis of variance for the
relationship of job stimulation and locus
of control to job involvement. . . . . . 41

Cell means and number of subjects per cell
for the relationship of job stimulation
and locus of control to job involvement . . 41

Summary of the analysis of variance for
the relationship of job stimulation and
belief in Protestant ethic to job
involvement. . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Cell means and number of subjects per cell
for the relationship of job stimulation
and belief in Protestant ethic to job
involvement. . . . . . . . . . . . 42

Summary of analysis of variance for the
relationship of job stimulation and
higher order need strength to job
involvement. . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Cell means and number of subjects per cell
for the relationship of job stimulation
and higher order need strength to job
involvement. . . . . . . . . . . . 44

Summary of analysis of variance for the

relationship of job stimulation and age
to job involvement . . . . . . . . . 45

vii

Table Page

9. Cell means and number of subjects per cell
for the relationship of job stimulation
and age to job involvement. . . . . . . 45

10. Summary of analysis of covariance for the
relationship of job stimulation and
education to job involvement (job level
held constant). . . . . . . . . . . 47

11. Cell means and number of subjects per cell
for the relationship of job stimulation
and education to job involvement (job
level held constant). . . . . . . . . 47

12. Summary of analysis of variance for the
relationship of job stimulation and
years with the organization to job
involvement. . . . . . . . . . . . 48

13. Cell means and number of subjects per cell
for the relationship of job stimulation
and years with the organization to job
involvement. . . . . . . . . . . . 48

14. Summary of analysis of variance for the
relationship of job stimulation and
marital status to job involvement . . . . 50

15. Cell means and number of subjects per cell
for the relationship of job stimulation
and marital status to job involvement . . . 50

16. Summary of analysis of covariance for the
relationship of job stimulation and sex
to job involvement (job level held
constant) . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

17. Cell means and number of subjects per cell
for the relationship of job stimulation
and sex to job involvement (job level
held constant). . . . . . . . . . . 51

18. Summary of the analysis of covariance for
the relationship of job stimulation and
sex to job involvement (job level and
years with organization held constant). . . 52

viii

Table Page

19. Cell means and number of subjects per cell
for the relationship of job stimulation
and sex to job involvement (job level
and years with organization held constant). . 52

20. Causal analysis between job stimulation and
job involvement for the total sample, the
sample moderated by higher order need
strength and the sample moderated by locus
of control over Time 1 to Time 2 (4 month
lag) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

21. Causal analysis between job stimulation and
job involvement for the total sample, the
sample moderated by high order need
strength and the sample moderated by locus
of control over Time 2 to Time 3 (4 month
lag) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

22. Causal analysis between job stimulation and
job involvement for the total sample, the
sample moderated by higher order need
strength and the sample moderated by locus
of control over Time 1 to Time 3 (8 month
lag) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

ix

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

 

In considering an individual's level of job

involvement, various theories have been presented which con—

tend that one's job involvement is primarily influenced by

(1) his background and socialization process or (2) the

job situation which he is presently in, or (3)

a combina-

tion of both factors. Evidence has also been presented in

defense of each position by various researchers. The

purpose of the proposed research is to address
as to which type(s) of variables influence job
A closer look at the previously cited theories
presented along with a discussion of empirical
viously performed related to variables in this

Job Involvement as an Individual
Difference Variable

 

 

Job involvement, as conceived by Dubin

the question
involvement.
will be m
work pre—

study.

(1956), is

intimately tied up in the Protestant Ethic, the moral

character of work and a sense of personal responsibility.

Anyone who has internalized these traditional values will

probably be "job involved" regardless of the situational
context within which he might be employed (Runyon, 1973).

Lodahl (1964) hypothesized that thermainldetex'
minant of job involvement is a value orientation toward
~workwthat is learned early in the soc1alizat1on process.
Lodahl further believed that job involvement operation-
alizes the Protestant Ethic is some ways and since it is
the result of the introjection of certain values about work
into the self, it is probably resistant to changes in the
person due to the nature of a particular job.

Siegel (1969) initially concurs with this point of
view stating that differences in job involvement can
probably be traced back to value orientations toward work
learned early in the course of socialization and inter-
nalized as determinants of behavior.

Hall and Mansfield (1971) suggested that if job
involvement is indeed a personal characteristic, then there
would be little change in it under periods of organiza-
tional stress.

Hulin and Blood (1968) also focus in on the notion
of individual differences in their studies. They feel that
as a result of extra-work socialization processes, many ”I”
blue-collar workers in urban industrial environments have

,q 7 ‘ n...

no desire for ego need gratification while on the job. In

contrast to the job involved individual, these workers

' *Nnfi—a .

mainly view their jobs as a means to an end. Work enables

them to satisfy their main needs off the job. The central

theme of Hulin and Blood (1968) and Blood and Hulin's
(1967) work is "alienation from middle class norms."
Closely approximating the Protestant Ethic, middle-class
norms are beliefs concerning the goodness of work and man's
spiritual obligation to partake in hard labor for the glory
of God. The authors contend that living in an urban,
industrialized, blue-collar environment leads to alienation
from these norms, while life in a rural, non-industrial
community or other settings does not. As an outgrowth of
their thesis we find that for rural workers the more satis—
fying jobs would demand greater personal involvement, while
city workers are more likely to be satisfied when their jobs
are less personally involving. Blood and Hulin state that,
"At the integrated end of the continuum which ranges from
integration with middle class norms to alienation from
middle—class norms are individuals who desire personal
involvement with their jobs." The job is expected to play
a more important central role to the individual at this end
of the continuum, while workers at the other end experience
only an instrumental involvement. Increased responsibility,
autonomy, etc. are not unfulfilled needs; these people have

no such needs.

Job Involvement and Individual Difference
Variables: An Empirical View

 

 

Locus of Control

 

The relationship of Rotter's (1966) locus of control
scale to job involvement has been established in two
studies. Evans (1971, cited in Hall and Mansfield, 1971)
found job involvement to be significantly related to low
dogmatism and internal control on Rotter's scale. Further
evidence of the solidarity of this relationship was pre-
sented by Runyon (1973) who investigated the interaction
between management style and locus of control on job
involvement. The job involvement of 110 hourly employees
of a major, multiplant chemical company was measured by use
of the short form of the Lodahl and Kejner (1965) job
involvement scale (a = .73), while locus of control was
measured by 26 items from Rotter's scale. Style of manage-
ment was measured by a scale which consisted of seven
Likert-type scales designed to determine whether a super-
visor's behavior was directive or participative in nature.
Runyon hypothesized that the job involvement of "Internals"
("individuals who perceive a reinforcement as being contin-
gent upon their own actions") would be directly related to
the amount of participation afforded by the management
style under which they work. In contrast to this hypothe—
sis, Runyon postulated that "Externals" ("individuals who
perceive a reinforcement as being contingent upon outside

forces") would evidence a low degree of job involvement

regardless of the management style to which they are sub-
jected. Analyzing the data by comparing the mean job
involvement scores for each of the test conditions, Runyon
stated that the mean scores increased as one moved from the
External to the Internal under both_management conditions.
In viewing the results, it can be seen that the hypothesis
regarding the Externals was well supported while the
hypothesis regarding the Internals was not. Concluding,
Runyon declared that the findings suggested that job
involvement was largely a function of the Internal-External
dimension of personality and should be considered a

"relatively stable personal characteristic."

The Protestant Ethic \“/

 

Individual differences in what people want from ‘
work can perhaps best be reflected in work values, the
broadest notion of which possibly being the Protestant
ethic (Weber, 1958). This term has been defined by Hulin
and Blood (1968) as, "Work hard and you will get ahead.
You are responsible for your own destiny. Acceptance into
the Kingdom of Heaven is dependent on hard work on this
mortal earth." Lodahl and Kejner (1965) discuss job
involvement as the internalization of values of the good-
ness of work in the worth of the person. Bass and Barrett
(1972) and Lodahl (1964) believe that job involvement

operationalizes the Protestant ethic. It would appear that

if a person is a follower of the Protestant ethic, he would
be a job involved person.

To test the relationship between job involvement
and the Protestant ethic construct, Ruh and White (1974)
administered a questionnaire containing nine job involvement
items and eight Protestant ethic items (Blood, 1969) to
thirty-one white collar, public, employees who appeared
"to represent a reasonable cross section of hierarchial
level, salary, age, sex and education." The intercorrela-
tion between the total job involvement score and the total
Protestant score was .60 before correction for attenuation
(using internal consistency reliabilities) and .87 after.
Thus a strong, positive relationship between the two Bi

variables was established.

Higher Order Need Strength

 

An individual difference variable of importance
is one of "higher order need strength" or the importance

__-— 4., 1 *Q—“M

of the individual of satisfying a particular_esteem or

~~k

growth desire. Maslow (1970), in discussing a hierarchy

of needs, essentially states that an individual's behavior
is motivated by an attempt to satisfy the need that is most
important at that point in time. Lawler (1973) points out
that large differences exist in the needs people have and
organizations should consider these differences when

viewing individual motivation in organizations. As proof,

he cites a review (Lawler, 1971) of forty—three studies in

which pay ranked anywhere from first to sixth or below in
terms of importance. Lawler also discusses a Porter (1963)
study where the data presented demonstrated that managers
at different organizational levels differed in the degree
to which they are motivated by higher order needs. In
addition, Lawler discusses other data which show that
managers are motivated by different needs; some are;
motivated by self-actualization, while others are motivated
by autonomy. Others, according to Lawler, seem to be
desirous of lower order needs such as security.

IE Lawler added that the design of a job should have
its major effect on involvement and satisfaction related to
the strength of an individual's higher order needs.

’Studies to follow demonstrate this point.

Maurer (1969) obtained significant results indi-
cating that work role involvement was positively related to
the importance, desired amount, and perceived existence of
opportunities for satisfaction of esteem, autonomy, and
self-actualization needs for a sample of middle managers
in eighteen manufacturing firms.

Mannheim (1975) analyzed the importance of various
reward factors for five categories of occupations. Results
indicated that those who were professionals, technicians,
and scientists (Category 1) placed highest importance on
autonomy rewards, followed closely by intrinsic rewards.

The least valued rewards for this group were social and

hygenic in nature. Category 2 (administrative management)

#1 . .o

displayed a similar profile to the previous group, with the
differences being that higher importancewas placed on most
of the rewards with little differentiation between intrinsic
and material (extrinsic) rewards. The third group (traders,
agents,transportation, communication) placed highest value
on autonomy followed by material rewards. The last two

categories (construction, production workers, craftsmen,

services, recreation) valued most the material rewards of

work followed by autonomy. Mannheim, in discussing the

‘h . him»
on. - Mr... (O .1” '_

I'd-.“VMW —a-—-— u

results, concluded thatwsoeial_rewards were theflleast

A“ “Mm mwm-r V

valued and autonomyassigned a high importance value by all

groups involved. Further, material (extrinsic) rewards

_‘,_-,...a-.— A»
’___1 .m-W .1 _ .._

were most important to the fourth and fifth categories

and least important to the first group. Intrinsic rewards
were_valued most bygroups one and two and least valued
by Category five. Finally, hygiene rewards were valued
most highly by Category 4 (blue collar, manual) and least
by Category 1.

Hall, Schneider and Nygren (1970) analyzed a sample
of 141 professional foresters in terms of their job
involvement and higher order need satisfaction. Job
attitudes (in particular, job involvement) were measured
by a twenty item scale used previously by Hall and Lawler
(1970). Need satisfaction was assessed by a questionnaire

developed by Porter (1961). Results found job involvement

significantly (p < .01) related to satisfaction of autonomy

and self-fulfillment needs only and not to satisfaction of
security, social or esteem needs.

The evidence presented in this section points to a
potential relationship between higher order need strength
and job involvement. It would appear that involvement in
one's job would only appear if one's esteem and growth
needs are important to fulfill and if so, if they are being
satisfied.

Relationship of Job
Involvement to Age

 

 

Schwyhart and Smith (1972) investigated the rela-
tionship of job involvement to age among 149 male middle
managers in one company. A replication sample of fifty-
eight males was also used in this study. Job involvement
was measured using the twenty item Lodahl and Kejner (1965)
scale. For the primary sample (N = 149), age of the middle
managers showed a significant (r = .18, p < .05) correla-
tion with job involvement. However, in the replication
sample there was not a significant correlation between the
two variables. The authors speculated that the positive
relationship of job involvement to age, but lack of a
significant relationship of job involvements to promotions
or tenure, would indicate that the job may become more
important to the self-image of a manager as he approaches
age forty (all participants in this study were either at or
below this age), no matter what his success in terms of

promotions received.

10

Jones, James, and Bruni (1975) examined the rela-
tionship of job involvement to age by administering
questionnaires to a sample of 112 civil service and
military engineering employees. Job involvement was
measured by a six item subset of the twenty item instrument
developed by Lodahl and Kejner (1965), a = .62. Results
found job involvement related to age (r = .36, p < .01).

Hall and Mansfield (1975) discussed the relation—
ship between age and job involvement by presenting data
from two studies of professional scientists and engineers
employed in non-managerial positions in research and
development (R & D) laboratories carried out under different
environmental conditions. Group interviews and individual
questionnaires were presented to the participants (N = 290
at Time 1, N = 90 at Time 2; 32 individuals participated in
both periods). Job involvement was measured as the sum of
six items taken from the measure developed by Lodahl and
Kejner (1965). The variation of job involvement with age
was examined by computing the zero-order correlation and
one-way analysis of variance between the two variables.
These results were reported separately for the two samples,
thus creating a replication under changed environmental
conditions. The Time 1 data (r = .29, p < .01) and Time 2
data (r = .40, p < .01) indicated significant positive
relationships between age and job involvement. Additional

evidence of this relationship was presented in the analysis

11

of variance when looking at both three (20—34, 35—49, 50+)

and four (20—29, 30-39, 40—49, 50+) age groups:

Time 1 Time 2
F4 groups = 5.27, p i .01 F4 groups = 5.61, p i .01
F3 groups = 8.02, p i .01 F3 groups = 7.64, p i .01

These results led the authors to conclude that job involve-
ment increases with age.

Schuler (1975) analyzed the relationship between
age and job involvement for 325 employees sampled from all
levels of a large manufacturing organization. A positive
(r = .24) relationship was found for the two variables.

Lodahl and Kejner (1965) discussed a study done
with 137 nursing personnel, consisting of head nurses, staff
nurses (RN's), partical nurses, nurses aides and orderlies.
Total job involvement scores were correlated with age
(r = .26, p i .01) leading to the conclusion that older
nursing personnel tend to be more job involved. However,
Lodahl and Kejner analyzed a sample of engineers and found
no relationship between age and involvement.

Mannheim (1975), in a study of males of all job
levels in the labor force of Israel found no significant
differences among age groups and their work role centrality
scores.

Finally, Gurin, Veroff, and Feld (1960) interviewed

922 employed males comparing the relationship of age and

{I ‘f

12

ego involvement in their job. The authors found no signifi-
cant relationship between the two variables. 1

Studies of the relationship between age and job "3:
involvement have, in more cases than not, demonstrated that
the older the worker, the more involved he is although the
information presented here certainly is not conclusive.

Relationship of Job Involvement
and Education

 

 

Studies reviewed in this section have mixed results
in discussing the relationship between education and job
involvement.

Schuler (1975) viewed the relationship between
relevant education and job involvement. Relevant education
was defined as years of education related to present job.
The measure of relevant education was used since it
reflected the level of skills and abilities of an employee
and use of skills and abilities has been positively related
to job involvement (Lawler and Hall, 1970). For the
sample of 325 employees from all organizational levels of a
large manufacturing firm, a significant positive relation-
ship was found between job involvement and relevant
education.

In analyzing a related concept of job involvement--
that of "work role centrality"-—Mannheim (1975) looked at
its relationship to education. Defining education as a
variable which "reflects the time and skill investments,

the deferred gratification, expectations, and chances of

13

individuals concerning their work (p. 90)," she showed that
centrality significantly decreases with decrease in level
of education (F = 5.68, p < .001). Citing the conflicting
results between this and past studies, Mannheim stated that
it was possible for the cognitive content of the work role
centrality score to be more sensitive to educational dif-
ferences than the Lodahl and Kejner (1965) measure.

Gurin, Veroff, and Feld (1960) similarly declare,
based on their interview survey, that the higher educational
groups expressed greater ego involvement due to the
centrality of the job to their need gratification.

For a sample of 2530 employees of six midwestern
manufacturing concerns, Siegel and Ruh (1973) found no
direct relationship between education and job involvement.
Education, when trichotomized into "high," "medium" and
"low" was found to moderate the relationship between job
involvement and participation in decision making (PDM).
Correlations were positive and significant (p < .01) for
this relationship under all levels of education. Addi-
tionally, there were significant differences between the
correlations of job involvement and PDM for the high
(r = .62) and low (r = .51) subgroups.

Jones, James, and Bruni (1975) concluded that there
was no relationship between years of education or highest
degree obtained and job involvement for a sample of civil

service and military engineering employees.

l4

Ruh and White (1974) demonstrated that job involve-
ment was negatively related to education for rank and file
workers (r = -.05, p < .05) and managers (r = -.10, p < .01)
but was not related for the overall sample.

Perhaps a key to this complex relationship lies in
the way Schuler (1975) handled the issue. It may be that
only those who perceive their education as being applicable
to their present job could be job involved. This may be
inherent in jobs which possess highly desirable character-
istics.

Relationship of Job Involvement
to Tenure

 

 

Perhaps the length of time that a person has been
on a job has something to do with his job involvement.
Studies have generally been mixed in this assertion.

Schneider, Hall, and Nygren (1971) used a sample
of 141 0.8. Forest Service Professionals as part of a study
to look at the relationship of job attitudes to tenure.
Job involvement was assessed by using a modified six item
version of the Lodahl and Kejner (1965) scale which was
scored uSing a Likert scale format ranging from Strongly
Agree = l to Strongly Disagree = 7. Correlating at the
p < .01 level, no relationship was found between the two
variables.

In a similar vein, no significant relationships
were found between tenure and job involvement for samples

of middle managers (Schwyhart and Smith, 1972) and

15

professional research and development scientists and
engineers (Hall and Mansfield, 1975). Jones, James, and
Bruni (1975) did, however, find a significant (p < .01)
relationship between job involvement and years in pay
grade among a sample of civil service and military
employees. Lodahl (unpublished study; cited in Lodahl and
Kejner, 1965) also found a relationship between job
involvement and "time on job" for a sample of women in
precision electronics assembly work. For purposes of
extending the literature, and perhaps to see if the situa-
tion involved has anything to do with this relationship,
more research is needed.

Relationship Between Marital Status
‘ and JOB Involvement

 

 

One might surmise that there would be a significant
relationship between marital status and job involvement.
Perhaps a married person with family responsibilities
should be less involved in his job than an individual who
is single with no family responsibility. This would seem
logical in that the involved person places highest regard
in matters concerning his job and the married individual
might not be able to devote the time necessary to be fully
involved in his job. Evidence, however, does not back up
this theorizing. Gannon and Hendrickson (1973) present
evidence showing that is is quite possible to be involved
in both job and family for a sample of sixty-nine clerks

and office workers in retail establishments. Lodahl and

16

Kejner (1965), in the only other study that I discovered
which discussed this relationship, found no relationship
between marital status and job involvement for separate
samples of nursing personnel and engineers. It would be
of interest to explore the possible relationships, based
on the above theorizing, between this variable and per-
ceived job stimulation and their combined effects on job
involvement.

Relationship Between Sex
and Job Involvement

 

 

It would appear that if the background/socialization
theory is correct, men as a group should be more job
involved than women. Siegel (1969) adds to this hypothesis
by discussing the point that traditionally men would be
more likely than women to value work aside from its impor-
tance to earning a living. The producing role is important
to them for maintaining their sense of general well being.
Most women, according to Siegel, have other roles to
fulfill besides that of breadwinner as well as having other
important routes to deriving personal satisfactions outside
of the work environment. I have not come across any
studies which have demonstrated whether or not there are
sex differences in terms of job involvement.

It has been demonstrated in this section that job
involvement and some personality/background variables are
related. According to individual difference theorists,

these variables alone would be the key to understanding

l7

one's job involvement. This viewpoint has, however, been
challenged by a group of researchers who claim that it is
the situation, not the personality/background, which is the
key. It is these theories which will now be presented.

Job Involvement as a Function
of the Situation

 

 

Vroom (1962) has suggested that job factors can
influence the degree to which an employee is involved in
his job. A person becomes ego-involved in his work per-
formance to the extent that performance is perceived to
be relevant to certain aptitudes, abilities, or other
attributes which are central to his self—conception. It
therefore become necessary to take into consideration not
only the individual but also the organizational constraints
inhibiting this relevancy. Thus we see, with Vroom's
theorizing, the possibility that situational factors might
influence an individual's job involvement.

Participative management theorists (Argyris and
McGregor) place a minimal emphasis on job involvement as a
value orientation or motivational set subject to individual
differences. They view the organization as blocking the
gratification of ego needs, a result which leads to the
absence of individual involvement on the job. Specifically,
McGregor (1960) places responsibility in the organization
for the behavior of its employees, stating that how pe0ple
behave is in large part dependent on the assumptions

management makes about them. Management draws from one of

18

two sets of assumptions, Theory x or Theory Y. Theory X
assumptions hold that people have an inherent dislike for
work and must be forced to perform. Additionally, man
avoids responsibility, seeking only security. Theory Y,
on the other hand, assumes that work is natural for people,
that they will exercise self—control without the threat of
force. Responsibility is sought rather than avoided.
Finally, Theory Y suggests that intellectual potential is
only partially expended given the present state of organi-
zational life. McGregor's thesis is that the predominance
of Theory x assumptions has caused discontentment of the
work force. The more management applies Theory Y assump-
tions, the more it can expect improved worker performance.
As previously indicated, Argyris (1964) also
places the burden on the organization. He argues that
although it is normal for individuals, as they mature, to
develop desires for independence, more complex behavior,
deeper interests, awareness of self, etc., the organization
does not recognize this development. In fact, according to
Argyris, the organization retards growth by applying
controls, demanding passivity, requiring only a few shallow
abilities, etc. Thus, if an individual is to meet the
demands of an organization, he must, in effect, consent to
regress rather than mature. As a result, the individual
will become "psychologically" ill unless he finds some way
of adaption to conditions. This adaption sometimes takes

a form which is detrimental to organizational goals such as

'i‘l

.

Ill-ll
I‘llll.

 

 

 

 

19

becoming apathetic and lowering work standards. Changes in
organizations should, therefore, center around designing
work that will allow the individual to mature normally.

Bass (1965) concluded his discussion of job involve-
ment by echoing the feeling that six conditions lead to a
strengthening of the variable: (1) Opportunity to make more
of the job decisions; (2) the feeling that one is making an
important contribution to company success; (3) success;

(4) achievement; (5) self-determination; (6) freedom to set
one's own work pace.

Blauner (1964) in discussing work alienation,
related many points to job involvement. Blauner hypothe-
sized that involvement in work may come from control, from
association with others, and from a sense of purpose. A
man who is in control of his immediate work process--
regulating the pace, the quantity of the output, the quality
of the product, choosing tools or work techniques--must,
according to Blauner, be relatively immersed in the activity
of work. The social aspects and meaning the job are also
touched upon by Blauner:

. . . for most employees, when work is carried out by
close-knit work groups, especially work teams, it will
be more intrinsically involving and rewarding. And
involvement and self-fulfillment is heightened when
the purpose of the job can be clearly connected with
the final end product or the overall goals and organi-
zation of the enterprise (p. 28).

The present research project will employ one type

of situational variable, that of perceived task

20

characteristics. Based on the work of Lawler (1969) and
Hackman and Lawler (1971), the characteristics are:
l. Autonomy--The extent to which the worker is allowed
to determine the scheduling and the nature of the
work which he does.

2. Feedback--The extent to which knowledge of what is
accomplished is provided to the worker.

3. Variety--The extent to which the task requires the
use of a number of different skills by the
employee.

4. Task Identity--Another way in which tasks can
become meaningful is for the individual to be
involved in a significant part of the task. He
does a "sufficiently whole piece of work" that he
can identify the outcome as a product of his
efforts.

Hackman and Lawler (1971) and Brief and Aldag
(1975) have demonstrated that perceived levels of these
characteristics are significantly related to job involve-
ment for samples of—telephone company and corrections
employees, respeCtively. Hackman and Lawler (1971) found
job involvement to be significantly correlated (p < .05)
with variety (r = .24), autonomy (r = .22), task identity
(r = .12), and feedback (r = .24). Brief and Aldag (1975),
in replicating the above study, found somewhat stronger
correlations between job involvement and the core task
characteristics: variety (r = .35), autonomy (r = .34),
task identity (r = .20), feedback (r = .40); all at the
p < .05 level.

For purposes of this paper, a combined score on all

four of the core dimensions will be calculated so as to

create a dimension of "perceived job stimulation." This

21

procedure has previously been performed in studies on the
relationship of task characteristics tO'satiSfactiOn,
motivation, and performance (Baird, 1975; Hackman and
Lawler, 1971).

While material discussed thus far has declared that
job involvement is solely (1) an individual difference
variable or (2) the result of a specific type of situation,
a third group of theorists have taken a middle of the road
stance; that is, one of possible interaction between per-
sonality and situational variables with job involvement.

Job Involvement as an Individual-
Situation Interaction

 

 

Lawler and Hall (1970) suggested that the most
realistic view of job involvement would be that it is a
function of an individual-job interaction. They support
the individual difference point of view by expressing the
feeling that people probably do differ, in the degree to
which they are likely to become involved in their jobs, as
a function of their backgrounds and personal situations.
However, the situational viewPoint is also alluded to
since, according to Lawler and Hall, it is also probably
true that other things being equal more people will become
involved in a job that allows them control and a chance to
use their abilities than will become involved in jobs that

are lacking in these characteristics.

22

Farris (1971) assumed that job involvement was a
function of the interaction of a person with his environ-
ment, thus not considering it solely an individual
characteristic.

Lodahl and Kejner (1965), although initially
believing the individual difference viewpoint, nonetheless
conclude their study by declaring:

. . . it seems clear that job involvement is affected
by local organizational conditions (mostly social
ones), as well as by value orientations learned early
in the socialization process (p. 35).

Wanous (1974) recently theorized on the relationship
of an individual's socialization process and characteristics
of a job. To Wanous, one of the earliest determinants of
an individual's work needs is his socialization environment.
In the context of an urban or a rural white—collar environ-
ment, an individual, according to Wanous, may be more
likely to adOpt a set of work values similar to those known
as the Protestant Work Ethic or middle-class work values.
The results of such an upbringing could cause an individual
to deve10p a general value orientation toward work which
emphasizes the importance of work in one's total self-
esteem and reinforces the belief that work can hold
intrinsic satisfaction.

Wanous speculates that the consequence of such
values is that an individual (when asked) is likely to state

his own particular desires for job characteristics in

terms resembling the higher order need concept. More

23

specifically, this means that an individual will prefer or
desire a job to have large amounts of such characteristics
as autonomy, variety, challenge, and meaningfulness. The
desired job will be one having task identity and providing
the persons with feedback. wanous believes that it is
likely that such an individual will respond favorably when
holding a job with such characteristics. It would also
seem to hold that if an individual's job characteristic
desires are not met, there would be an unfavorable (low
involvement) reaction.

Ruh and White (1971) view job involvement as others
do in this section. A portion of job involvement is a
stable value orientation (a measure of individual dif-
ferences) brought to the job. These differences involve a
basic commitment to the work ethic and tend to be related
to the Protestant Ethic. However, there is another portion
of job involvement, which, according‘to the authors, like
job attitudes is also influenced by the job situation.

Lawler (1973) states that the design of a job
should have its major effect on motivation and satisfaction
related to the strength of an individual's higher order
needs. Those individuals valuing intrinsic outcomes (i.e.,
feelings of achievement, growth and competence) should
respond to jobs that are high on the four core job charac-
teristics with high motivation (i.e., high job involvement).
Persons who do not have interest in obtaining these higher

order needs should, according to Lawler, respond to jobs

24

that are high on the core characteristics with frustration
and irritation at having too demanding a job.

Three studies have been done which present results
in defense of these viewpoints. Lawler and Hall (1970)
performed a study designed to investigate the interrelation-
ships among job involvement, intrinsic motivation, and need
satisfaction as well as the relationship of these attitudes
to job design characteristics. For purposes of this study,
the authors used a sample of 291 scientists in research and
development laboratories who replied to a questionnaire
containing six items (Lodahl and Kejner, 1965) measuring
job involvement; six items relating to satisfaction of
autonomy and self-actualizing needs; four items measuring
intrinsic motivation; five items designed to measure job

perceptions dealing with the degree of control over job,

degree to which the job was perceived to be a relevant

test of one's abilities and degree of influence and control
in the department; and two items measuring self-rated
effort and performance. Satisfaction was measured by first
asking the scientists how much of the factor mentioned in
an item (e.g., autonomy) was associated with their position
and comparing this response with the rating of how much of
'the factor they felt should be associated with the posi-
tion. Group interviews were also used in order for the
investigators to rate the amount of contact the subject had
with project clients. Factorial independence of these

three attitudes was demonstrated by the authors although

25

its clarity may have been partly due to the use of different
scale types for these attitudes (i.e., minimum-maximum,
agree-disagree). Job involvement was found to be signifi-
cantly related to four of the five self—perceived job design
measures and not to the two objective measures (i.e,
challenging job and customer contact). The correlations
suggest that the more the job is seen to allow the worker

to influence what goes on, to be creative, and to use his
skills and abilities, the more job involved he will be

(r = .18-.21). Lawler and Hall suggest that the fact that

self-rated design characteristics and not objective design

characteristics relate to job involvement may give credence

to the individual difference viewpoint first discussed in

Lodahl (1964) but they are quick to say that it may also be
due to an individual-job characteristic interaction.
Hackman and Lawler (1971) applied their previous
theories and past research (Turner and Lawrence, 1965;
Hulin and Blood, 1968) in viewing higher order need satis—
faction as, essentially, a moderator variable determining
the effects of job redesign efforts. They test the hypo-
thesis that if employees are desirous of higher order need
satisfaction there should be a positive correlation
between the four task dimensions of variety, autonomy, task
identity, and feedback and measures of motivation, satis-
faction, performance and attendance. Job involvement in
this study was measured by three items from Lodahl and

Kejner's (1965) scale (a = .81) which yielded a score

26

indicative of the degree employees felt personally involved
in their work. Among the sample of 208 telephone company
employees, statistically significant correlations were found
in support of the authors' hypotheses. A later replication
of this study (Brief and Aldag, 1975) using a sample of 104
corrections employees found results similar to this study.
In particular, individuals with strong desires for higher
order need satisfaction respond much more positively to
high level jobs than do individuals who have weaker higher
order needs. It should be noted that the mean higher order
need strength of the sample was so high (6.01 out of 7.00
maximum) as to suggest a severe restriction of range
problem in the study. A major point which does come out of
this important study is that the psychological demands of
jobs must be matched to the personal needs of workers for

optimal results.

Hypotheses

 

The above point, that of person—situation matching,
was the theme on which the present study was based. Evi-
dence presented demonstrated that both individual
difference and situation variables could be related to job
involvement. The purpose of this study was to focus in on
a number of individual difference/background variables and
Hackman and Lawler's (1971) core task characteristics (as
one type of situational variable) in order to look at their

effects on job involvement scores.

27

A series of hypotheses based on past research

findings were tested in this study:

1.

Those individuals who perceive their job as highly
stimulating will be more job involved than those who
view their job as less stimulating.

Individuals who are "Internals" will be more highly
job involved than "Externals," regardless of level
of perceived job stimulation.

Individuals who have high belief in the Protestant
ethic will be more highly job involved than those
who place less value in the Protestant ethic,
regardless of level of perceived job stimulation.

Individuals perceiving their job as highly stimu-
lating will be job involved if they have high need
strength. Low need strength persons will not be
job involved, regardless of level of perceived job
stimulation.

Individuals who are older will be more highly job
involved than younger individuals, regardless of
level of perceived job stimulation.

Individuals perceiving jobs as highly stimulating
will be job involved if highly educated. Those
with less education will not be job involved,
regardless of level of perceived job stimulation.

Individuals who have been with the organization
for a longer period of time will be more job
involved than those who have been with the company
for shorter periods, regardless of level of per-
ceived job stimulation.

There will be no difference in level of job
involvement between single and married individuals,
regardless of perceived job stimulation.

Males will be more job involved than females,
regardless of perceived job stimulation level.

Hackman and Lawler (1971) assume throughout their

study that the core job characteristics actually cause

observed differences in level of motivation. To test this

assumption, the following hypothesis will be tested:

28

10. There is a causal relationship between job stimu-
lation and job involvement, with perceived level
of job stimulation leading to job involvement at
a later point in time (4 months lag, 8 months lag).

The above hypothesis was tested for the total sample, the
sample moderated by higher order need strength and the

sample moderated by locus of control.

METHOD

Subjects

The original sample consisted of 332 employees
(76% male) of a Canadian government ministry. Of these,
233 responded to the second questionnaire and 162 to the
third. Twenty-seven percent of the sample had been
employed in the ministry for five years or less, 23 percent
for 6-10 years, and 50 percent for 11 years and above.
Approximately 44 percent was 35 years old and under,
37 percent fell into the 36-50 years old range and 19 per—
cent were 51 and above. The vast majority of this sample
(71%) were high school graduates or below, with 23 percent
having received either some undergraduate education or a
degree and 6 percent doing work beyond the undergraduate
degree. The subjects spanned seven different job levels
as shown in Table 1. Additionally, a large portion of the
sample (73%) was married while 21 percent were single at

the time of data collection.

29

30

Table l.--Distribution of all employees according to sex

and job level.

 

Job
Level

Males

Females

 

 

(% of sample)

(% of sample)

 

Semi-skilled laborers

Office & Clerical

Technicians

Skilled Crafts

Sales & Business Personnel
(with college degrees)

Professional

Officers & Managers

Missing Data

24
(7.4%)

19
(5.9%)

140
(43.2%)

29
(9%)

8
(2.5%)

25
(7.7%)

l
(.3%)

O
(0%)

59
(18.2%)

17
(5.2%)

0
(0%)

1
(.3%)

1
(.3%)

0
(0%)

 

31

Data Collection

The method of data collection was a survey run at
three points in time approximately four months apart as
part of a larger study on psychological success (Hall and
Goodale, 1975). The initial questionnaire provided for
the measurement of personal-background data. The demo-
graphic variables of interest to this study were years in
organization, marital status, age, sex, and level of
education. A detailed description of the specific items
along with the number replying to each is presented below

(the mean level of years in organization is shown).

I. Years in organization

To the nearest year, how many years have you been

with the Ministry? 11.2 years

II. Marital Status

 

What is your marital status?

IO

(1) single = 29_ (4) separated = 12

(2) married = 32.. (5) widowed = 3

(3) divorced = 6 (6) other (please specify) =
III. 13.33

What is your approximate age?

(1) under 20 = 3, (5) 36-40 = 44 (9) 56-60 =‘2l

(2) 21-25 = 32_ (6) 41-45 = 31 (10) 61-65 = g

(3) 26-30 = 51 (7) 46-50 = 42 (11) over 65 =

(4) 31-35 = 18 (8) 51-55 = 33

32

IV. Sex

What is your sex? Male = 249, Female = 79

 

V. Education

 

Check the highest level of education you have
completed:

(1) 8th grade or less = 2

(2) some high school = 1 0

12

(3) high school graduate
(4) some undergraduate university = 41
(5) university graduate = 33

(6) some graduate university = 1

(7) graduate degree (please specify) = 1
(8) other including professional
certification (please specify) = 6

In addition to these demographic items, attitudinal
variables relating to employee values and perceptions of
the job were measured. Five scales (self-reports) were
utilized for the study with questionnaire items and internal
consistency reliabilities to be presented here:

Job Stimulation (a = .69)--a sum score of items based
on measures of core job characteristics (variety,
autonomy, task identity and feedback from the job
itself) developed by Hackman and Lawler (1971).
Four seven point scale items were used to rate the
job dimensions ranging from Very Little (1) to
Very Much (7).

 

How much variety is there in your work?

How much freedom or autonomy do you have on your
job; how much are you left on your own to do your
own work?

To what extent do you do a "whole" piece of work
(as opposed to doing part of a job which is
finished by some other employee)?

33

To what extent do you find out how well you are
doing on the job as you are working?

Job Involvement (a = .75) based upon a scale developed
by Lodahl and Kejner (1965) as used by Lawler and
Hall (1970). The four scale items were measured on
a six point scale ranging from Strongly Agree (6)
to Strongly Disagree (1).

 

The major satisfaction in my life comes from my job.

I live, eat and breathe my job.

I am very much involved personally in my work.

The most important things that happen to me involve
my job.

Higher Order Need Strength (cc = .93)--to obtain a
measure of the degree to which subjects were
desirous of obtaining higher order need satisfac-
tion from their work, ten items were included which
asked how important various opportunities and
attributes were to the individual. The scale was
based upon Maslow's need hierarchy and adapted
items from Hackman and Lawler (1971). In a space
below each item, employees circled a number
ranging from 1 (not very important) to 7 (very
important).

 

The feeling of self-esteem a person gets from being

in my job.

The authority connected with my job.

The Opportunity for independent thought and action
in my job.

The prestige of my job inside the company.

The Opportunity for independent thought and action
in my job.

The feeling of self-fulfillment a person gets from
being in my job (i.e., the feeling of being able
to use one's own unique capabilities, realizing
one's potentialities).

The prestige of my job outside the company (i.e.,
the regard received from others not in the
company).

The feeling of worthwhile accomplishment in my job.

The Opportunity, in my job, for participation in
the determination of methods and procedures.

The Opportunity, in my job, for participating in
the setting of goals.

Locus of Control (cc = .59)--the four scale items were
derived from Rotter's (1966) conceptualization of
Internal vs. External locus of control. Each item

 

34

was measured on a six point scale ranging from
Strongly Agree (6), the External measure, to
Strongly Disagree (1), which described Internals.

Most people don't realize the extent to which their
lives are controlled by accidental happenings.
Many times I feel that I have little influence over
the things that happen to me.

Many of the unhappy things in peOple's lives are
partly due to bad luck.

Sometimes I feel that I don't have enough control
over the direction my life is taking.

Protestant Ethic (cc = .6l)--based upon the conventional
ethic subscale of the Survey of Work Values
((Wollack et al., 1971). Eleven items were scored
on a six point scale ranging from Strongly Agree (6)
to Strongly Disagree (1). Negatively worded items
were first reflected and then added together with
the other scale items in order to create a sum
score.

 

Most companies have suggestion boxes for their
workers, but I doubt that the companies take
these suggestions seriously. (reflected)

A good worker cares about finding ways to improve
his job, and when he has an idea, he should pass
it on to his supervisor.

A worker who has an idea about how to improve his
job should drop a note in the company suggestion
box.

A good worker is interested in helping a new worker
learn his job.

A man should always be thinking about pulling him-
self up in the world and should work hard with
the hope of being promoted to a higher-level job.

There is nothing as satisfying as doing the best
job possible.

A person would soon grow tired of loafing on a job
and would probably be happier if he worked hard.

A well paying job that offers little opportunity
for advancement is not a good job for me.

A person should try to stay busy all day rather
than try to find ways to get out of doing work.

The most important thing a man should feel about
his job is that he enjoys working at it.

Doing a good job should mean as much to a worker
as a good paycheck.

35

Data Coding

 

To investigate the hypothesized relationships,
responses to the four scales used as independent measures
(job stimulation, higher order need strength, locus of
control and Protestant ethic) were split at the median into
low and high subgroups. The demographic variables were
placed into subgroups as follows: age--20-35, 36-50, 51+;
education--below college, college and above; years with
organization--1-5, 6-10, 11 and above; marital status--

single, married; and sex--males, females.

Data Analysis

 

A series of 2x2 and 2x3 analyses of variance and
analyses of covariance were performed based on the above
cited splits, with job involvement as the dependent measure.
The advantage of this type of design was that it enabled
the researcher to focus in not only on the main effects of
personality/background and job stimulation variables on job
involvement but also the interaction effects of the various
individual difference variables and level of job stimula-
tion on involvement (Issac and Michael, 1971; Glass and
Stanley, 1970). Runyon (1973) had previously used this
type of design to analyze the relationship between the
personality variable "locus of control" and the situational
variable "management style" with level of job involvement.

It had been initially proposed to check for a

possible correlation between job level and the perceived

36

levels of job stimulation as previous research (Baird,
1975) had indicated that such a relationship could exist.
The purpose of this was to consider holding job level con-
stant throughout the analyses. Job level and job
stimulation were not related so most of the analyses were
performed as analyses of variance. Analyses Of covariance
were run when education and sex were independent variables
as job level was found to correlate with both and thus was
held constant. Additionally, years with the organization
was found to correlate with sex and was held constant
along with job level in a reanalysis of that relationship.

In an attempt to ascertain the percent of variance
in job involvement explained by the various relationships,
omega-squared (oz) was employed. Through application Of
this technique it was possible to learn which of the combi-
nations Of independent variables is most strongly
associated with job involvement (Hays, 1973).

Since the nature of the hypotheses presumes a
causal relationship between job stimulation and job
involvement, cross-lagged correlations (Lawler, 1968) were
applied. The value of this method of analysis is that it
yields inferences about which Of two correlated variables
is the causal agent; this is based on the assumption that
if variable A at time 1 is correlated with B at time 2 more
strongly than is B at time 1 with A at time 2, then the
state of A at time 1 may be influencing the state of B at

time 2. Additionally, four other correlations comprise a

37

typical cross-lagged situation, two of which are static

correlations at time 1 and time 2 (rA and rA B2) and the

131 2
remaining two are essentially test-retest reliabilities
(rAlA2 and rBle). This may be illustrated as follows in

Figure l:

 

 

Time 1 Time 2

rAlA2

Variable A Variable A
B rkig

rAl 1 rA B rAsz

2

Variable B Variable B

rBlB2

In order to infer causality of Variable A by Variable B,

the order of correlations should be as follows: rA281 >

(rAlBl = rA2B2) > rAle. Similarly, if one were to infer

causality of Variable B by Variable A, the order of corre-

lations would be rA B > (rA In this

1 2 131 = 231'

study, cross-lagged relationships were computed for the

rA2B2) > rA

total sample, the sample moderated by higher order need
strength and the sample moderated by locus of control.
Finally, a stepwise multiple regression analysis
was performed with variables found to be related to job
involvement. In such an equation, the variable that
explains the greatest amount of variance in the dependent
measure (job involvement) will enter first; the variable
that explains the greatest amount of variance in conjunc-

tion with the first will enter second, and so on. Thus

38

the variable that explains the greatest amount of variance
unexplained by the variables already in the equation enters

the equation at each step (Nie et al., 1975).

III III. IIIIIIIIII III III

RESULTS

Chapter III will report the results of the test of
hypotheses developed in Chapter I. Initially, the hypo-
theses will be restated. Then the results of the
appropriate statistical analyses will be reported. Where
there are significant results a brief statement will be
included describing them.

Hypothesis 1. Those individuals who perceive their job
as highly stimulating will be more job

involved than those who view their job as
less stimulating.

 

The summaries Of the analyses of variance and
covariance for each combination of job stimulation and
individual difference measures as well as the mean job
involvement scores for different levels of each of the
measures are presented in Tables 2-17. The results pre-
sented in these tables strongly support hypothesis 1. All
of the analyses Of variance produced significant results
(p g .001) which demonstrated that differences in job
involvement do exist among those who perceive their job as
being high on stimulation and those perceiving low stimula-

tion jobs. A check of the tables Of cell means revealed

39

40

that those who perceive their job as high on stimulation
are more job involved than those who perceive their job as
low on stimulation. The wz scores shown in these tables
range from .028 to .057, which indicated that job stimula-
tion accounted for, at most, 5.7% of the variance in job
involvement.

Hypothesis 2. Individuals who are "Internals" will be

more highly job involved that "Externals,"

regardless Of level Of perceived stimu-
lation.

 

The results presented in Tables 2 and 3 do not
support this hypothesis. The analysis of variance presented
in Table 2 indicated that no significant differences exist
on job involvement between subgroups based on locus Of
control. Table 3 illustrated that little difference exists
between Internal and External cell means. The wz score of
locus of control as presented in Table 2 showed that this
variable accounted for 0% of the variance in job involve-
ment.

Hypothesis 3. Individuals who have high belief in the
Protestant ethic will be more highly job
involved than those who place less value

in the Protestant ethic, regardless of
level of perceived job stimulation.

 

This hypothesis was not supported. The results
presented in Tables 4 and 5 demonstrated that no significant
differences exist on job involvement between believers in
the Protestant ethic and those who place less value in it.
The Protestant ethic measure accounted for 0% Of the vari-

ance in job involvement as can be seen in Table 4.

Table 2.--Summary of analysis of variance for the relation-
ship of job stimulation (A) and locus of control

(B) to job involvement.

 

Source df F w2
A 1 14.674*** .057
B 1 .412 0
A x B 1 .540 0
(MS Error) 225 (12.166)

 

***p < .001

Table 3.--Cell means and numbers of subjects per cell for
the relationship of job stimulation and locus of

control to job involvement.

 

Locus of Control

 

 

Internal External
Low 11.046 10.391
N = 65 N = 46
Job
Stimulation
High 12.500 12.530
N = 52 N = 66

 

42

Table 4.--Summary of the analysis of variance for the rela-
tionship of job stimulation (A) and belief in the
Protestant ethic (B) to job involvement.

 

 

Source df F m2
A l l6.745*** .047
B l .437 0
A x B l .117 0

(MS Error) 319 (13.465)

 

***p i .001

Table 5.--Cell means and number of subjects per cell for
the relationship of job stimulation and belief in
Protestant ethic to job involvement.

 

Protestant Ethic

 

 

Low Belief High Belief
Low 10.835 10.976
N = 85 N = 84
Job
Stimulation
12.361 12.785

High N = 61 N = 93

 

I r1 II III I‘ll ['I

43

Hypothesis 4. Individuals perceiving their job as
highly stimulating will be job involved
if they have high need strength. Low
need strength persons will not be job
involved, regardless of level of per-
ceived job stimulation.

 

The analysis of variance table presented in Table 6
does not support this hypothesis of significant interaction
effects. It can be observed, however, that main effects
for higher order need strength were present and statis-
tically significant (p i .01). Upon checking Table 7, it
can be seen that those with high need strength were more
job involved than those with low need strength, regardless
of level of job stimulation. Need strength accounted for
2.8 percent of the variance in job involvement, as is
indicated by the w2 score presented in Table 6. The com-
bined relationship of job stimulation and need strength
accounted for 7.2 percent of the variance in job involve-
ment.

Hypothesis 5. Individuals who are older will be more
highly job involved than younger

individuals, regardless Of level of
perceived job stimulation.

 

The results presented in Table 8 indicated that
significant differences (p i .001) in job involvement do
exist between age groups. In looking at Table 9, it can
be observed that job involvement went up as age increased
regardless of the level of job stimulation, thus supporting
the hypothesis. Table 8 shows that age accounted for

5.5 percent of the variance in job involvement while the

44

Table 6.—-Summary of analysis of variance for the rela-
tionship of job stimulation (A) and higher order
need strength (B) to job involvement.

 

 

 

Source df F m2
A 1 11.164*** .043
B 1 7.547** .028
A x B 1 .792 .001
(MS Error) 211 (11.086)
**p i .01

***p < .001

Table 7.--Ce11 means and number of subjects per cell for the
relationship of job stimulation and higher order
need strength to job involvement.

 

Higher Order Need Strength

 

Low Need Strength High Need Strength

 

Low 10.015 11.737
N = 66 N = 38
Job
Stimulation
. 11.977 12.866
ngh

N = 44 N = 67

 

45

Table 8.--Summary of analysis of variance for the relation-

 

 

ship of job stimulation (A) and age (B) to job
involvement.
2
Source df F m
A l l3.574*** .035
B 2 10.852*** .055
A x B 2 2.096 .006
(MS Error) 313 (12.525)

 

***p i .001

Table 9.--Cell means and number of subjects per cell for
the relationship of job stimulation and age to

job involvement.

 

 

 

Age
21-35 36-50 51+
L 9.716 11.776 12.926
Ow N = 81 N = 58 N = 27
Job
Stimulation
H. h 12.119 12.508 13.272
19 N = 59 N = 61 N = 33

 

46

combined relationship of age and job stimulation accounted
for 9.6 percent of the variance in involvement scores.

Hypothesis 6. Individuals perceiving jobs as highly
stimulating will be job involved if
highly educated. Those with less educa-
tion will not be job involved, regardless
of level of perceived job stimulation.

 

The interaction effect predicted by this hypothesis
was not supported, as is shown in Tables 10 and 11. Job
level was held constant in the analysis of covariance used
to test this hypothesis. Education accounted for 0 percent
of the variance in job involvement.

Hypothesis 7. Individuals who have been with the
organization for a longer period of time
will be more job involved than those who
have been with the company for shorter

periods, regardless of level of per-
ceived job stimulation.

 

The two-way analysis of variance presented in
Table 12 indicated that differences in level Of job involve-
ment do exist between various subgroups based on years with
organization (p i .001). Table 13 revealed that the level
of job involvement increased with years with organization,
thus supporting the hypothesis. Years with organization
accounted for 6.9 percent of the variance in job involve-
ment as is indicated by the w2 score in Table 12. The
combined relationship on job stimulation and years with
organization accounted for 10.4 percent of the variance in
job involvement.
Hypothesis 8. There will be no differences in level of
job involvement between single and

married individuals, regardless of level
of perceived job stimulation.

 

47

Table lO.--Summary of analysis of covariance for the rela-
tionship of job stimulation (A) and education
(B) to job involvement (job level held constant).

 

 

Source df F w2
A 1 15.015*** .040
B l .334 0

A x B 1 3.121 .006

(MS Error) 313 (13.114)

 

***P 3.001

Table ll.--Cell means and number of subjects per cell for
the relationship of job stimulation and educa-
tion to job involvement (job level held
constant).

 

 

 

Education
Below College College and Above

Lo 11.380 11.230

w N = 121 N = 48

Job
Stimulation

. 12.170 12.020

High

N = 107 N = 45

 

48

Table 12.--Summary of analysis of variance for the relation-

ship of job stimulation (A) and years with the
organization (B) to job involvement.

 

 

Source df F w2
A 1 12.503*** .032
B 2 l3.603*** .069
A x 2 1.468 .003

(MS Error)

314 (12.463)

 

***p i .001

Table 13.--Cell means and number of subjects per cell for

the relationship of job stimulation and years
with the organization to job involvement.

 

Years with Organization

 

 

1-5 6-10 11+
Low 9.308 10.341 12.384
N = 52 N = 41 N = 73
Job
Stimulation
. 11.486 12.379 13.133
High

N = 35 N = 29 N = 90

 

49

The analysis of variance, as presented in Table 14,
showed that no significant differences in job involvement
exist between married and unmarried people. Table 15,
which examined the cell means, confirmed that no signifi-
cant differences exist when examining the effects of marital
status on job involvement. Thus, the data presented
supported this hypothesis. The variable marital status
accounted for .3 percent of the variance in job involvement,
as is presented in Table 14.

Hypothesis 9. Males will be more job involved than

females, regardless of perceived job
stimulation level.

 

A two-way analysis of covariance with job level
held constant was initially used to test this hypothesis.
Results, as presented in Table 16, showed a main effect
for sex (p i .05). Table 17 revealed that males had
higher levels of job involvement than females. The hypo-
thesis was thus supported. Sex accounted for 1.3 percent
of the variance in job involvement. When sex was combined
with job stimulation, 5.5 percent of the variance was
accounted for.

A reanalysis of this hypothesis was performed
which held both job level and years with organization
constant after a check of the data showed a significant
correlation between sex and years with organization. The
data presented in Table 18 and 19 demonstrated that no
significant sex differences exist when those variables were

held constant, thus not supporting the hypothesis. The

50

Table l4.--Summary of analysis Of variance for the relation-

 

 

 

ship Of job stimulation (A) and marital status
(B) to job involvement.
2
Source df F m
A 1 15.492*** .046
B 1 2.013 .003
A x B l .447 0
(MS Error) 297 (13.338)
***p i .001

Table 15.--Cell means and number of subjects per cell for
the relationship Of job stimulation and marital
status to job involvement.

 

Marital Status

 

 

Single Married
10.610 11.041
LOW N = 41 N - 121
Job
Stimulation
High 11.741 12.857
N = 27 N = 112

 

51

Table l6.-—Summary of analysis of covariance for the rela-
tionship of job stimulation (A) and sex (B) to
job involvement (job level held constant).

 

 

 

Source df F w2
A 1 15.500*** .042
B 1 5.349* .013
A x B 1 .489 0
(MS Error) 314 (12.991)
*p i .05

***p < .001

Table l7.--Cell means and number of subjects per cell for
the relationship of job stimulation and sex to
job involvement (job level held constant).

 

 

 

Sex
Male Female
L w 11.485 10.905
0 N = 128 N = 40
Job
Stimulation

. 12.230 11.700

High

N = 138 N = 36

 

52

Table 18.--Summary of analysis of covariance for the rela-
tionship of job stimulation (A) and sex (B) to

job involvement (job level and years with

organization held constant).

 

 

Source df F m2
A l ll.305*** .028
B 1 1.229 .001
A x B 1 .094 0
(MS Error) 311 (12.202)

 

***p i .001

Table l9.--Cell means and number of subjects per cell for
relationship of job stimulation and sex to job
involvement (job level and years with organiza-

tion held constant).

 

 

 

Sex

Male Female

L 11.475 11.195

0” N = 128 N = 40

Job
Stimulation

H' h 12.145 11.865

19 N = 118 N = 36

 

53

percent of variance accounted for by sex in the reanalysis
is .1 percent. The combination of sex and job stimulation
accounted for 2.9 percent of the job involvement variance.

Hypothesis 10. There is a causal relationship between
job stimulation and job involvement,
with perceived level of job stimulation
leading to job involvement at a later
point in time (4 month lag, 8 month lag).

 

This hypothesis, tested by a series of cross-lagged
analyses between time 1 and time 2 (Table 20), time 2 and
time 3 (Table 21), and time 1 to time 3 (Table 22), was not
supported for the total sample, the sample moderated by need
strength nor the sample moderated by locus of control over

any of the time periods.

Multiple Regression

 

Upon completion of these analyses, it was decided
to place all of the variables showing significant relation-
ships with job involvement into a stepwise multiple
regression equation in order to see which of the four vari-
ables explained the most variance in job involvement. The
order of the variables and their beta weights (in paren-
theses) were (1) Years with organization (.20), (2) Higher
order need strength (.22), (3) Job stimulation (.20), and
(4) Age (.11). These four variables combined accounted for

23.8 percent of the variance in job involvement.

Summary

The analyses performed supported the following

hypotheses which predicted that:

54

VI
a
4:
4:

H00.

so. v a.

mmml Noa n Z

 

 

 

 

 

*NN. 880m. «mm. «8mm. «eon. «va. mascumuxm

*NN. Nimm. «mm. NNmN. «Nam. «8mm. mHMCHOUCH

«ma. «amm. «Hm. ««mN. «imm. «New. numcwuum Ummz 30A

as. he. so. .Inm. «.GG. .Imm. numcmuum 6002 zoom
NNNN. ¥«mm. teem. «Nam. «*mm. Neom. mamfimm HMDOB
Hmmflu NmadH Nmmdh Hdeu NmHmH NdeH

mCOHHMHGHHOU WCOHHMHTHHOU meHHHflQMHHmm HOHMHmvaE

ommmmanmmouu

 

.Amms chaos «V

N OEHB paw a wEHB um>o Houusoo mo msOOH we omumumooe mHmEmm

one can zumcmuum poms Hmouo “mama: an owumumoofi mHmEmm may .mHmEmm Hmuou

Mom Amy ucwEm>Ho>CH now new Amv coflumaseflum non romance mammamcm Hmmsmuun.om magma

55

 

 

 

 

 

Hoo. w 6..
Ho. w 6.
ommn on u 2
ON. 8mm. «*ov. tom. Nemm. NNHB. mamcumpxm
mm. ea. tom. 4mm. exam. *«Hs. mascumucH
ma. oH. «om. 4am. .4oo. 44mm. numcwupm 6002 30a
oo. oo. .om. oo. ..mo. ..oo. numcmuum ommz zoom
«om. «Hm. «8Hm. «New. «gown . News. mHoEmm Hmuoe
mmmeu mmmmu mmmmu mmmau mmmmu mamas
HODMHOUOE
mcoflumHmHuoo mcoHumamHHoo mmHuHHHQMHHmm
Ommmmalmmouo Oflumum

 

.AmmH nucoE «V m mafia on N mafia Hm>o Houucoo mo msOoH we omumumooa mHoEmm
one was eumcmuum ommc umouo umrmwe an OODOHOUOE mHmEmm may .mHmEmm Hmuou
How Amy usmEm>Ho>co now was Amy coflumasEHum now cmmzumn mommamcm Hamsmonn.am magma

56

o*«

Vl

Hoo.
o8

VI

Ho.

mmml on u z

 

 

 

 

 

ha. om. «Nov. «kmm. «Nmm. £85m. mamcumuxm
NH. 50. New. ¥«mm. *«mw. kamm. mHMCHODCH
so. no. .om. 44om. .4oo. .«om. gumcmuum @002 30a
as. ms. .om. ..km. ..oo. ..~m. ouoomuum ommz zoom
ms. ms. ..Hm. ..Hm. ..ko. «.om. mamsmm H6609
Amman mmaau mmmau Hmaau mmamu mason
I . Houmumooz
mcoHumHmuuoo mcofiumamuuoo meuHHfiQMHHmm
ommmmaummouu ooumum

 

.Amma nucOE mv m mafia on H oEflB um>o Houusoo mo msooa an omumumooa mHoEmm
on» com sumcwuum pom: Hmono Mormon an pmumumooe mamfimm mew

MOM Amy

.mHoEmm Hmpou

ucmEm>Ho>CH non pom Adv coflumasfioum now cmmzumn mHmMHmcm Hamomull.mm mange

57
l. A significant relationship exists between high job
stimulation and job involvement
5. Older workers would be more highly job involved

7. The longer a worker has been in the organization,
the more job involved he would be

8. No differences exist in job involvement between
single and married individuals

A significant main effect exists for the relation—
ship between higher order need strength and job involvement,
but not the predicted (hypothesis 4) interaction between
need strength and job stimulation on job involvement.

No support was found for the following hypotheses
which predicted that:

2. Internals would be more job involved than Externals

3. High believers in the Protestant ethic would be
more job involved than low believers

6. The interaction of more education and high job
stimulation would relate to job involvement (with
job level held constant)

9. Males would be more job involved than females (with
job level and years with organization held constant)

10. Job stimulation leads to job involvement
As a final check of the relative importance of those
variables (years with organization, age, job stimulation,
and higher order need strength) found to be related to job
involvement, a stepwise multiple regression was performed
which demonstrated that these variables combined accounted

for 23.8 percent of the variance in job involvement.

DISCUSSION

General Findings

 

The data generally seem to support the View of the
theorists who espouse the notion that both individual
difference and situational variables relate to job
involvement. The present study demonstrated that the two
types of variables have a joint (additive) effect, as
opposed to a contingent effect, in relation to job involve-
ment. It cannot be conclusively stated from this study,
however, which of the two types of variables is more
strongly associated with job involvement since only 23.8
percent of the variance was accounted for by variables
measured.

Results presented here in regard to the relation-
ship of job involvement to demographic characteristics such
as age and years with organization do support previous
research findings. Many studies (Schwyhart and Smith, 1972;
Jones, James, and Bruni, 1975; Hall and Mansfield, 1975;
Schuler, 1975; and Lodahl and Kejner, 1965) have demon-

strated that older workers are more job involved than

58

59

younger employees. The present study is in accord with the
literature in this area.

The findings of a positive relationship between
years with the organization and job involvement is in
agreement with previous studies (Jones, James, and Bruni,
1975; Lodahl and Kejner, 1965) which found positive corre-
lations between job involvement and years in pay grade and
time on job respectively for samples of civil service and
assembly work employees.

The predicted relationship of an interaction between
level of education and job stimulation with job involvement
did not occur. Perhaps such a relationship might occur by
using only relevant education (Schuler, 1975) as a pre-
dictor. Generally though, past research (Siegel and Ruh,
1973; Jones, James, and Bruni, 1975) has not shown a direct
relationship between education and job involvement and thus
this study adds to the consensus in this area.

The present study eventually did not find signifi-
cant sex differences in terms of job involvement. Initially
with only job level held constant, males appeared more job
involved than females, thus giving some support to sociali-
zation theory. However, when it was found that males had
been in the organization for a longer time than females,
this variable was also held constant. Thus, when holding
job level and years with the organization constant, sex was

not significantly related to job involvement.

60

Finally, in terms of demographic variables, marital
status was not found to relate to job involvement. Pre-
vious work (Lodahl and Kejner, 1965) similarly found no
relationship between these two variables for separate
samples of nursing personnel and engineers.

Turning from background to personality variables,
the present research found a significant relationship
between higher order need importance and job involvement.
This finding supports previous studies (Maurer, 1969; Hall,3
Schneider, and Nygren, 1970) which found job involvement I
related only to higher order need importance. ,The hypo-
thesized interaction between high need strength and high
job stimulation with job involvement did not occur. This
finding does not support the Hackman and Lawler (1971)
finding that individuals with high need strength respond
more positively to high stimulation jobs than do indi-
viduals who have low need strength. Differences between
the two studies may be traced to two areas. The Hackman
and Lawler total sample had a mean need strength score of
6.01 out of 7.0 which appears to be unusually high. The
sample in the present study had a mean need strength score
of 4.4 out of 7.0. Secondly, Hackman and Lawler (1971)
trichotomized their sample, designating the upper third as
"high need strength" (mean score = 6.78) third as "low need
strength" (mean score = 5.09). The present research
dichotomized the sample into high (mean score = 5.37) and

low (mean score = 3.52) subgroups. Thus Hackman and

61

Lawler's (1971) low need strength group appears to be vir-
tually equivalent to the present study's high need strength
group. It seems evident that the predicted interaction did
not occur for this reason.

The lack of a relationship between Internals on the
locus of control scale and job involvement did not support
previous findings (Runyon, 1973; Evans, 1971). A conclusive
finding of the present study, contrary to Runyon (1973), was
that job involvement was not primarily a function of the
Internal-External dimension of personality. The education
level of this sample was not very high and the items
presented in this scale were thought-provoking, requiring
some degree of comprehension. Such items may not have been
fully understood and might have been answered randomly by
some people in the sample. The present study's use of a
"strongly agree" to "strongly disagree" response format for
presenting locus of control items could have also influenced
responses. Previous studies (e.g., Baird, 1974) have pre-
sented these items in a forced-choice format, which was
used in the original presentation of this scale (Rotter,
1966). Finally, cultural differences should be taken into
account. It is possible that Canadian workers respond
differently to items measuring this dimension of personal-
ity.

Some of the above statements can be repeated in
discussing the lack of a significant relationship between

the Protestant ethic and job involvement. Cultural

62

differences stand out as a possible reason for lack of
significance. The concept of a work ethic may be inter-
preted differently by peOple of various cultures. Further,
the items were long and may not have been fully understood
by the sample. It is also possible some of the scale items
measured areas conceptually dissimilar to those of the job
involvement scale. The internal consistency level of the
Protestant ethic measure is not very high considering the
number of items in it and may be tapping different dimen-
sions. A comparison of this measure of the Protestant
ethic to the Blood (1969) measure used by Ruh and White
(1974) in correlating job involvement with belief in the
Protestant ethic might be in order.

Thus, the present study has demonstrated that some
individual difference variables do, in fact, relate to job
involvement. Additionally, though, data presented here
support the notion that perceived job_stimulatigp (a
situational variable) relates to job involvement. It was 9‘
found that those individuals perceiving their job as highly I
stimulating are job involved. These results support past I
studies (Hackman and Lawler, 1971; Brief and Aldag, 1975) I
which found job involvement positively related to per-
ceived levels of the components of job stimulation. It is) .
thus possible that the way in which persons perceive the
characteristics of their job gives some indication; although

not strong, of whether an individual is job involved.

63

The final hypothesis tested for a suggested causal
relationship (Hackman and Lawler, 1971) with perceived job
stimulation causing job involvement. Testing this hypo-
thesis for the sample as a whole, no such relationship was
present. The sample was then split into high and low need
strength subgroups with no apparent causal relationships
present. Finally the sample was split into Internals and
Externals based on locus of control scores, with no causal
relationship between job stimulation and job involvement
found. Thus, for the present sample, such a causal rela-

tionship was not present.

it has been found that the job involved worker in the
I
present sample is one who perceives the job as highly

'L-fi

stimulating, has a high desire for higher order need

,1». “Mr-.- '-

To briefly summarize the discussion to this point,I
I

satisfaction, has been in the organization for a longer
time andgis older than non-involved workers. The present
findings further indicate that marital status, education
(holding job level constant), sex (holding job level and
years with organization constant), belief in the Protestant
ethic and the locus of control aspect of the personality

have no effect on one's job involvement.

Practical Significance

 

Throughout the present study, statistically signifi-
cant relationships have been shown to exist between job

involvement and various variables. It should not, however,

64

be assumed that these findings are practically significant.

Perhaps the most practically significant finding is that

"“ ’Io...‘ .‘
.4“:

the true nature of job involvement is not solely inherent

in the variables tested in the present research. When one

,—~"'V
._,.__-——-
___..-‘

considers that only a small (23.8%) portion of the variance
in job involvement was accounted for by variables found to
statistically significantly relate to it, one must conclude
that the answer lies elsewhere.

With this is mind, it would be of interest to con-
sider the making of staffing decisions in industry. Based

on findings of the present study, it appears that the

1 aw.- w~-—~a—“W*— -9; .—.n

business world should think twice about nOt hiring (or I

M...“ (.1

 

_’———

dismissing) a middle-aged individual. Older workers, in \
this sample:Etended to be more job involved than their I
younger counterparts. Similarly, those workers who had I
been with the organization for longer lengths of time were
more involved in their job than those who had not been in I
the ministry as long.

If a decision in regard to an open job positiOn
must be made, it would be of some help to know how the
workers in question perceive their present job. Those who
find their present assignment highly stimulating should not)
be moved if at all possible, while an individual who finds 1
his present position unstimulating should be considered for
transfer in the hopes of changing his attitude.

Additionally, the knowledge of an individual's

higher order need strength may also give some indications

65

as to a person's job involvement. Individuals with high
need strength may be job involved on their present job and I
should perhaps remain on it, while those with low need 3
strength might be better candidates for a change Of scenery I
if the Opportunity arises in hopes of increasing their
involvement.

Of major importance is the finding that, all things
being equal, sex differences do not exist in terms of job
involvement. The hiring of women into various positions
has been a questioned past practice and results presented
here show that both sexes may be equally involved in jobs.
Job involvement has been found to be significantly” I
related to both turnover (Farris, 1971; Wickert, 1951;
Siegel and Ruh, 1973) and absenteeism (Patchen, 1965), and
it would thus make logical sense for an organization to be
aware of the job involvement levels of various individuals.
Through findings of the present study, it has been seen
that the job involved worker is one who:

1. Is older

2. Has been with the organization longer
3. Has high need strength

4. Perceives the job as high stimulating

As was indicated, however, these areas are only a
beginning in terms of drawing a sketch of the job involved

individual.

66

Limitations

 

When interpreting the results of the present study,
one must keep in mind the limitations of it. One limita—
tion of this study is narrow range of job levels represented
by the sample. As was seen in Table l, the bulk of the
sample fell into two classifications, clerical workers and
technical workers. Future studies should aim for good
representation from all job levels for purposes of compari-
son.

Another limitation here is that cultural differences
may have occurred in terms of responses to many of the
scales. Studies cited throughout this paper have, for the
most part, employed samples from the United States while 7
this was a sample of Canadian workers. Perhaps some of the
differences could be observed by giving the questionnaire
used here to American workers employed in similar positions.

A third limitation is the inability to make a con-
clusive statement about all the components of job
involvement. Only 23.8 percent of the variance in job
involvement was accounted for by variables in this study
and thus it cannot be definitively stated that job involve-
ment is most affected by individual difference variables
or situational variables.

A final limitation of this study may have been in
its use of a self-report rather than objective measure of
job characteristics. Jenkins et a1. (1975) criticize the

excessive use of self-report job characteristics in

67

organizational research due to problems of bias inherent
in these methodologies. They suggest on-site observation
of job characteristics by trained observers as a feasible
alternative. Such objective measures of jobs were not
available for this study, but past research (Baird, 1974;
Hackman and Lawler, 1971; Hackman and Oldham, 1975) has
demonstrated fairly high correlations between perceived
and objective reports of job characteristics. Therefore,
it is not clear that the use of task perceptions is in

fact a problem here.

Future Research

 

Future research should measure additional variables
which may be related to job involvement in order to get a
better picture of the job involved worker. Such variables
are participation in decision-making (Siegel and Ruh, 1973),
supervision (Lodahl and Kejner, 1965) and supervisory style
(Runyon, 1973), satisfaction, task repetitiveness and role
ambiguity (Schuler, 1975).

Perhaps other forms of involvement may give us a
further clue as to the nature Of job involvement. Such
areas could include family involvement (Gannon and Hen-
drickson, 1973), company and product involvement (Lodahl,
1964), community, religious and recreational involvement
(Bray et al., 1974). It is possible that the job involved
person is one who is involved in his work at the cost of

all other forms of potential involvement. It is perhaps

68

the case, though, that one may be job involved because his
job relates to outside activities. This areas is worth
exploring.

Another area open to exploration is that of
reanalyzing measures of job involvement. While Lodahl and
Kejner's (1965) scale has been the most widely used measure
of job involvement, it may not be the most satisfactory way
of looking at this construct. Wood (1974) found this scale
to be multidimensional in nature and thus it may be looking
at too general an area. A plethora of definitions has been
used in past studies in regard to "job involvement." It is
perhaps due to the unclarity of the scale applied that such
confusion has resulted. A comparison of the Lodahl and
Kejner (1965) scale with other measures of involvement such
as Dubin's (1956) central life interests scale, Maurer's
(1969) work role involvement measure, Faunce's (1959)
measure of occupational involvement, Patchen's (1970)
"general interest" measure and Mannheim's (1975) work
centrality measure might enable researchers to tie together
the various elements of job involvement, thus creating

more clarity in this area of research.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Argyris, C. Integrating the individual and the organiza-
tion. New York: Wiley, 1964.

 

Baird, L. The relationship of task and role characteristics

 

to satisfactiOn and performance in a state agency.
Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State
University, 1975.

 

Bass, B. M. Organizational psychology. Boston: Allyn &
Bacon, 1965.

 

Bass, B. M., and Barrett, G. V. Man, work and organiza—
tions. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, INc., 1972.

 

Blauner, R. Alienation and freedom. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1964.

 

Blood, M. R. Work values and job satisfaction. Journal of
Applied PsychologY: 1969, 5; (6), 456-59.

 

 

Blood, M. R., and Hulin, G. L. Alienation, environmental
characteristics and worker responses. Journal of
Applied Psychologxr 1967, 51 (3), 284-90.

 

 

Bray, D. W.; Campbell, R. J.; and Grant, D. L. Formative
years in business: a longeterm A.T.&T. study of
managerial lives. New York: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., 1974.

 

 

 

Brief, A. P., and Aldag, R. J. Employee reactions to job
characteristics: A constructive replication.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 62 (2), 182-86.

 

Dubin, R. Industrial workers' worlds: A study of the
"central life interests" of industrial workers.
Social Problems, 1956, 3, 131-42.

 

69

70

Farris, G. F. A predictive study of turnover. Personnel
Psychology: 1971, £1 (2), 311-28.

 

 

Faunce, W. Occupational involvement and the selective
testing of self-esteem. American Sociology
Association Meeting, Chicago, 1959.

 

 

Gannon, M. J., and Hendrickson, D. H. Career orientation
and job satisfaction among working wives. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 1973, 51 (3), 339—40.

 

Glass, G. V., and Stanley, J. C. Statistical methods in
education and_psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1970.

 

 

Gurin, G.; Veroff, J.; and Feld, S. Americans view their
mental health. New York: Basic Books, 1960.

 

 

Hackman, J. R., and Lawler, E. E. Employee reactions to
job characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology
Monograph, 1971, 52, 259-86.

 

 

Hackman, J. R., and Oldham, G. R. Development of the job

diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology,
1975, 62 (2), 159-70.

Hall, D. T., and Goodale, J. G. Causes and conseguences of
psychological success in work settings. Paper
presented at Annual Meeting of the American
Psychological Association, Chicago, 1975.

 

 

Hall, D. T., and Mansfield, R. Organizational and indi-
vidual response to external stress. Administrative
Science Quarterly, 1971, 1§_(4), 533-v7}

 

 

Hall, D. T., and Mansfield, R. Relationships of age and
seniority with career variables of engineers and
scientists. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975,
60 (2), 201-10.

 

Hall, D. T.; Schneider, B.; and Nygren, H. T. Personal
factors in organizational identification. Admini—
strative Science Quarterly, 1970, 12, 176-90.

 

Hays, W. L. Statistics for psychologists. New York: Holt
Rinehart and Winston, 1963.

 

Hulin, C. L., and Blood, M. R. Job enlargement, indi-
vidual differences, and worker responses.
Psychology Bulletin, 1968, 69 (1), 41-65.

 

Issac ,

Jones,

Jenkins,

Lawler,

Lawler,
Lawler,

Lawler,

Lodahl,

Lodahl,

71

S., and Michael, W. B. Handbook in research and

 

evaluation. San Diego, CA.: Robert R. Knapp, 1971.

 

A. P.; James, L. R.; and Bruni, J. R. Perceived

leadership behavior and employee confidence in the
leader as moderated by job involvement. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 1975, §Q_(l), 146-49.

 

G. D., Jr.; Nadler, D. A.; Lawler, E. E. III; and
Cammann, C. Standardizing observations: an
approach to measuring the nature of the jobs.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 1975, 62_(2),
l7l-8.l

 

E. E., III. A correlational-causal analysis of the
relationship between expectancy attitudes and job
performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1968,
52 (6), 462-68.

 

E. E., III. Job design and employee motivation.
Personnel Psychology, 1969, 22, 426-35.

 

E. E., III. Motivation in work organizations.
Monterey, CA.: Brooks7Cole Publishing Company, 1973.

 

E. E., III., and Hall, D. T. Relationship of job
characteristics to job involvement, satisfaction,
and intrinsic motivation. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 1970, 54 (4), 305-312.

 

 

T. M. Patterns of job attitudes in two assembly
technologies. Administrative Science Quarterly,
1964, g, 482-519.

 

T. M., and Kejner, M. The definition and measure-
ment of job involvement. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 1965, 42_(1), 24-33.

 

 

Mannheim, B. A comparative study of work centrality, job

Maslow,

Maurer,

rewards and satisfaction. Sociology_of Work and
Occupations, 1975, 2 (1), 79-102.

 

 

A. H. Motivation and personalipy (2nd edition).
New York: Harper & Row, 1970.

 

J. G. Work role involvement of industrial super-
visors. East Lansing: MSU Business Studies, 1969.

 

McGregor, D. The human side of enterprise. New York:

 

McGraw-Hill, 1960.

72

Nie, N. H.: Hull, C. H.; Jenkins, J. G.; Steinbrenner, K.;
and Bent, D. H. Statistical package for the
social sciences (2nd edition). New York: McGraw-
Hill Book Company, 1975.

 

 

Patchen, M. Some questionnaire measures of employee
motivation and morale. Institute for Social
Research Monograph, 1965, 41, 1-70.

 

 

Rotter, J. B. Generalized expectancies for internal vs.
external control of reinforcement. Psychological
Monographs, 1966, g9 (1, Whole No. 609).

 

 

Ruh, R. A., and White, J. K. Job involvement: a construct
validity study. Paper presented at Annual Meeting
of the American Psychological Association, New
Orleans, 1974.

 

 

Runyon, K. E. Some interactions between personality vari-
ables and management styles. Journal of Applied

 

 

Schneider, 3.; Hall, D. T.; and Nygren, H. T. Self image
and job characteristics as correlates of changing
organizational identification. Human Relations,
1971, fig (5), 397-416.

 

Schuler, R. S. Determinants of_job involvement: Individual
vs. organizational: An extension of the literature.
Paper presented at Annual Meeting of the Academy
of Management, New Orleans, 1975.

 

 

Schwyhart, W. R., and Smith, P. C. Factors in the job
involvement of middle managers. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 1972, 56 (3), 227-33.

 

 

Siegel, A. L., and Ruh, R. A. Job involvement, participa-
tion in decision making, personal background and
job behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human
Performance, 1973, 2, 318-27.

 

 

Siegel, L. Industrial psychology (Revised edition).
Homewood, 111.: Richard D. Irwin, Inc., 1969.

 

Turner, A. N., and Lawrence, P. R. Industrial jobs and
the worker. Boston: Harvard University Graduate
School of Business Administration, 1965.

 

 

Vroom, V. H. Ego-involvement, job satisfaction, and job
performance. Personnel Psychology, 1962, 15,
159-77.

 

73

Wanous, J. P. Individual differences and reactions to job
characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology,
1974, 55 (5), 616-22.

 

Weber, M. The protestant ethic and the spirit of capital-
ism. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1958.

Wickert, F. R. Turnover, and employees' feelings of ego-
involvement in the day-to-day operations of a
company. Personnel Psychology, 1951, A (2),
185-97.

 

Wollack, 8.; Goodale, J. G.; Wijting, J. P.; and Smith,
P. D. Development of the survey of work values.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 1971, 55 (4), 331-38.

Wood, D. A. Effect of worker orientation differences on
job attitude correlates. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 1974, 59 (1), 54-60.

 

 

"7'11 1111111111111111“