2023年全國碩士研究生考試考研英語一試題真題(含答案詳解+作文范文)_第1頁
已閱讀1頁,還剩7頁未讀 繼續(xù)免費(fèi)閱讀

下載本文檔

版權(quán)說明:本文檔由用戶提供并上傳,收益歸屬內(nèi)容提供方,若內(nèi)容存在侵權(quán),請(qǐng)進(jìn)行舉報(bào)或認(rèn)領(lǐng)

文檔簡介

1、2100 單詞, 單詞,12700 英文字符, 英文字符,3600 漢字 漢字出處: 出處:Wu C H, Luksyte A, Parker S K. Overqualification and Subjective Well-Being at Work: The Moderating Role of Job Autonomy and Culture[J]. Social Indicators Research, 2015, 121

2、(3):917- 937.Overqualification and Subjective Well-Being at Work: The Moderating Role of Job Autonomy and CultureChia-Huei Wu ? Aleksandra Luksyte ? Sharon K. ParkerAbstract Overqualification is a form of underemploy

3、ment wherein people have more skills, experience, knowledge, and abilities than required for a job. Past research has shown that overqualification is negatively related to subjective well-being at work, such as lower j

4、ob satisfaction. To mitigate this negative impact, drawing on a job design perspective, the authors proposed that job autonomy can buffer overqualification’s negative effects. Based on the model of culture fit in mana

5、gerial practice, as well as regulatory fit theory, the authors further proposed that the buffering effects of job autonomy apply only to employees from individualistic (vs. collectivistic) cultures. Data from the 5th E

6、uropean Working Conditions Survey were analyzed. Results of a two-level multilevel modeling analysis showed a three way interaction between overqualification, job autonomy, and national culture in predicting subjectiv

7、e well-being at work. Job autonomy buffered the negative effects of overqualification on subjective well-being at work, but only in indi- vidualistic cultures.Keywords Overqualification · Job design · Nation

8、al culture ·Subjective well-being at work1 IntroductionOverqualification is a form of underemployment wherein people have more skills, expe- rience, knowledge, and abilities than required for a job (Erdogan et al.

9、2011b; Maynard et al. 2006). Overqualification is a pervasive organizational phenomenon, especially during times of economic downturn (Reingold 2009). For example, during the global 2008/09 financial crisis, one in fi

10、ve American workers and one in three Australian employees reported being overqualified (Luo 2010; Skills Australia 2009). Other countries experience comparable overqualification rates, ranging from 14 % in India to 31

11、% in Spain (O’Connell 2010). These figures are of particular concern given consistent evidence that overqualification is negatively related to subjective well-being at work (i.e., an employee’s evaluation of her/his w

12、ork lives) (Bakker and Oerlemans 2011), such as job satisfaction, emotion at work and organizational affective commitment (Bolino and Feldman 2000; Feldman et al. 2002; Fine and Nevo 2008; Johnson and Johnson 2000a; Jo

13、hnson et al. 2002).Despite the prevalence of overqualification in the global marketplace, current research is somewhat limited regarding factors that can mitigate its negative impact on subjective well-being at work. U

14、nderstanding boundary conditions in which overqualified people might experience higher subjective well-being at work is important because this knowl- edge may help organizations to more effectively manage these potenti

15、ally excellent workers (e.g., Erdogan et al. 2011b). In one of the few studies exploring potential mod- erators of overqualification-outcomes links, Erdogan and Bauer (2009) showed that psy- chological empowerment att

16、enuated the negative impact of overqualification on related autonomy to pursue personal values and goals by, for example, crafting greater meaning into their work. As such, job autonomy will help employees in individual

17、istic cultures to regulate the negative impact of overqualification on subjective well-being at work. In contrast, employees from collectivistic cultures tend to nurture and value their relationships with others more

18、than maximizing individual goals (e.g., Hofstede 1991; Kagitcibasi 1997; Lu and Gilmour 2007; Markus and Kitayama 1991). Because the regulatory function of job autonomy is less congruent with such values and goals, we

19、do not expect that job autonomy will mitigate the negative impact of overqualification on subjective well-being at work in collectivistic cultures. In sum, we propose a three-way interaction between overqualifi- catio

20、n, job autonomy, and national culture in shaping employees’ subjective well-being at work. To examine our hypothesis, data from the 5th European Working Conditions Survey (EWCS) (Gallup Europe 2012) were analyzed. We e

21、xpect that job autonomy will mitigate negative impact of overqualification on subjective well-being at work for employees from nations with individualistic cultures, but not for employees from nations with collectivist

22、ic cultures.Our investigation contributes to literature in two ways. First, we suggest that over- qualification is exacerbated by poor job design; specifically, a lack of job autonomy. Overqualification has been concep

23、tualized as a multi-dimensional construct consisting of two facets: mismatch (i.e., having more qualifications than is required) and no-growth (i.e., a lack of opportunities to utilize one’s skills; (Johnson and Johnso

24、n 1996). Rather than focusing on the aspect of personnel selection to recruit employees whose background matches the job (Fine and Nevo 2011), we emphasize the role of job autonomy in allowing for growth, despite the

25、mismatched job. In particular, when overqualified employees have job autonomy, they can proactively craft their jobs and enhance the meaning of work, thereby resulting in more favorable subjective well-being at work. C

26、ompared to selecting new employees with job-matched backgrounds, a job design approach can help maximize the development of existing human capital in an organization, which is sometimes the only option open to organiz

27、ations.A second contribution of our study is that we offer insights into when job autonomy is most useful in shaping overqualified employees’ subjective well-being at work. As indi- cated by the job demands-control mode

28、l (Karasek 1979), job autonomy can help indi- viduals to deal with suboptimal work conditions, and thus positively influence one’s work experiences. However, as other scholars have argued (e.g., Parker and Sprigg 1999)

29、, this buffering role of autonomy does not apply to all individuals. In line with this perspetive, we suggest that the effect of job autonomy in mitigating the negative impact of over- qualification on subjective well

30、-being at work will only occurs for employees from indi- vidualistic cultures. As the business environment has become increasingly globalized (Gibson and McDaniel 2010), organizations need to learn how to effectively m

31、anage culturally diverse employees. Accordingly, it is important to unpack the possible differ- ential effect of job autonomy across cultures. In the remainder of the introduction, we review literature on the relation

32、ship between overqualification and subjective well-being at work, and then develop our research hypotheses.1.1 Overqualification and Subjective Well-Being at WorkThere are several reasons regarding why overqualification

33、 is related negatively to sub- jective well-being at work (Anderson and Winefield 2011; Erdogan et al. 2011a; Johnson and Johnson 1999, 2000a, b). A person-job fit perspective (Kristof-Brown et al. 2005) suggests that

34、 overqualified people have negative work experiences because of a lack of similarity between the individual and their environment (i.e., supplementary misfit, Maynard et al. 2006). This type of person-job misfit will r

溫馨提示

  • 1. 本站所有資源如無特殊說明,都需要本地電腦安裝OFFICE2007和PDF閱讀器。圖紙軟件為CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.壓縮文件請(qǐng)下載最新的WinRAR軟件解壓。
  • 2. 本站的文檔不包含任何第三方提供的附件圖紙等,如果需要附件,請(qǐng)聯(lián)系上傳者。文件的所有權(quán)益歸上傳用戶所有。
  • 3. 本站RAR壓縮包中若帶圖紙,網(wǎng)頁內(nèi)容里面會(huì)有圖紙預(yù)覽,若沒有圖紙預(yù)覽就沒有圖紙。
  • 4. 未經(jīng)權(quán)益所有人同意不得將文件中的內(nèi)容挪作商業(yè)或盈利用途。
  • 5. 眾賞文庫僅提供信息存儲(chǔ)空間,僅對(duì)用戶上傳內(nèi)容的表現(xiàn)方式做保護(hù)處理,對(duì)用戶上傳分享的文檔內(nèi)容本身不做任何修改或編輯,并不能對(duì)任何下載內(nèi)容負(fù)責(zé)。
  • 6. 下載文件中如有侵權(quán)或不適當(dāng)內(nèi)容,請(qǐng)與我們聯(lián)系,我們立即糾正。
  • 7. 本站不保證下載資源的準(zhǔn)確性、安全性和完整性, 同時(shí)也不承擔(dān)用戶因使用這些下載資源對(duì)自己和他人造成任何形式的傷害或損失。

最新文檔

評(píng)論

0/150

提交評(píng)論