American Psychological Association



Supplemental MaterialsOne Hundred Years of Work Design Research: Looking Back and Looking Forwardby S. K. Parker et al., 2017, Journal of Applied Psychology Resource 1: Glossary of TermsAutonomous work group (also semi-autonomous work group, self-managing team): A group of interdependent members who have collective autonomy over aspects of their work, such as when and how to carry out tasks and which tasks are allocated to which members. Challenge demands (or challenge stressors): Stress-inducing work demands that also have the potential to promote mastery, personal growth, or future demands. Examples include workload, time pressure, and responsibility.Empowerment (psychological): A motivational construct that captures individuals’ experience of meaning, impact, self-determination, and competence. Empowerment (structural): Structures, policies, and practices that delegate power and authority to employees.Hindrance demands: Stress-inducing demands that have the potential to thwart growth, learning, and attainment of goals. Examples include including organizational politics, role ambiguity, and role conflict.Interdependence: Degree to which individuals need to work closely with others to carry out their job or work role.Job autonomy: Degree to which the job provides discretion over daily work decisions, work methods, and work scheduling, such as when and how to do tasks.Job demands: Aspects of jobs that require high levels of, or sustained, physical, mental, or emotional effort (e.g., time pressure, emotional demands). Job enlargement: Expanding the content of jobs to include additional tasks.Job enrichment: Increasing the motivational value of work, such as enhancing autonomy over work planning and execution by giving responsibility for decisions normally undertaken by supervisors. Job rotation: Rotating employees from one job to another job.Job feedback. Degree to which job incumbent obtains clear information about his/her effectiveness whilst performing their work tasks/ job. Job identity (or task identity): Degree to which a job requires completion of a “whole” job, from beginning to end.Job resources: Aspects of the job that help achieve goals, personal development, and help deal with job demands (e.g., job autonomy, social support).Job significance (or task significance): Degree to which a job has a substantial impact on the lives or work of others. Job variety (or task variety): Degree to which a job involves a variety of activities.Relational work design: Designing roles to provide greater opportunities for employees to interact with others, such as the beneficiaries of the work.Roles: Expected patterns of behavior that arise from social processes and interactions.Role conflict: Incompatible demands from different role senders.Role ambiguity (or low role clarity): Lack of clarity about role expectations.Scientific management: A system (introduced by Fredrick Taylor) in which managers analyze tasks, break them into simplified elements, train employees to perform the elements, and then closely monitor employee compliance with simplified tasks. Skill utilization: Extent to which the job allows the incumbent an opportunity to use their skills, abilities, and talents.Skill variety: Extent to which a job involves using a number of different skills.Social support: Provision of emotional or instrumental help, typically from a peer or supervisor.Sociotechnical systems (STS) theory and principles: Idea that the technical and social aspects of work should be jointly optimized when designing work, with principles such as that work should provide variety, allow learning, include autonomous decision-making, offer social support, be relevant, and lead to a desirable future for incumbents.Online Resource 2: Mapping the Work Design LiteratureFirst, we sought to obtain an appropriate set of work design articles that was used in both the next steps. Second, we identified influential articles. Third, we conducted scientific mapping. Each of these steps is elaborated next. 1. Data set of work design articles To obtain a total data set of work design articles, an initial set of results was obtained using a set of search terms in the Psycinfo and Web of Science database. We used Psycinfo (which includes many psychology journals) as well as Web of Science to ensure comprehensive coverage and to ensure a match with Humphrey et al. (2007). The resulting set of records was very large (>50,000 abstracts in Web of Science). Only 500 and 200 records at a time (Web of Science and Psycinfo, respectively) can be exported from the databases to separate files, which then have to be aggregated into a single file. Given this limitation, >50,000 records was not a workable quantity. Accordingly, some search terms were modified to make them more work specific. The final search terms that we used were: Job/work design, job enlargement, job/work enrichment, job/work characteristic, task attribute, job perception, enriched job, taylorism, job simplification, simplified jobs, mechanistic job design, motivating work, deskilling, job variety, task variety, skill variety, job feedback, job autonomy, job control, job significance, task significance, job identity, job scope, job/work complexity, job demand, role demand, role overload, work overload, work load, work demands, cost-responsibility, role clarity, role ambiguity, autonomous work team/group, autonomous work group, self-managing teams/groups, semi-autonomous team/group, group work design, self-leading team, self-leading groups, team design, job crafting, i-deals, role innovation, virtual work/team, job share, flex time, JCM, Herzberg two-factor theory, motivator-hygiene theory, structural/team empowerment, quality circles, scientific management, task/job interdependence, work interdependence, social contact, emotional demands, time pressure, attentional demand, cognitive demand, problem solving demand, role conflict, job meaningfulness, work meaningfulness, experienced responsibility, knowledge of results, physical demands, task revision, sociotechnical systems, job quality, job diagnostic, job descriptive index, multiskilling, job/work content, job/work conditions, job/work dimensions, job/work social support, task identity, psychological states. This search resulted in a more workable set of records of approximately 25,000 records. These records were screened to eliminate duplicate records from the set, to remove clearly irrelevant records, and to delete the following types of records: books, conference proceedings, and non-English publications. The resulting set was 17,874 records.Next, we created a more focused data set by concentrating only on records from 70 psychology and management journals. Specifically, we chose OS/OB/HRM/IR journals listed in the Harzing list, plus any additional journals listed in Peters et al. (2014) or in Zickar and Highhouse (2001). The resulting 5,708 records were the psychology/management work design articles that we used in to identify the most influential articles (Table 1 in the article) and which we used in the main scientific mapping exercise (Figure 2 in the article). We also created from the psychology/management data set a further subset of articles: those published in the Journal of Applied Psychology. These records were used in the JAP scientific map (Online Resource 2).2. Identification of the Most Influential ArticlesAs noted above, to identify the most important work design articles, we focused on 5,708 journal articles on the topic of work design within the field of management and psychology. We narrowed this list further by including only those articles published before 2010 that had at least 100 citations (Web of Science), and those articles between 2010 and 2015 identified as “highly cited” papers. From this list of >500 articles, we identified those “influential articles that took the field in new directions.” In making these judgements, although we considered citations, we did not rely on citations alone. First, citations are biased from a temporal perspective, underestimating the impact of early papers (when the field was smaller and so papers were cited less) and more recent papers (which have not had time to be cited). Second, citations can be biased from a cultural perspective. Consequently, we selected articles as influential articles to be those that we judged, using both citations and our own professional expertise, to be an article or book that has shaped or extended work design research in a significant way. We excluded from the list:measure development studies, unless they explicitly took the field in a new direction;reviews and meta analyses, unless they explicitly took the field in a new direction;practical applications of work design;applications of work design theory to other management/ psychology research (e.g., work design as one antecedent among many in predicting a particular outcome); andimportant books or book chapters (these were excluded because of their very large number, which would have expanded the list considerably).The identification of the most influential articles naturally involves a degree of judgement that cannot be readily quantified. The process of selection involved the first author making an initial recommendation of approximately 70 articles, using a combination of citations and her own judgment. Both the second and third author inspected the list and identified whether they agreed or disagreed, and each author identified any additional articles they believed should be included. We then settled on 35 articles for which we had clear and shared agreement. 3. Scientific MappingWe used VOSviewer (see ) to conduct scientific mapping on the 5,708 articles in the psychology/management field (see above). VOSviewer has validated procedures for term extraction and selection, visual mapping of relatedness, and clustering of terms. Consistent with Lee et al. (2014), we used the default settings in the software, which generally represents “the best practice in the science mapping literature.” The first step in the mapping process involved identifying “noun phrases” (groups of nouns and preceding adjectives) that occur in the abstract or title of at least 10 articles. Generic nouns like “reader” or “journal” were removed, as they do not help distinguish topics. Other terms relevant to the method of data analysis (e.g., “regression”), approach (e.g., “cross-sectional study”) were also removed. In addition, synonyms were grouped together, including different spelling of the same term. For example, organizational citizenship behavior, citizenship, citizenship behavior with the various spellings were coded as “citizenship behavior.” The relevance of the terms was then computed, and the relatedness was assessed using the association strength measure, which refers to the ratio between the number of co-occurrence of two terms relative to the expected number of co-occurrences of the two terms. Association strength measures were used as input for the VOS mapping technique, which is a two-dimensional depiction of term relatedness. Tables A and B show summaries of the cluster maps obtained for the scientific mapping of the psychology/management work design research and the JAP work design research, respectively. Figure A shows the scientific map generated using the JAP work design articles only. Figures B and C show density maps for the scientific mapping of the psychology/management work design research and the JAP work design research, respectively. In the density maps, those topics that have been investigated most are shown in red.ReferencesLee, C. I., Felps, W., & Baruch, Y. (2014). Toward a taxonomy of career studies through bibliometric visualization. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 85, 339–351.Peters, K., Daniels, K., Hodgkinson, G. P., & Haslam, S. A. (2014). Experts’ judgments of management journal quality: An identity concerns model. Journal of Management, 40, 1785–1812.Van Eck, N. J., Waltman, L., Dekker, R., & van den Berg, J. (2010). A comparison of two techniques for bibliometric mapping: Multidimensional scaling and VOS. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61, 2405–2416.Waltman, L., van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. (2010). A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. Journal of Informetrics, 4, 629–635.Zickar, M. J., & Highhouse, S. (2001). Measuring prestige of journals in industrial-organizational psychology. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist, 38, 29–36.Table SA Clusters of Research Topics Identified From Scientific Mapping of Work Design Articles in the Psychology and Management LiteratureClusterLabelDescription of clusterDefining work design termsOutcome terms1 (red)Sociotechnical and AWGsSociotechnical systems-oriented work design (e.g., teams), as well as broader, more contextualized, management-oriented conceptsTeam, work organization, self-managing team, group work, empowerment, interdependence, and autonomous work groupTeam performance/effectiveness, innovation, competitive advantage2 (green)Job characteristics modelJob characteristics concepts with emphasis on motivational outcomes, with some link to the job analytic perspective.Job characteristics, feedback, task variety, task significance, JCMJob satisfaction 3 (blue)Job demands-control modelJob demands-control work design with emphasis on mental/physical health outcomesJob demand, job stress, job strain, health, work load, fatigue, applied ergonomics, recoveryJob demand, job stress, job strain, health, work load, fatigue, applied ergonomics, recovery5 (pink)Job demands-resources modelKey variables in the job demands/resources model, with focus on burnout and engagement as outcomesJob resources, emotional demands, work-family interfaceExhaustion, burnout, engagement4 (yellow)Role theory Focus on role ambiguity and conflict, but also role processes Role ambiguity, role conflict personality, role perceptionsSelf-efficacy, newcomer socializationTable SB Clusters of Research Topics Identified From Scientific Mapping of Work Design Articles in the Journal of Applied PsychologyCluster labelWork design termsOutcome termsLink to clusters from Table A 1 (green)Job characteristics modelJob characteristics, job diagnostic survey, skill variety, job feedback, job complexity, job enrichmentJob satisfaction, effort, attitudeThis cluster is similar to the job characteristics cluster referred to in Table 1, albeit fewer terms and it includes team.2 (yellow)Role theoryRole ambiguity, role conflict, role clarityOrganizational commitmentThis is similar to, albeit narrower than, the role variables (yellow) cluster3 (purple)Job demands-control/resources modelsJob demand, job control, job resources, job stressor, work load, role overloadExhaustion, health, job strain, job stressThis cluster combined the job demands-control cluster (blue) and the job demands-resources cluster (pink), although each is narrower4 (orange)Work–family interface Work family conflict ConflictAn additional cluster here (in the broader map, these terms are part of the job demands-resources cluster)697230030797500Figure SA. Scientific map for JAP articles only (see Table SB for description of clusters).Figures SB and SC. Density maps of work design articles in Psychology and Management (top figure) and in the Journal of Applied Psychology (bottom figure). Red, followed by yellow, indicates area of highest density.Online Resource 3: Ngram Analyses Showing Work Usage in Google BooksFigure SA. Plot of terms from Google’s Ngram Viewer using the English Corpus, 1800–2008. Search terms were: (job design + work design—blue line), (Taylorism + scientific management—red line), (job enrichment + job enlargement + job characteristics + job autonomy—green line), (self-managing teams + autonomous work + sociotechnical systems—orange line), (job demand + job control—purple line), (role conflict + role ambiguity—maroon line). Figure SB: Plot of terms from Google’s Ngram Viewer using the English Corpus, 1800–2008. Search terms were (work empowerment + team empowerment + structural empowerment + employee empowerment)*10—blue line, (teamwork +work teams + team work—red line), (job demands + work demands)*10—green line.Figure SC: Plot of terms from Google’s Ngram Viewer using the English Corpus, 1800–2008. Search terms were electronic monitoring, (attentional demands +cognitive demands + problem solving demands + job complexity + work complexity—red line), (work overload + role overload—green line), time pressure—orange line, (emotional demands+ emotional labor + emotional labor—purple line).Online Resource 4: Work Design Reviews, Meta analyses, SynthesesAndrei, D., & Parker, S. K. (in press). Work design for performance: Expanding the criterion for contemporary work. In N. Anderson, C. Viswesvaran, H. K. Sinangil, & D. S. Ones (Eds), The Sage handbook of industrial, work, and organizational psychology (2nd Edition). London, England: Sage Publications.Bakker, A. B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22, 309–328.Belkic, K. L., Landsbergis, P. A., Schnall, P. L., & Baker, D. (2004). Is job strain a major source of cardiovascular disease risk? Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 30, 85–128.Burke, C. S., Stagl, K. C., Klein, C., Goodwin, G. F., Salas, E., & Halpin, S. M. (2006). What type of leadership behaviors are functional in teams? A meta-analysis. Leadership Quarterly, 17, 288–307.Campion, M. A., Mumford, T. V., Morgeson, F. P., & Nahrgang, J. D. (2005). Work redesign: Eight obstacles and opportunities. Human Resource Management, 44, 367–390.Cherns, A. (1976). The principles of sociotechnical design. Human Relations, 29, 783–792.Clegg, C., & Spencer, C. (2007). A circular and dynamic model of the process of job design. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 80, 321–339.Cohen, S. G., & Bailey, D. E. (1997). What makes teams work: Group effectiveness research from the shop floor to the executive suite. Journal of Management, 23, 239–290. Combs, J., Liu, Y., Hall, A., & Ketchen, D. (2006). How much do high-performance work practices matter? A meta-analysis of their effects on organizational performance. Personnel Psychology, 59, 501–528.Cordery, J., & Parker, S. K. (2007). Work organization. In P. Boxall, J. Purcell, & P. Wright (Eds.), Oxford handbook of human resource management (pp. 187–209). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Cordery, J. L., & Parker, S. K., (2012) Work design: Creating jobs and roles that promote individual effectiveness. In S. W. J. Kozlowski (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 247–285). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Crawford, E. R., LePine, J. A., & Rich, B. L. (2010). Linking job demands and resources to employee engagement and burnout: A theoretical extension and meta-analytic test. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95, 834–848Cullinane, S. J., Bosak, J., Flood, P. C., & Demerouti, E. (2013). Job design under lean manufacturing and its impact on employee outcomes. Organizational Psychology Review, 3, 41–61.Cummings, T., & Blumberg, M. (1987). Advanced manufacturing technology and work design. In T. D. Wall, C. W. Clegg, & N. J. Kemp (Eds.), The human side of advanced manufacturing technology (pp. 37–60). New York: John Wiley.Daniels, K. (2006). Rethinking job characteristics in work stress research. Human Relations, 59, 267–290.Davis, G. F. (2010). Job design meets organizational sociology. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 302–308.De Lange, A. H., Taris, T. W., Kompier, M. A., Houtmn, I., & Bongers, P. M. (2003). The very best of the millennium: Longitudinal research and the demand-control-(support) model. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 8, 282–305.Demerouti, E., & Bakker, A. B. (2011). The job demands-resources model: Challenges for future research. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 37, 1–9.Elsbach, K. D., & Hargadon A. B., (2006). Enhancing creativity through “mindless” work: A framework of workday design. Organization Science, 17, 470–483.Feldman, D. C., & Gainey, T. W. (1997). Patterns of telecommuting and their consequences: Framing the research agenda. Human Resource Management Review, 7, 369–388.Fisher, C. D., & Gitelson, R. (1983). A meta-analysis of the correlates of role conflict and ambiguity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68, 320–330.Frese, M., & Zapf, D. (1994). Action as the core of work psychology: A German approach. In H. C. Triandis, M. D. Dunnette, & J. M. Hough (Eds), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, (2nd Edition, pp. 271–340), Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Fried, Y. (1991). Meta-analytic comparison of the job diagnostic survey and job characteristics inventory as correlates of work satisfaction and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 76, 690–697.Fried, Y., & Ferris, G. R. (1987). The validity of the job characteristics model: A review and meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 40, 287–322. Fried, Y., Grant, A. M., Levi, A. S., Hadani, M., & Slowik, L. H. (2007). Job design in temporal context: A career dynamics perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28, 911–927.Fried, Y., Levi, A. S., & Laurence, G. (2008). Motivation and job design in the new world of work. In C. Cooper & C. Cartwright (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of personnel psychology (pp. 586-611). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Gagné, M., & Deci, E. L. (2005). Self-determination theory and work motivation. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 26, 331–362.Gardner, D. G., & Cummings, L. L. (1988). Activation theory and job design: Review and reconceptualization. Research in Organizational Behavior, 10, 81–122.Ganster, D. C., & Fusilier, M. R. (1989). Control in the workplace. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 235–280). Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons.Grant, A. M. (2007). Relational job design and the motivation to make a prosocial difference. Academy of Management Review, 32, 393–417.Grant, A. M., & Parker, S. K. (2009). Redesigning work design theories: The rise of relational and proactive perspectives. Academy of Management Annals, 3, 317–375.Grant, A.M., Fried, Y., & Juillerat, T. (2011). Work matters: Job design in classic and contemporary perspectives. In S. Zedeck (Ed.), APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 417–452). Washington, DC. American Psychological Association.Grant, A., Fried, Y., Parker, S. K., & Frese, M. (2010). Putting job design in context: Introduction to the special issue. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 145–157. (Note: this special issue contains several interdisciplinary commentaries with novel ideas for work design research)Griffin, R. W. (1987). Toward an integrated theory of task design. Research in Organizational Behavior, 9, 79–120.Gully, S. M., Devine, D. J., & Whitney, D. J. (1995). A meta-analysis of cohesion and performance effects of level of analysis and task interdependence. Small Group Research, 26, 497–520.Hall, D. T. T., & Heras, M. L. (2010). Reintegrating job design and career theory: Creating not just good jobs but smart jobs. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31, 448–462.Holman, D., Clegg, C., & Waterson, P. (2002). Navigating the territory of job design. Applied Ergonomics, 33, 197–205.Humphrey, S. E., Nahrgang, J. D., & Morgeson, F. P. (2007). Integrating motivational, social, and contextual work design features: a meta-analytic summary and theoretical extension of the work design literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1332–1356. Ilgen, D. R., & Hollenbeck, J. R. (1991). The structure of work: Job design and roles. In M. D. Dunnette & L. M. Hough (Eds.), Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 2, 2nd Edition, pp. 165–207). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Jackson, S. E., & Schuler, R. S. (1985). A meta-analysis and conceptual critique of research on role ambiguity and role conflict in work settings. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 36, 16–78.Johns, G., Xie, J. I., & Fang, Y. Q. (1992). Mediating and moderating effects in job design. Journal of Management, 18, 657–676.Karasek R.A., & Theorell T. (1990). Healthy work: Stress, productivity, and the reconstruction of working life. New York, NY: Basic Books.Kiggundu, M. N. (1981). Task interdependence and the theory of job design. Academy of Management Review, 6, 499–508.Kinicki, A. J., McKee-Ryan, F. M., Schriesheim, C. A., & Carson, K. P. (2002). Assessing the construct validity of the Job Descriptive Index: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 14–20.Kopelman R. E. (2006). Job redesign and productivity: A review of the evidence. National Productivity Review, 4, 237–255. Lee R. T., & Ashforth B. E. (1996). A meta-analytic examination of the correlates of the three dimensions of job burnout. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 123–133.LePine, J. A., Podsakoff, N. P., & LePine, M. A. (2005). A meta-analytic test of the challenge stressor–hindrance stressor framework: An explanation for inconsistent relationships among stressors and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 764–775.Loher, B. T., Noe, R. A., Moeller, N. L., & Fitzgerald, M. P. (1985). A meta-analysis of the relation of job characteristics to job satisfaction. Journal of Applied Psychology, 70, 280–289.Macy B. A., & Izumi, H. (1993). Organizational change, design, and work innovation: A meta-analysis of 131 North American field studies, 1961-1991. Research in Organizational Change and Development, 7, 235–313.Miller, K. I., & Monge, P. R. (1986). Participation, satisfaction, and productivity: A meta-analytic review. Academy of Management Journal, 29, 727–753.Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. (2008). Job and team design: Toward a more integrative conceptualization of work design. In J. Martocchio (Ed.), Research in personnel and human resource management (Vol. 27, pp. 39–91). United Kingdom: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Morgeson, F. P., & Campion, M. A. (2003). Work design. In W. C. Borman, D. R. Ilgen, & R. J. Klimoski (Eds), Handbook of psychology: Industrial and organizational psychology, (Vol. 12, pp. 423–452). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Nahrgang, J. D., Morgeson, F. P., & Hofmann, D. A. (2011). Safety at work: A meta-analytic investigation of the link between job demands, job resources, burnout, engagement, and safety outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 71–94.Nieuwenhuijsen, K., Bruinvels, D., & Frings-Dresen, M. (2010). Psychosocial work environment and stress-related disorders: A systematic review. Occupational Medicine, 60, 277–286.Oldham, G. R., & Hackman, J. R. (2010). Not what it was and not what it will be: The future of job design research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31: 463–479.Oldham, G. R. (1996). Job design. International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 11, 33–60.Parker, S. K. (2002). Designing jobs that enhance employee well-being and effectiveness. In P. B. Warr (Ed.), Psychology at work (5th Edition. pp. 276–299). London: Penguin.Parker, S. K. (2014). Beyond motivation: Job and work design for development, health, ambidexterity, and more. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 661–691.Parker, S. K., Andrei, D., & Li, W. (2014). An overdue overhaul: Revamping work design theory from a time perspective. In A. Shipp & Y. Fried (Eds), Time and work: How time impacts individuals (pp. 191–229). East Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.Parker, S. K., & Ohly, S. (2008). Designing motivating work. In R. Kanfer, G. Chen, & R. Pritchard (Eds), Work motivation: Past, present and future (pp. 233-284). New York, USA: Lawrence Erlbaum. Parker, S. K., & Ohly, S. (2009). Extending the reach of job design theory: Going beyond the Job Characteristics Model. In A. Wilkinson, N. Bacon, T. Redman, and S. Snell (Eds) The handbook of human resource management (pp. 269–286). London, England: Sage.Parker, S. K., & Turner, N. (2002). Work design and individual job performance: Research findings and an agenda for future inquiry. In S. Sonnentag (Eds), Psychological management of individual performance: A handbook in the psychology of management in organizations (pp. 69–96). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons. Parker, S. K., Turner, N., & Griffin, M. A. (2003). Designing healthy work. In D. A. Hofmann & L. E. Tetrick (Eds), Health and safety in organizations: A multi-level perspective (pp. 91–130). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Parker, S. K., & Wall, T. (1998). Job and work design: Organizing work to promote well-being and effectiveness. London, England: Sage Publications.Parker, S. K., & Wall, T. D. (2001). Work design: Learning from the past and mapping a new terrain. In N. Anderson, D. S. Ones, H. K. Sinangil, & C. Viswesvaran (Eds). Handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 90–109). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Parker, S. K., Wall, T. D., & Cordery, J. L. (2001). Future work design research and practice: Towards an elaborated model of work design. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 74, 413–440. Pierce, J. L., & Dunham, R. B. (1976). Task design: A literature review. Academy of Management Review, 1, 83–97.Podsakoff, N. P., LePine, J. A., & LePine, M. A. (2007). Differential challenge stressor-hindrance stressor relationships with job attitudes, turnover intentions, turnover, and withdrawal behavior: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 438–454.Roberts, K. H., & Glick, W. (1981). The job characteristics approach to task design: A critical review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 66, 193–217.Salancik, G. R., & Pfeffer, J. (1978). A social information processing approach to job attitudes and task design. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23, 224–253.Seibert, S. E., Wang, G., & Courtright, S. H. (2011). Antecedents and consequences of psychological and team empowerment in organizations: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96, 981–1003.Smith, M. J., & Sainfort, P. C. (1989). A balance theory of job design for stress reduction. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 4, 67–79.Sonnentag S. (1996). Work group factors and individual well-being. In M. A. West (Ed.), Handbook of work group psychology (pp. 345–367). Chichester, England: Wiley.Spector, P. E. (1986). Perceived control by employees: A meta-analysis of studies concerning autonomy and participation at work. Human Relations, 39, 1005–1016.Stansfeld, S., & Candy, B. (2006). Psychosocial work environment and mental health: A meta-analytic review. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 32, 443–462.Taris, T. W., Kompier, M. A. J. (2005). Job demands, job control, strain and learning behavior: Review and research agenda. In A. S. G Antoniou & C. L. Cooper (Eds), Research companion to organizational health psychology (Vol. 17, pp. 132–150), Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.Terry, D. J., & Jimmieson, N. (1999). The psychology of control in work organizations. In I. Robertson & C. Cooper (Eds), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol 14, pp. 95–148). London, England: Wiley.Thomas, J., & Griffin, R. (1983). The social information processing model of task design: A review of the literature. Academy of Management Review, 8, 672–682.Torraco, R. J. (2005). Work design theory: A review and critique with implications for human resource development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16, 85–109.Tubre, T. C., & Collins, J. M. (2000). Jackson and Schuler (1985) revisited: A meta-analysis of the relationships between role ambiguity, role conflict, and job performance. Journal of Management, 26, 155–169.Turner, N., Parker, S. K., & Williams, H. M. (2006). Team-working in organizations: Implications for workplace safety. In M. Shams, & P. R. Jackson (Eds), Developments in Work and Organizational Psychology, Implications for International Business (pp. 49–78). Volume 20 of International Business and Management Series (Series Edition, P. V. Guauri), Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.Van der Doef, M., & Maes, S. (1999). The job demand-control (-support) model and psychological well-being: A review of 20 years of empirical research. Work & Stress, 13, 87–114.van Veldhoven, M., Taris, T. W., de Jonge, J., & Broersen, S. (2005). The relationship between work characteristics and employee health and well-being: How much complexity do we really need? International Journal of Stress Management, 12, 3–28.Vough, H., & Parker, S. K. (2008). Work design research: Still going strong. In C. L. Cooper & J. Barling (Eds), The sage handbook of organizational behavior (Vol 1, pp. 410–426). London: Sage Publications. Wall, T. D., & Jackson, P. R. (1995). New manufacturing initiatives and shopfloor work design. In A. Howard (Ed.) The changing nature of work (pp. 139–174). San-Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Wall, T. D., & Martin, R. (1987). Job and work design. In C. L. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 61–91). Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons.Wall, T. D., Cordery, J. L., & Clegg, C. W. (2002). Empowerment, performance, and operational uncertainty: A theoretical integration. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 51, 146–169.Zapf, D. (2002). Emotion work and psychological well-being: A review of the literature and some conceptual considerations. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 237–268.Zapf, D., Dormann, C., & Frese, M. (1996). Longitudinal studies in organizational stress research: A review of the literature with reference to methodological issues. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 1, 145–155. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download