Work Meaningfulness through Goal Setting & Work Design in Emerging Work Environments.
| Author | Devarajan, R. |
Introduction
The business scenario today is witnessing major changes in the form of disruptive innovations, radical thinking, scarcity of resources, heavy insurgence of technology, automation and artificial intelligence (Pettigrew et al., 2001; Lee & Warner, 2001; Zhu & Warner, 2005; Poon & Rowley, 2010; Brownstein et al, 2016; Forbes, 2016; PWC, 2018; Deloitte, 2017) that have reshaped work, making it dynamic, disruptive and somewhat overwhelming. 'Work' is undergoing changes towards boundaryless organizations (Wajcman, 2008). Technological breakthroughs have redefined work and workforce, shifting the nature of work from routine to a fast growing, diverse and complex work environment (Deloitte, 2016). A lot of work is happening in the virtual work-spaces, powered by increased digitization. This may improve the speed at which work is carried out, but may impact the quality of work-life of the employees. Reduced social interactions with one's colleagues, limited and restricted interactions with managers and management and a sense of isolation may result in employees questioning the meaningfulness of the job being performed by them.
Over the years, workforce has also become more diverse with respect to age, race, gender, religion, socio-economic background. Individuals differ in their traits, cognitive opinion and life experiences owing to demographic shifts. Individuals are seeking experience and wellbeing, meaning, work/life balance, greater flexibility and autonomy (Deloitte Report, 2018). Traditional jobs and work schedules are becoming archaic, replaced by fluid work roles and flexitime which contribute to the hazy line between work and non-work (Allan, Loudoun, & Peetz, 2007).
The changes in the nature of work and the composition of workforce, alongwith the changing attitudes and expectations of the workforce, has made it important to re-visit the concept of work meaningfulness and its determinants. Work meaningfulness is higher for an individual if feels that he is able to attain valuable and worthwhile goals, congruent with his existential values (Allan et al., 2019). It is important to see how organizations can create an atmosphere where employees attach greater meaning to their work, without having to just go through the daily grind.
Work meaningfulness is associated with a higher sense of purpose and is associated with a congruence between personal and organizational goals. Employees want challenging jobs through which they can experience personal growth (Holbeche & Springet, 2004). According to the researchers, employees experiencing meaning at work, have greater engagement and show high performance, and lack of meaning leads to cynicism. Due to the many benefits of work meaningfulness, organizations try to foster work meaningfulness amongst individuals. Work meaningfulness has also been shown to relate to numerous positive organizational outcomes such as engagement, job satisfaction, employee wellbeing, performance, and retention (Grant, 2007; May et al., 2004; Steger & Dik, 2009).
Traditionally, research has examined work meaningfulness from a work-centric perspective, focusing on how meaningfulness can be managed by manipulating the external work environment (e.g., through job design; Hackman & Oldham, 1975). More recently, however, this managerial approach has been critiqued for disregarding humans' intrinsic need for meaningfulness (Lips-Wiersma & Morris, 2009). Consequently, researchers have begun to explore what makes work meaningful from the perspective of the worker (Bailey & Madden, 2016). In the worker-centric literature, emphasis is placed on the importance of the self-concept, and in particular on the identity-related mechanisms that underlie employees' meaning-making at work (Pratt & Ashforth, 2003; Rosso et al., 2010).
An important component of work meaningfulness has been the work design-specifically, the Job Characteristic Theory (JCT) by Hackman and Oldham (1976). Work design is an integral part of work and has been studied since past 100 years, where earlier the focus was on how division of labor could increase worker efficiency and productivity and later on how specialization and simplification can maximize worker efficiency (Taylor, 1911). Work has changed tremendously, making organizations realize that they need to rely on workers to decide on how work can be accomplished efficiently and this requires more employee autonomy, flexibility, empowerment, continuous learning, risk taking and creativity (Thomas, 2000). Yet, in the current dynamic work environment, numerous factors impinge upon work design (Parker, Van den Broeck & Holman, 2017). Individuals working on multiple roles and frequently changing team, with varying work characteristics and changing work context, can shape work design (Dierdroff & Morgeson, 2007), making it an important concept worth investigating. Thus, extant literature suggests that making changes in work design in the context of changing nature of work is vital, yet no direct investigation of impact of these changes has been studied in the past (Humphrey Nahargang & Morgeson, 2007).
In enhancing work meaningfulness, another area where organizations can direct their focus is the performance management system and goal setting specifically. Goal setting is an important component of performance management system as goals are performance directed, resulting in elevated performance (Locke & Latham, 2002). Goals and goal-related processes motivate, organize, and direct behavior at all ages. Commitment to specific challenging goals, adequate feedback, high self-efficacy (and ability), and suitable task strategies lead to high performance (Locke & Latham, 1990). When employees pursue cherished goals, they find work more meaningful (Ryff, 2000). While work is changing, it is imperative for organizations to use the lever of goal setting to set practices that manage, measure and monitor work. Research suggests that four most intrinsic rewards are sense of meaning and purpose, sense of choice, sense of competence and sense of progress and goal setting plays an important role in helping employees achieve these rewards (Thomas, 2000).
Thus, in the context of changing nature of work, workplace and workforce, from organization view point, goals impact performance outcome (Locke Latham, 2002) and from individual view point, work meaningfulness impacts performance (Steger, 2010). If work is perceived as meaningful, it motivates the employees intrinsically (Chalofsky & Krishna, 2009). Effective work design can contribute significantly to making work more meaningful by providing the necessary variety, autonomy and feedback that an employee expects from his job. The present study aims at understanding goal setting and work design as predictors of work meaningfulness, in a dynamic and changing work environment.
Theoretical Background
Meaningful work is defined as job and other workplace characteristics that facilitate the attainment or maintenance of one or more dimensions of meaning (Fairlie, 2010). 'Meaning' refers to a cognitive process whereby people construe, interpret, and understand their experiences as positive, negative, or neutral valence (Lepisto & Pratt, 2017). 'Meaningfulness' on the other hand refers to the significance or value of work, which by definition has positive valence (Lips-Wiersma et al., 2016). Having meaningful work does not reflect a continuous psychological state (Bailey & Madden, 2017), rather, people have many episodic experiences at work that are meaningful or meaningless which they integrate into a belief system about the significance of their work. Experiences are meaningful when people conduct actions that fulfil values that are relevant to their existence and explain why their work is worth doing (Allan et al., 2017; May et al., 2004).
Most types of work are thought to suffer from a scarcity of meaningfulness, with negative consequences for motivation, commitment, and wellbeing (Michaelson et al., 2014; Pratt and Ashforth, 2003), engagement (Kahn, 1990; May et al., 2004), and job performance (Rodell, 2013). Research has thus been mainly interested in how and when individuals experience meaningfulness (Chalofsky, 2003; Lips-Wiersma & Morris, 2017; Rosso et al., 2010) and how organizations can help to create this experience (Michaelson et al., 2014). Meaningful work has received continued attention because "the restoration of meaning in work is seen as a method to foster an employee's motivation and attachment to work" (May et al., 2004). Meaningful work characteristics were positively correlated with total engagement, job satisfaction and organizational commitment and negatively correlated with disengagement, exhaustion, and turnover cognitions (Fairlie, 2011). As work meaningfulness is closely tied to one's own identity, it has emerged as a significant work characteristic (more important than other work characteristics) (Debats et al., 1995).
There have been recent calls for more comprehensive models of work meaningfulness (Lips-Wiersma & Morris, 2009; Rosso et al., 2010). Although work is necessary to secure a pay check at the end of the month for most of the working population, people generally also report a strong desire for work that is intrinsically interesting and satisfying (MOW--Meaning of Work International Research Team, 1987). In this respect, it is important to distinguish between the possible meanings attached to work--i.e., the type of meaning individuals ascribe to work (e.g., work as a pay check versus a higher calling)--and work meaningfulness - i.e., the amount of significance work holds for individuals (Rosso et al., 2010).
Goal-setting theory refers to the effects of setting goals on subsequent performance and Locke and Latham (1990) found that individuals who set specific, difficult goals, performed better than those who set general, easy goals. Locke and Latham (1990) proposed five basic...
To continue reading
Request your trialCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
