Motivating and managing older people
The job characteristics model:
An „old model‟ extended with a „new concept‟.
Is there a relation between the five perceived job characteristics, job satisfaction,
age and motivation to continue to work?
Author: Yvonne Peters (390457)
Brialmontstraat 101
5913 HH Venlo
[email protected]
Master Thesis Human Resource studies
University of Tilburg
Faculty of Social and Behavioural Sciences
Supervisor:
Second assessor:
Period:
Dr. T.A.M. Kooij
Dr. A.P.J.G. Vossen
January 2010 – April 2011
Preface
The last part of the Master Human Resources Studies is writing a thesis. „Motivating
and managing older people‟, presented by Dorien Kooij, was one of the topics to choose to
write a thesis about. This topic caught my intention immediately, because the population
pyramid shows that we also need the elderly in order to prevent labour shortage in the future.
As a consequence, we need to know how we can motivate older people to continue working.
The HR department is very important in order to reach this goal. It is almost inevitable not to
get involved in this social problem as an HR employee, which is the reason that I wanted to
dedicate my thesis to this topic.
There are several people I would like to thank for their help during the process of
writing my thesis. First of all I would like to thank Dr. Dorien Kooij, who supported me with
her extensive know-how and comments. Furthermore I would like to thank my second assessor
Dr. Ad Vossen, for his critical view and feedback. Due to this, new insights came up and the
quality of the thesis could be improved.
I also would like to thank my group members for the pleasant cooperation during the
last months. Last but not least I would like to thank my parents, friends and boyfriend for their
support and faith in me.
Enjoy reading my thesis about motivating and managing older people.
Yvonne Peters, March 2011
Y. Peters
2
Abstract
The ageing workforce and the declining number of younger workers are two important
reasons why organizations need to find a way to motivate people to stay in the workforce even
when they almost reach their retirement age. This study examined a part of the model of
Hackman and Oldham (1976). The model has been investigated on two levels. Firstly on an
aggregated level with motivating potential score (MPS) as a single index of the five job
characteristics and secondly on a disaggregated level with the five job characteristics
separately. In this research, job satisfaction functioned as a mediator between the five job
characteristics, MPS and motivation to continue to work. Age was added as a moderator in
order to test if older workers are more or less satisfied with their job, when their job includes
one of the five job characteristics. The data in this cross-sectional study was collected through a
questionnaire within two Dutch companies. The sample consisted of 157 respondents. The data
was used to test the different hypotheses formulated by the researcher. The results in this study
show some inconsistency with previous research. No relation was found between the MPS and
motivation to continue to work. The same applies for the relation between the job
characteristics separately and motivation to continue to work. The relation between job
satisfaction and motivation to continue to work was non-significant. Job satisfaction did not
show a mediating effect and age did not show a moderator effect. The results did show a
relation between the MPS and job satisfaction. A positive relation between two of the five job
characteristics (task significance and autonomy) and job satisfaction was also found. This is in
line with previous research. Different definitions in various studies (Hackman & Oldham,
1976; Kooij, 2010) and the extension of the model of Hackman and Oldham (1976) with age
and motivation to continue to work are two possible explanations for the fact that the
expectations turned out differently. After describing the limitations and possible directions for
future research, the practical and theoretical implications in this research are discussed.
Keywords: MPS, job characteristics, job satisfaction, motivation to continue to work, age
Y. Peters
3
Index
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 5
Theoretical framework ............................................................................................................. 7
The job characteristics model ...................................................................................................... 7
Motivation to continue to work ................................................................................................... 9
The effect of the perceived job characteristics on motivation to continue to work .................. 10
Job satisfaction........................................................................................................................... 11
The effect of the perceived job characteristics on job satisfaction...…..................................... 11
The effect of job satisfaction on motivation to continue to work ............................................. 12
The mediating effect of job satisfaction..................................................................................... 13
The moderating effect of age .................................................................................................... 14
Conceptual models ................................................................................................................... 18
Method ..................................................................................................................................... 19
Participants ............................................................................................................................... 19
Procedure .................................................................................................................................. 20
Measurements ........................................................................................................................... 20
Control variables........................................................................................................................ 22
Analyses .................................................................................................................................... 22
Results....................................................................................................................................... 24
Descriptive analyses .................................................................................................................. 24
Regression analyses .................................................................................................................. 26
Conceptual models: A summary................................................................................................ 34
Conclusion and discussion....................................................................................................... 35
Limitations and directions for future research..................................................................... 41
Implications.............................................................................................................................. 42
References................................................................................................................................. 45
Appendix A: output factor analyses....................................................................................... 52
Appendix B: Scales................................................................................................................... 55
Y. Peters
4
Introduction
The workforce is „graying‟, and as a consequence the numbers of retirees will increase
(Armstrong-Stassen, 2008) and labour shortage becomes a problem in the future. In the
Netherlands the amount of people with the age of 65 or higher was 15% in 2009 (Centraal
Bureau voor de Statistiek [CBS], 2010). This percentage will increase up to 23,6% in 2040
(CBS, 2009). On top of ageing, people will stop joining the workforce before the official
retirement age (UN, 2007). Only 36% of the people are willing to work until the age of 65
(CBS, 2008). The willingness to continue working after the age of 65 is only 12% in 2008
(CBS, 2008).
Labour shortage will become a problem in the future, due to the ageing baby boom
generation. A proposal from the Dutch government to control the economic consequences is to
reduce the opportunities for early retirement or to increase the pensionable age, which means
that people have to work after they reach the age of 65 (de Lange, Taris, Jansen, Kompier,
Houtman & Bongers, 2005). As a consequence, older employees are becoming more important
in the labour market (de Lange et al., 2005). Therefore it is important to know how older
employees can be motivated. This has become a top priority issue in the Netherlands in which
the government, employers and trade unions play an important role (CBS, 2008).
Intensive research has been conducted about what people motivate (Hackman &
Oldham, 1976; Aldag & Brief, 1976; Buelens & Van den Broeck, 2007; Moynihan & Pandey,
2007). The same applies for the relation between job characteristics, job satisfaction and
motivation (Nakhata, 2010; Behson & Eddy & Lorenzet, 2000; Hackman & Oldham, 1980).
The most influential theory of how job characteristics affect people is the job characteristics
theory of Hackman and Oldham (Spector, 1997). They suggested that five job characteristics
make jobs more satisfying for workers. These job characteristics in the model of Hackman and
Oldham (1976) are the following: skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy and
feedback (Hackman & Oldham, 1980). These core characteristics have been repeatedly found
to predict work motivation and job satisfaction (Behson et al., 2000). The basis of the theory is
that people can be motivated by the intrinsic satisfaction they find in doing job tasks (Spector,
1997). Existing research found that job characteristics affect job satisfaction (Spector, 1997).
But is this statement valid for younger and older people? Is there a relation between the job
characteristics and motivation to continue to work? The life span theory emphasizes that the
attitude from people changes with age (Baltes, 1987); younger employees may be satisfied
differently than older employees. Life span theory involves the study of constancy and change
Y. Peters
5
in attitude throughout the life course in order to obtain knowledge about general principles of
life long development, as well as about the degree and conditions of individual pliability or
modifiability of development (Baltes, 1987). The life span concept of age advances the
possibility for behavioural change at any point in the life circle (Kooij, de Lange, Jansen &
Dikkers, 2008). Kanfer and Ackermann (2004) found, for example, that job satisfaction with
older workers is more closely related to intrinsic factors of work in comparison with younger
workers. Do older people attach more value to other job characteristics than younger people
and what is the impact on motivation to continue to work?
Research has shown that age and job satisfaction are related, but the exact nature of the
relation is not clear yet (Spector, 1997). Lee & Wilbur (1985) found that younger employees
are less satisfied with their job, especially with the intrinsic characteristics of their work. Is this
due to the age factor, do older workers attaching more value to intrinsic work characteristics in
comparison with younger workers, or due to the lower intrinsic work characteristics for
younger workers (Lee & Wilbur, 1985)? Older workers have built up seniority and experience,
through which they tend to have better jobs, in terms of intrinsic and extrinsic factors (Eichar,
Norland, Brady & Fortinsky, 1991). Research about the relation between intrinsic and extrinsic
job characteristics and job satisfaction among older workers, found that autonomy and skill
variety, which are intrinsic characteristics, have a significant effect on job satisfaction (Eicher
et al., 1991). None of the extrinsic characteristics have a significant effect on job satisfaction
(Eichar et al., 1991). Warr (2001) summarized the very little empirical evidence about
preferences at different ages for job characteristics and made a suggestion of a pattern of
valence for some job characteristics for older and younger people. In this pattern of valence,
the importance of externally generated goals and feedback decreases across the years while for
example the importance of job security and physical security increases with age (Warr, 2001).
However, the relation between the five job characteristics in the model of Hackman and
Oldham (1976) and job satisfaction with the moderating role of age, as a whole, is investigated
limited (e.g. Katz, 1978). Therefore more research is needed to find out what the moderating
effect of age is on the relation between job characteristics, job satisfaction and motivation to
continue to work.
If the results in this study show the existence of a relation between the job
characteristics and job satisfaction moderated by age and between job satisfaction and
motivation to continue to work, employers, the government and trade unions can take
advantage of the clarification of this relation. The social relevance is therefore that these parties
can anticipate to this to make sure that the job characteristics are in line with the desire of their
Y. Peters
6
employees. As a consequence people are motivated to continue working longer so that the
economic consequences of the aging workforce can be solved.
There is obviously a positive relation between the job characteristics and job
satisfaction (Hackman & Oldham, 1980), but is this relation the same for younger and older
employees? And how is job satisfaction related to motivation to continue to work? Therefore
the research question is the following:
Is the effect of perceived job characteristics on motivation to continue to work mediated by job
satisfaction and does age moderate the relation between perceived job characteristics and job
satisfaction?
Theoretical framework
In this research two ways of the job characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham, 1980)
will be investigated. One way is the model on an aggregated level, which means that the five
core job characteristics are summarized into a single index, the motivating potential score
(hereafter MPS). The other way is the model on a disaggregated level which means that the
five core job characteristics will be investigated separately. Therefore this research consists out
of two conceptual models. The first model consists out of four variables: the MPS, job
satisfaction, motivation to continue to work and age. The second model consists out of eight
variables. Instead of MPS, the five job characteristics are present in this model. The other three
variables are equal to the first conceptual model. First the job characteristics model will be
described followed by motivation to continue to work and job satisfaction.
The job characteristics model
The theory of Hackman and Oldham (1980) suggests that there are three key
conditions to create internal work motivation. These key conditions, labelled as critical
psychological states in the job characteristic model, lead in turn to work outcomes, for example
internal work motivation (Spector, 1997). After identifying the critical psychological states,
Hackman and Oldham (1980) worked backwards to identify job characteristics that could elicit
these critical psychological states (Behson, et al., 2000). These five job characteristics are
posited to stimulate the psychological states and these psychological states affect work
outcomes, like work motivation. Hackman and Oldham (1976) expected the critical
Y. Peters
7
psychological states to mediate the relationships between the five job characteristics and work
outcomes.
Skill variety, task identity and task significance seem especially powerful in
influencing the experienced meaningfulness of the work (Hackman & Oldham, 1980) which is
the first psychological state. Autonomy contributes to the experienced responsibility for
outcomes of the work, which is the second psychological state and feedback contributes to the
last psychological state, knowledge of the actual results of the work attitudes (Hackman &
Oldham, 1980).
Perceived job characteristics
The above mentioned job characteristics will be described below (Hackman &
Oldham, 1976). The definitions are clearly formulated by Hackman and Oldham (1980) which
is probably the reason why they are followed in quite some literature (Chang & Lee, 2006;
Spector, 1997; Milette & Gagne´, 2008). Other definitions are used in the literature, which
imply basically the same, but formulated differently. It is important to notice that the variable
„perceived job characteristics‟ (hereafter job characteristics), is only based on the perception of
an employee, thus on an individual level. The different definitions of the job characteristics can
be found below.
“Skill variety is the degree to which a job requires a variety of different activities in
carrying out the work, involving the use of a number of different skills and talents of the
person” (Hackman & Oldham, 1980, p.78). The definition of skill variety used by Garg and
Rastogi (2005, p. 575) is: “Skill variety refers to the extent to which the job requires the
employee to draw from a number of different skills and abilities as well as upon a range of
knowledge”.
“Task identity is the degree to which a job requires completion of a „whole‟ and
identifiable piece of work, that is, doing a job from beginning to end with a visible outcome”
(Hackman & Oldham, 1980, p78).
“Task significance is the degree to which the job has a substantial impact on the lives
of other people, whether those people are in the immediate organization or in the world at
large” (Hackman & Oldham, 1980, p. 79). Garg and Rastogi (2005, p.575) defined task
significance as: “Task significance involves the importance of the task. It involves both internal
significance (i.e. how important the task is to the organization) and external significance (i.e.
how proud employees are to tell their relatives, friends, and neighbours what they do and where
they work)”.
Y. Peters
8
The definition of autonomy according to Hackman and Oldham (1980) is “the degree to
which the job provides substantial freedom, independence and discretion to the individual in
scheduling the work and in determining the procedures to be used in carrying it out” (p.79). De
Jonge (1995) stated that autonomy in the workplace refers to the ability to make decisions
about how and when to undertake workplace tasks. Another definition of autonomy is the one
used by Debnath, Tandom and Pointer (2007, p. 814): “the depth of work-related discretion and
freedom allowed by the job”.
Job feedback is defined as: “The degree to which carrying out the work activities
required by the job provides the individual with direct and clear information about the
effectiveness of his or her performance” (Hackman & Oldham, 1980, p. 80).
Motivating potential score
The job characteristics Model can be used in two different ways, as separate
characteristics to consider the standing of a job or as a single index which reflects the overall
MPS, based on the perceived job characteristics, of a job to foster internal work motivation
(Hackman & Oldham, 1980). This study will investigate both, the job characteristics separately
and the MPS, in order to find out which characteristic separately, has the greatest influence on
motivation to continue to work and to find out what the influence of the overall score is on
motivation to continue to work.
The MPS can be generated using the following formula:
Skill variety + task significance + task identity
x autonomy x job feedback
3
The formula shows that an increase in one of the five characteristics will increase the MPS.
This implies that the job characteristics have a positive effect on work motivation. Because of
the multiplicative relationship between the three major components (1 = skill variety, task
significance and task identity; 2 = autonomy; 3 = job feedback) the MPS will also be low if one
of the major components is low.
Motivation to continue to work
There is a large amount of research why people leave the workforce or take an early
retirement (Shacklock, Brunetto & Nelson, 2009). However, there is not a lot of research about
the reasons why people want to continue to work and which variables influence older workers
Y. Peters
9
to stay in the workforce (Shacklock et al., 2009). To investigate the effect of the five job
characteristics on motivation, the variable motivation to continue to work is used in this
research and is defined as follows: “An older workers‟ desire or intention to continue to work”
(Armstrong-Stassen, 2008).
The effect of perceived job characteristics on motivation to continue to work
As mentioned before, the job characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham, 1980)
suggests that when workers experience the five job characteristics (which elicit the three
psychological states: meaningful work, personal responsibility and knowledge of results)
motivation to work will occur (Johns, Xie & Fang, 1992). Behavioural scientists have actually
found that the three psychological are critical in determining a persons‟ motivation and
satisfaction on the job (Hackman, Oldham, Janson & Purdy, 1975).
Bassey (2002) found in his research that the five job characteristics are important
factors for the motivation of employees. The stronger these factors are present in a job, the
higher the motivation (Bassey, 2002). Essentially, complex or enriched jobs are associated with
increased motivation (Fried & Ferris, 1987). The job characteristics model of Hackman and
Oldham (1980) stated that a good designed job can influence motivation to work. Lee and
Wilbur (1985) used the MPS in their research and found that the higher the MPS, the more
employees are motivated.
It is important to notice that internal work motivation is not the same as motivation to
continue to work because internal motivation is present when people work for themselves and
act without interference of someone or something (Vinke, 2002). Motivation to continue to
work is the desire of older worker‟s to continue to work. Research found that older people
score higher on internal motivation than younger people (Paynter, in Kooij, 2010). An
explanation is that older people are more motivated through intrinsic motivators compared to
younger people. Due to the fact that motivation to continue to work is applicable for older
people and they can be motivated with intrinsic motivators, it can be assumed that the relation,
which was found between the job characteristics and internal work motivation (Hackman &
Oldham, 1976), also can be found between motivation to continue to work and the job
characteristics.
Firstly, the job characteristics model will be used in order to find out if there is a
relation between MPS and motivation to continue to work. Secondly, the model will be used in
order to find out which of the characteristics has the greatest effect on motivation to continue to
work. Therefore, two hypotheses will be formulated based on the job characteristics model.
Y. Peters
10
Hypothesis 1a:
The motivating potential score is positively related to motivation to
continue to work.
Hypothesis 1b:
The perceived five job characteristics, including, skill variety, task
identity, task significance, autonomy and job feedback are positively
related to motivation to continue to work
Job satisfaction
Different definitions about job satisfaction with different perspectives are used in
previous research (Spector, 1997). However the attitudinal perspective is the predominant one
in the study of job satisfaction, which is the reason that this definition will be used in this
research. “Job satisfaction is simply how people feel about their jobs and different aspects of
their jobs. It is the extent to which people like (satisfaction) or dislike (dissatisfaction) their
jobs” (Spector, 1997, p.2).
The effect of the perceived job characteristics on job satisfaction
The effect of the job characteristics will be investigated in twofold. It is important to
find out if the job characteristics together in a single index (MPS) have an effect on job
satisfaction and it is also interesting to know which of the characteristics have the greatest
effect on job satisfaction.
There is a positive relation between the job characteristics and job satisfaction (Lee &
Wilbur, 1985). A high employee score on the job characteristics separately results in a high
MPS and consequently results in more job satisfaction (Lee & Wilbur, 1985).
Other research about the relationship between job satisfaction and each of the job
characteristics defined by Hackman and Oldham (1980) shows that there is a positive relation
between the job characteristics and job satisfaction (Chang & Lee, 2006). Humphrey,
Nahrgang and Morgeson (2007) tested the job characteristics model and expected to find a
positive relationship between the job characteristics and job satisfaction, like Fried and Ferris
(1987) did in their meta-analytic examination. The results confirmed their expectations; all five
job characteristics were positively related to job satisfaction, where autonomy showed the
strongest relation and skill variety the weakest relation with job satisfaction (Humphrey, et al.,
2007). On the other hand Behson et al. (2000) found only a positive relation between job
Y. Peters
11
satisfaction and two of the five job characteristics, autonomy and feedback. Autonomy showed
the strongest relation. Bhuian, Al-Shammari and Jefri (1996) found that task identity,
autonomy and feedback directly influence job satisfaction in a positive way. Job feedback
appears to have the strongest relationship with overall job satisfaction according to Fried and
Ferris (1987). Other research about predictors of job satisfaction found, that skill variety is one
of the strongest predictors of satisfaction (Hackman & Oldham, 1976; Katz, 1978; Gerhart,
1987). Glisson and Durick (1988) found indeed that skill variety is a greater predictor of job
satisfaction instead of task significance and task identity (feedback and autonomy were not
included in this research).
Different findings about the strength of the job characteristics and the relation with job
satisfaction are found. Overall, the five job dimensions separately and as a single index (MPS)
have shown a positive relationship with job satisfaction (Fried & Ferris, 1987; Hackman &
Oldham, 1980), therefore the above elucidation leads to the following hypotheses:
Hypothesis 2a: The motivating potential score is positively related to job satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2b: The perceived five job characteristics, including, skill variety, task identity, task
significance, autonomy, and job feedback are positively related to job
satisfaction.
The effect of job satisfaction on motivation to continue to work
The empirical findings about the relationship between job satisfaction and retirement
intentions are not always consistent. Bidewell, Griffin and Hesketh (2006) found a negative
relation between job satisfaction and retirement intention. In line with this, another study found
that job satisfaction predicts retirement planning the best, in a negative way, which means that
if people experience more job satisfaction they are more motivated to continue to work (Topa,
Moriano, Depolo, Alcover & Morales, 2009). On the other hand, there are also studies who did
not find a relation between job satisfaction and the decision to retire (Beehr, Glazer, Nielson, &
Farmer, 2000; Schmitt & McCune, 1981).
The results of a national survey of job satisfaction and retirement intentions in 1998 and
2001 showed that higher overall job satisfaction is associated with reduced intentions to retire
(Sibbald, Bojke & Gravelle, 2003). The trend of increased intentions to retire in 2001
compared to 1998 was due to the fall of job satisfaction in 2001 versus 1998. Higher job
satisfaction is associated with a reduced likelihood of quitting (Sibbald, Bojke & Gravelle,
Y. Peters
12
2003). The more satisfied members are with their career, the longer they stay. In fact, there is a
strong relationship between job satisfaction and career length (Fisher III & Herrick, 2002). This
supports that the level of job satisfaction affects how long people stay within the organization
before retiring. If people scored one point higher on the job satisfaction scale, they stayed a half
year longer (Fisher III & Herrick, 2002). The desire to quit a job can be best predicted by job
satisfaction according to Iverson and Currivan (2003); the more satisfied people are with their
job, the less chance that employees will leave their job.
The number of studies which found a positive relation between job satisfaction and
motivation to continue to work led to this being the most adapted point of view leading to the
following hypothesis. Because this study consists out of two research models with different
variables, two hypotheses were conducted, based on an aggregated and a disaggregated level.
Hypothesis 3a:
Job satisfaction is positively related to motivation to continue to work.
Hypothesis 3b:
Job satisfaction is positively related to motivation to continue to work.
The mediating effect of job satisfaction
As mentioned before, the aim of this research is twofold. Firstly, the single index of the
five job characteristics (MPS) will be investigated in order to find out if this influences
motivation to continue to work, (partly) mediated by job satisfaction. Secondly, the effect of
the job characteristics separately on motivation to continue to work, (partly) mediated by job
satisfaction will be investigated.
The job characteristics model, developed by Hackman and Oldham (1976) is widely the
most recognized approach to job design. This approach has been postulated in a way that it
indirectly affect an employees‟ level of motivation via the three critical psychological states
(Garg, 2005). The job characteristics have an indirect positive effect on motivation according
to the job characteristics model of Hackman and Oldham (1976). The three psychological states
have a mediating effect between the job characteristics and motivation.
Looking at the previous hypotheses and literature, it is likely that job satisfaction has a
mediating effect. The expectation is that the MPS and the five job characteristics have a
positive effect on both job satisfaction and motivation to continue to work. Further there is
evidence that there is a positive relation between job satisfaction and motivation to continue to
work, which is described in hypothesis 3. People are motivated to continue to work if they are
satisfied with their job, according to the model of Hackman and Oldham (1976) both the job
Y. Peters
13
characteristics and the MPS have a positive effect on job satisfaction. Therefore the above
elucidation leads to the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 4a:
The motivating potential score is indirectly positively related to
motivation to work through job satisfaction
Hypothesis 4b:
The perceived job characteristics are indirectly positively related to
motivation to continue to work through job satisfaction.
The moderating effect of age
Limited research is conducted on the relation between age, job satisfaction and work
motivation. There has been little research on the moderating effect of age on the relationship
between the job characteristics and motivation to continue to work. The limited research on age
and work motivation does reveal that age moderates the relation between several work
characteristics and motivation to work (Kooij et al., 2008). Although there are other factors
which account for more of the variance in job satisfaction, the significant influence of
demographic factors is undeniable (Kavanaugh, Duffy & Lilly, 2006). Other studies have
found that for older workers, job satisfaction is more closely related to intrinsic factors
compared to younger workers (Kanfer & Ackermann, 2004; Schwab and Heneman, 1977).
Lee and Wilbur (1985) used the motivating potential score, and significant differences
were found in the MPS between younger and older employees. Lee and Wilbur (1985) found
that there is a direct effect between age and MPS, the older the employee the higher the MPS.
However the moderating effect of age is not investigated.
The findings in the small amount of research about job characteristics and job
satisfaction with age as a moderator are different. Katz (1978) expected that younger
employees would be more responsive to task characteristics than older employees. The results
showed that age moderates the relationship between MPS and job satisfaction. Katz (1978)
confirmed the expectations about the direction of the moderator. On the other hand Wernimont
(1966) found that older people select more intrinsic items in satisfying situations and extrinsic
items in dissatisfying situations compared to younger people. The core characteristics of the
model of Hackman and Oldham (1976) can be seen as intrinsic items. The above mentioned
can be captured in the following hypothesis:
Y. Peters
14
Hypothesis 5:
The effect of the motivating potential score on job satisfaction will be
strengthened with age.
Eichar, et al. (1991) compared intrinsic characteristics of work with extrinsic
characteristics of work in relation with job satisfaction and older workers. They found that both
intrinsic characteristics, autonomy and skill variety, had a positive effect on job satisfaction and
none of the extrinsic characteristics had a significant effect on job satisfaction (Eichar et al.,
1991). The very limited empirical evidence about preferences at different ages for job
characteristics are collected by Warr (2001), whereby the perceived importance of feedback
decreases with age and the opportunity to use skills increases first and then decreases.
Because of the different findings about the moderating effect of age, the five job
characteristics are also hypothesized separately to find out in which direction each job
characteristic goes. The five hypotheses with explanation can be found below.
Skill variety
Research has shown that older people want to experience variation in their work (de
Lange & Thijssen, 2007). Other research found that older people are more willing to continue
to work if they do not have to much routine in their work (Visser-Lapré, 2008). Eichar et al.
(1991) investigated the influence of intrinsic and extrinsic job characteristics on job satisfaction
among older people (aged 50 or older). The intrinsic characteristic, variety in skills, showed a
positive effect on job satisfaction, so job satisfaction increases when older people have more
skill variety in their job. They also controlled for age, in order to investigate the strength of the
found relationship within the group of older people. The oldest workers within the group of
ancient workers tend to be most satisfied with variety in skills (Eichar et al., 1991).
Kooij (2010), found that the motive strength for the use of skills or interesting work
increases with age. In practice this means that it is important for older people to have
interesting work as they are more motivated if their work is interesting (Kooij, 2010).
This leads to the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 6:
The effect of perceived skill variety on job satisfaction will be
strengthened with age.
Task identity
Previous research found that older workers responded much more favourable to jobs
with more task identity than to jobs with less task identity (Aldag & Brief, 1976). On the other
Y. Peters
15
hand, younger workers responded more favourable to jobs with less task identity than to jobs
with more task identity (Aldag & Brief, 1976).
The results in the study conducted by Kooij (2010) showed that older workers have
higher motive strength for job characteristics and outcomes which are related to
accomplishment, in comparison with younger people. Therefore older people are more
motivated if they can accomplish worthwhile tasks. Because of the positive relation between
motivation and job satisfaction (Pool, 1997) it can be assumed that if older people are more
motivated they are also more satisfied with their job. Accomplish worthwhile tasks has several
similarities with the variable used in this research, task identity, which is defined as: “the
degree to which a job requires completion of a „whole‟ and identifiable piece of work, that is,
doing a job from beginning to end with a visible outcome” (Hackman & Oldham, 1980, p78).
The above mentioned information can be captured in the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 7:
The relation of perceived task identity on job satisfaction will be
strengthened with age.
Task significance
For older people the quality of their function is important, they want to feel that their
job is useful (de Lange & Thijssen, 2007).
Results about specific work-related motives for older and younger people showed that
the motive strength for job characteristics related to helping people or contributing to the
society increases with age (Kooij, 2010). Older people find it therefore more important to carry
out a job with a contribution to the society in comparison with younger people (Kooij, 2010).
This leads to the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 8:
The relation of perceived task significance on job satisfaction will be
strengthened with age.
Autonomy
Van den Berg and van der Velde (2005) found in their study that older employees, who
have the freedom of autonomy in their jobs, are more satisfied with their job and are willing to
continue to work.
In the study of Eichar et al. (1991) about job satisfaction of older workers, autonomy
had a positive effect on job satisfaction. The more autonomy in their work, the more satisfied
the older people are with their job. Autonomy as an intrinsic characteristic showed a positive
Y. Peters
16
effect on job satisfaction, the oldest workers within the group of ancient workers, tends to be
most satisfied with autonomy (Eichar, et al., 1991).
The motive strength for job characteristics related to autonomy increased with age,
found by Kooij (2010). Therefore the content of a job should be rephrased for older people in
order to include autonomy. The reason for this is that the motive strength for autonomy
increases with age (Kooij 2010).
Logically this results in the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 9:
The relation of perceived autonomy on job satisfaction will be
strengthened with age.
Job feedback
Katz (1978) investigated the relation between job feedback and job satisfaction for
employees with different ages. The results showed that job feedback had a greater impact on
job satisfaction for younger people than for older people. The younger employees are more
satisfied with job feedback in comparison with the older employees.
Minimal empirical evidence exists about the preference for feedback at different ages
(Warr, 2001). Collecting the limited evidence resulted in a suggested pattern of valence for
different job features, in which the importance of feedback tends to decrease with age (Warr,
2001).
This leads to the following hypothesis:
Hypothesis 10:
The relation of perceived job feedback on job satisfaction will be
weakened with age.
Y. Peters
17
Conceptual models
All the variables and relations that will be investigated in this research are summarized in
the two models below.
Age
+
Motivating
potential score
(based on perceived
job characteristics)
+
+
Motivation to
continue to work
Job satisfaction
+
Figure 1: Representation of conceptual model 1, based on an aggregated level
Age
Perceived job
Characteristics
Skill variety
+
Task identity
+
+
+
Task
significance
+
+
+
+
Autonomy
job satisfaction
-
Feedback
+
Motivation
to continue
to work
+
+
Figure 2: Representation of conceptual model 2, based on a disaggregated level
Y. Peters
18
Methods
Participants
The sample of this quantitative research includes Dutch employees. Data was collected
through a survey among employees in two companies, Eiffel and Kema, in the Netherlands.
Eiffel is a consultancy organization in Legal, Finance and Process. Kema is a global, leading
authority in energy consulting and testing & certification, active throughout the entire energy
value-chain. The sample consisted of 157 respondents of which 45 were female (28,7%) and
112 were men (71,3%). The age of the respondents ranged between 18 and 61 years, with an
average age of 40,03 years (SD = 10.434). 81,1% of the respondents were highly educated
(HBO, University). None of the respondents finished only preliminary school. The mean
organizational tenure of the respondents is 10 years (SD = 10.50). Striking is the difference
between the two companies, the average organizational tenure within Kema is 15 years and
within Eiffel only 5 years.
Table 1 depicts a summary of the demographic information with regard to the whole sample for
the two different companies.
Table 1: Demographic information about the total sample for both companies.
Full sample
Kema
Eiffel
Sample size
N = 157 100%
N = 84 53,5%
N = 73 46,5%
Men
N = 112
71,3%
N = 67 79,8%
N = 45 61,6%
Women
N = 45
28,7%
N = 17 20,2%
N = 28 38, 4%
Mean age overall
40
44
35
Mean age men
41
44
36
Mean age women
38
44
34
Educational background
Preliminary school
N=0
0%
N=0
0%
N=0
0%
MAVO, LBO, LTS
N=5
3,2%
N=5
6%
N=0
0%
MBO, MEAO, MTS
N = 11 7,1%
N=9
10,8%
N=2
2,7%
HAVO, VWO
N=9
N=6
7,2%
N=3
4,1%
HBO, HEAO, HTS
N = 57 36,5%
N = 33 39,8%
N = 24 32,9%
University (WO)
N = 70 44,9%
N = 30 36,1%
N = 40 54,8%
Different
N=4
N=0
N=4
Organizational tenure
10
Y. Peters
5,8%
2,6%
5
0%
5,5%
15
19
Procedure
To collect the data from Eiffel a program was used to convert the questionnaires into
an online questionnaire. Each questionnaire was accompanied by a cover note which explained,
among other things, that this was a research of the Tilburg University and that anonymity was
guaranteed. The questionnaire could be filled in via a link which was send to 200 respondents
by e-mail (response rate of 36,5%). The program converted the results in an Excel document
without a name or e-mail address trough which anonymity was guaranteed. To collect the data
within Kema, employees were asked to fill in the questionnaire with an explanation about the
research and the guaranteed anonymity, during one day. At the end of the day the
questionnaires were collected by the researchers. 84 people have been asked to participate in
this research (response rate of 100%). After the data was received it was entered in SPSS.
Measurements
The following scales were used in the questionnaire, which was distributed in two
different companies.
The core job characteristics were measured using 15 items derived from the Job
Diagnostic Survey (JDS) developed by Hackman and Oldham (1976). These items assess
whether employees perceive availability of the job characteristics in their job. Hackman and
Oldham (1976) indicated that these 15 items measured five constructs (job characteristics).
Each construct was measured with a three-item scale with a response scale that exists of a
seven point Likert-type scale (very little – very much). To test if these items measured the same
five constructs in this sample too, a Principal Components Analysis (hereafter PCA) was
performed. In contrary with the expectation, the results revealed a one factor solution with an
eigenvalue above 1, explaining 31,03% of the variance, instead of a five factor solution. As can
be seen in Table 1 in Appendix B, almost all items loaded strongly to one factor. Catell‟s scree
test shows also a clear break between the first and second component. The reliability and an
example of a question of the original five scales can be found in table 2. Since scales with an
alpha of .70 are acknowledged to be reliable (Nunnally, 1978), these scales cannot be
considered as reliable. The one factor solution, the motivating potential score reported a
Cronbach alpha of .83, which can be considered as reliable.
Despite of the one factor solution and the low reliability, both conceptual models
were tested to investigate if there are differences in the strength of the effect of the job
characteristics separately on job satisfaction and motivation to continue to work.
Y. Peters
20
Table 2: Reliability of the job characteristics
Variables
Example question
Reliability( α )
“how much variety is there in your job?
Skill variety
.65
That is, to what extent does the job require
you to do many different things at work
using a variety of your skills and talents”
“the job provides me the chance to
Task identity
.56
completely finish the pieces of work I begin”
Task significance
“the job itself is not very significant or
.69
important in the broader scheme of things”
”how much autonomy is there in your job?
Autonomy
.57
That is, to what extent does your job permit
you to decide on your own how to go about
doing the work”?
“the job itself provides very few clues about
Feedback
.69
whether or not I am performing well”
Job satisfaction was measured with a six item scale which is part of a validated
instrument (VBBA; van Veldhoven & Meijman, 2008). An example question is: “I enjoy my
work”. The response categories ranged from disagree very much (one) to agree very much
(five). Van Veldhoven and Meijman (2008) reported that these six items measure one
construct, job satisfaction. Again it was tested if this was true for the current sample as well.
PCA and Catell‟s scree test revealed one factor solution with an eigenvalue above 1, explaining
52,47% of the variance (table 2, appendix B). Van Velhoven and Meijman (2008) reported a
Cronbach alpha coefficient of .80. The reliability in the current study was .81 and can be
considered as reliable.
Motivation to continue to work was measured through a three-item scale (Armstrong
& Stassen, 2008). According to Armstrong and Stassen (2008) measure these three items one
construct, motivation to continue to work. An example question is: “If I were completely free
to choose, I would prefer to continue working in this organization”. To measure the general
motivation to continue to work from workers, „in this organization‟ is deleted from the
questions (Kooij, 2010). The response categories ranged from strongly disagree (one) to
strongly agree (five). To verify whether „motivation to continue to work‟ is just one construct,
a PCA was executed. The results of the PCA revealed one factor solution with an eigenvalue
above 1, explaining 74,79% of the variance (see table 3, appendix B).
Y. Peters
21
Armstrong and Stassen (2008) reported a Cronbach alpha coefficient of .84. In the current
study, the reliability was .83 and can be considered as a reliable scale.
Age, the moderator, was measured by the question: “What is your age?”
Control variables
To test the model on spuriousness, the following control variables were used; gender,
organization, educational level and organizational tenure.
Gender is used as a control variable since previous research has shown that men and
women vary in their perception of the meanings of work when they reach the age of 50 years
(Berquist, Greenburg & Klaum, 1993). The influence of gender on the intention of older
workers to continue to work differs between men and women according to Shacklock et al.
(2009). The question „Are you a ...‟ with answering categories (1) male and (2) female was
used to assess the gender of the respondents.
It is not inconceivable that the two companies generate different typical results. To
ensure that this does not influence the results, „organization‟ was also used as a control
variable.
Education is used as a control variable because, previous research has shown that
education is a predictor of later retirement, primarily because education reduces disability
retirement (Blekesaune & Solem, 2005). Educational level was measured by the question
„What is your highest achieved education?‟ with answering categories (1) primary school, (2)
MAVO, LBO, LTS, (3) MBO, MEAO, MTS, (4) HAVO, VWO, (5) HBO, HEAO, HTS, (6)
WO, (7) different.
Previous research has shown that there is a positive relationship between organizational
tenure and work motivation (Kuvaas, 2006). Therefore organizational tenure is used as a
control variable in the current study. The question „What is the length of your employment in
years?‟ was used to asses the organizational tenure of the respondents.
Analysis
There are a number of important assumptions which should not be violated in order to
be able to proceed with the regression analyses in SPSS (Pallant, 2007). First of all, the data
was checked for outliers and missing values by making use of the statistical analyzing program
SPSS. The outliers that did occur were restored after verifying the original answers in the
questionnaires. No high numbers of missing data were detected after the execution of
descriptive analyses. In order to deal with the missing values, the option pairwise exclusion
Y. Peters
22
was used for the statistical analyse. With this option, only missing data that is required for a
specific analysis are excluded. Furthermore the assumption of collinearity was tested and
indicated that the recommended values did not exceed the values in this study. In general, the
major assumptions according to Pallant (2007) are almost fulfilled.
To test if the items in the scales measure the same construct in this sample as in
previous samples, PCA has been used. The specific outcomes of the PCA were explained
earlier (see measurements).
In line with the PCA, reliability analysis was used to ensure that the reliability of each
scale is high enough. Scales with a value above .7 (cronbach‟s alpha) are considered
acceptable, but values above .8 are more preferable (Pallant, 2007).
The same analyses are conducted on an aggregated level and on a disaggregated level.
First the analysis has been conducted with the variable MPS, followed by the five job
characteristics. Despite of the low reliability of the five scales in the model of Hackman and
Oldham, all scales were included in the research. Otherwise the model is not complete anymore
and no comparison with other research can be made.
To test the hypotheses in this study, multiple regression has been applied. The
independent variables were entered in the first model, the control variables in the second model
and the interaction variables in the third model.
In order to test the mediating effect in hypothesis three, it is important to notice that
there is a prerequisite for analyzing the possible significance of an indirect effect. All three the
direct effects, the effect of the independent variable on the mediator (hypothesis two) and the
effect of the mediator on the outcome variable (hypothesis three) and the effect of the
independent variable on the dependent variable (hypothesis one), should be significant (Baron
& Kenny, 1986). If the direct effects are significant, a Sobel test is necessary to test the
mediation effect. The direct effects were tested in hypothesis one, two and three. No further
analyses are needed in case of non significance results in hypothesis one, two or three.
Y. Peters
23
Results
Descriptive analysis
The means, standard deviations and correlations of the research variables in this study,
are provided in Table 3. This table shows that all the job characteristics correlate positively
with job satisfaction, which is in line with the expectations, because the model of Hackman and
Oldham assumed this relation earlier. For example, the more skill variety people experience in
their job, the more satisfied they are with their job (r = .32, p < 0.01).
Striking and not expected is that none of the job characteristics correlate significantly
with motivation to continue to work, the same applies for job satisfaction and motivation to
continue to work. The job characteristics correlate strongly with each other, which is not
unexpected because the results of the PCA already showed their relatedness.
The mean of the variable job satisfaction is higher (M=3.95, SD=0.61) than the mean of
the variable motivation to continue to work (M=3.54, SD=0,80). So people are on average
more satisfied with their job then that they are motivated to continue to work (p < .001). Older
people are more satisfied with their job, because there is a positive correlation between age and
job satisfaction (r =.25, p < 0.01), which is in line with earlier research about the relation
between age and job satisfaction. There is a strong positive correlation between job satisfaction
and MPS (r = .71, p < 0.001), which is in line with the expectations. It is also expected that the
MPS correlates with motivation to continue to work, but surprisingly this correlation is very
low and not significant.
Looking at the control variables, organizational tenure is significantly correlated with
motivation to continue to work. People who work longer in the company are less motivated to
continue to work (r = -.208, p < 0.01).
Since the correlations between the job characteristics seemed quite high the assumption
of collinearity was checked. Collinearity occurs when there are several independent variables
that, more or less, measure the same construct and therefore correlate at a high level with one
another. Ignoring collinearity can result in misleading regression results. According to Pallant
(2007), collinearity can be checked by assessing the tolerance-and Variance inflation factor
(hereafter VIF-values) which can be analysed in SPSS. If the tolerance-value is less than .10
and if VIF values exceed 10, one can speak of collinearity (Pallant, 2007). Results show a
tolerance value of .754, exceeding the minimum of .10 and a VIF value of 1.327, which is
below the required value of 10. These results indicated that the collinearity assumption was not
violated.
Y. Peters
24
Table 3: Means (M), standard deviations (SD) and correlations (N = 157)
Mean
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Organization a
Gender b
Age
Education
Organizational tenure
Jobsatisfaction c
Motivation to work c
Skill variety d
Task identity d
Task significance d
Autonomy d
Job feedback d
MPS
40.03
5.21
10.31
3.95
3.54
5.86
5.49
5.07
5.88
5.23
173.29
SD
10.43
1.07
10.50
0.61
0.80
0.88
1.00
1.04
0.79
0.86
58.31
1
.200*
-.424**
.314**
-.456**
-.059
.183*
.096
-.017
.211**
.100
.155
.157*
2
3
-.132
-.083
-.196*
-.119
.785**
-.019
.250**
**
.244
-.120
*
-.196
.053
-.085
.215**
-.085
-.002
-.081
.156
.015
.190*
-.077
.198*
4
5
-.303**
-.049
.240**
.281**
.159*
.199*
.130
.112
.200
.222**
-.208**
-.067
.173*
-.023
.047
.190*
.124
6
.101
.321**
.268**
.345**
.370**
.329**
.444**
7
-.011
-.022
.054
-.051
.155
.063
8
.530**
.488**
.690**
.364**
.710**
9
.319**
.589**
.402**
.693
10
.326**
.395**
.608**
11
12
.301**
.753** .791**
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Note: MPS = motivating potential score
a Organization was coded 0 (Kema) and 1 (Eiffel)
b gender was coded 0 (male) and 1 (female)
c Five point Likert-type scale (1 = disagree very much – 5 = agree very much
d Seven point Likert-type scale (1 = very little – 7 = very much)
25
Regression analyses
The job characteristics model of Hackman and Oldham (1976) is partly reflected in the
conceptual model of the current study (see figure 1 & 2). Since this study entails two
conceptual models, the analyses are also executed on two levels, aggregated level (MPS) and
disaggregated level (the five job characteristics separately).
Firstly the results at an aggregated level will be discussed, followed by the results at a
disaggregated level.
Analyses at an aggregated level
The effect of MPS and job satisfaction on motivation to continue to work
To test hypotheses 1a and 3a, multiple regression analysis was executed. First the
independent variables, MPS and job satisfaction were entered in SPSS with motivation to
continue to work as dependent variable. The first model explained a total variance of 1,1% for
motivation to continue to work, and was non-significant F (2,152) = .810, p = 0.45. After
adding the control variables, model 2 explained significantly more variance, namely a total
variance of 16,3% for motivation to continue to work F (5,147) = 5.335, p = 0.00.
The results of the second model were used in order to test hypothesis 1a, „the motivating
potential score is positively related to motivation to continue to work‟. Results in model 2
(table 4) show that MPS (ß = -.027, p = 0.77) does not have an effect on motivation to continue
to work. Therefore no support was found for hypothesis 1a; a higher motivating potential score
does not lead to more motivation to continue to work.
Hypothesis 3a, „job satisfaction is positively related to motivation to continue to work‟
can also be tested with the results in table 4, model 2. Results show a beta coefficient of .151
with p = 0.08. Therefore hypothesis 3 had to be rejected; more job satisfaction does not lead to
more motivation to continue to work.
Two of the control variables, education and gender, show a significant contribution in
explaining the variance in motivation to continue to work.
26
Table 4: Multiple regression predicting motivation to continue to work, standardized regression coefficients (N=157)
Motivation to continue to work
Independent variables
Job satisfaction
MPS
Model 1
Model 2
ß
p
ß
p
.091
.023
0.32
0.80
.151
-.027
0.08
0.77
.246
-.206
.221
.024
.095
0.00
0.11
0.01
0.80
0.45
Control variables
Gender ª
Organizational tenure
Educational level
Organization b
Age
R²
F R²
R²
F R²
.011
.810 0.45
.011
.810 0.45
.163
4.075 0.00
.152
5.335 0.00
Note:
a Gender was coded 0 (male) and 1 (female)
b Organization was coded 0 (Kema) and 1 (Eiffel)
The moderating effect of age on the relation between MPS and job satisfaction
In order to test hypothesis 2a and hypothesis 5 a second regression analysis was
executed. The variable MPS was entered in model 1 as an independent variable and job
satisfaction as dependent variable. Model 1 explained a total variance of 19,7% for job
satisfaction F (1,153) = 37.543, p = 0.00. The control variables were entered in the second
model and this model explained a total variance of 23,9% for job satisfaction. The change in
explained variance in model 2 is not significant ( R² = .042, p = 0.16). The control variables in
the second model do not influence the relation between MPS and job satisfaction. The third
model, in which the interaction variable was entered, explained a total variance of 24,3% for
job satisfaction (see table 5). This change in explained variance in model 3 is not significant
( R² = .004, p = 0.41).
To assess hypothesis 2a, the results of the second model will be used. Hypothesis 2a
„The motivating potential score, is positively related to job satisfaction‟ can be confirmed
based on the results showed in table 5, model 2. Results show that MPS has a positive effect on
job satisfaction (ß = .448, p = 0.00). Therefore hypothesis 2a can be confirmed.
Y. Peters
27
To assess hypothesis 5, the results of the third model will be used. The interaction
variable (MPS x age) had no significant influence on job satisfaction (ß = .279, p = 0.41). Age
does not have a moderating effect on the relation between MPS and job satisfaction. Therefore
hypothesis 5 „The relation of MPS on job satisfaction will be strengthened with age‟ cannot be
confirmed.
Table 5: Multiple regression predicting job satisfaction, standardized regression coefficients (N=157)
Job satisfaction
Independent variables
MPS
Model 1
ß
p
Model 2
ß
p
Model 3
ß
p
.444
.448
0.00
.223
0.39
.036
.059
-.086
.013
.083
0.63
0.63
0.28
0.60
0.70
.040
.052
-.094
-.041
-.068
0.60
0.67
0.24
0.64
0.75
.279
0.41
0.00
Control variables
Gender ª
Organizational tenure
Educational level
Organization b
Age
Interaction
MPS x age
R²
F R²
R²
F R²
.197
37.543
.197
37.543
0.00
0.00
.239
7.743
.042
1.629
0.00
0.16
.243
6.723 0.00
.004
.696 0.41
Note:
a Gender was coded 0 (male) and 1 (female)
b Organization was coded 0 (Kema) and 1 (Eiffel)
The mediating effect of job satisfaction
In order to test hypothesis 4a, if job satisfaction mediated the relationship between the
MPS and motivation to continue to work, path analysis was considered as the appropriate
analysis to be used. As mentioned earlier, there is a prerequisite for analyzing the possible
significance of an indirect effect, namely that both direct effects (i.e. the effect of the
independent variable on the mediator and the effect of the mediator on the outcome variable)
should be significant (Baron & Kenny, 1986). As shown in figure 3, there is no direct effect
between MPS and motivation to continue to work and there is also no mediating effect, because
of the non-significant relation between job satisfaction and motivation to continue to work.
Y. Peters
28
Therefore hypothesis 4a‟the MPS is indirectly positively related to motivation to
continue to work through job satisfaction‟ has been rejected.
Job
satisfaction
ß = .448, p = 0.00
ß = .151, p = 0.08
MPS
Motivation to continue to work
ß = -.027, p = 0.80
Figure 3: mediating effect of job satisfaction
Analyses at a disaggregated level
The effect of perceived job characteristics and job satisfaction on motivation to continue to
work
In this regression analysis, motivation to continue to work was entered as dependent
variable and job satisfaction and the five job characteristics as independent variables in the first
model. This model explained a total variance of 4,4% for motivation to continue to work. The
second model, after adding the control variables, explained a total variance of 20,2%
F (5,143) = 5.649, p = 0.00. This change in explained variance in model 2 is significant (
R²
= .158, p = 0.00), therefore hypothesis 1b and 3b can be assessed, based on the results of the
second model (see table 6).
First the results in order to test hypothesis 1b will be discussed. The results in table 6
showed only a positive effect between job feedback and motivation to continue to work (ß =
.182, p = 0.05). This is very unlikely, because no significant correlation was found between job
feedback and motivation to continue to work (see table 3). The relation between job feedback
and motivation to work is probably due to a third, unseen factor, called a spurious relation. In
this case, the third factor is most likely organizational tenure, because this control variable
correlates significantly with both job feedback and motivation to continue to work. An
additional regression analysis without organizational tenure as control variable, showed a nonsignificant relation between job feedback and motivation to continue to work (ß = .153, p =
0.10). This is an indication that the relation which was found is a spurious relation. Therefore
the hypothesis, „perceived job feedback is positively related to motivation to continue to work‟
cannot be confirmed. The other four job characteristics do not have a significant effect on
Y. Peters
29
motivation to continue to work at all and therefore no support was found for the general
hypothesis „the perceived five job characteristics, including, skill variety, task identity, task
significance, autonomy, feedback are positive related to motivation to continue to work‟.
Hypothesis 3b „job satisfaction is positively related with motivation to continue to
work‟ cannot be confirmed. Job satisfaction does not have a positive effect on motivation to
continue to work (ß = .169, p = 0.06). Model 2 shows that three of the five control variables,
gender, organizational tenure and education, have a significant contribution in explaining the
variance in motivation to continue to work.
Table 6: Multiple regression predicting motivation to continue to work, standardized regression coefficients (N=157)
Motivation to continue to work
Model 1
ß
p
Model 2
ß
p
Independent variables
Job satisfaction
.096
0.30
.169
0.06
Skill variety
Task identity
Task significance
Autonomy
Job feedback
-.008
-.056
.007
-.103
.178
0.95
0.60
0.95
0.40
0.06
-.074
-.022
-.029
-.112
.182
0.54
0.83
0.76
0.34
0.05
.219
-.274
.231
-.003
.117
0.01
0.04
0.01
0.98
0.35
Control variables
Gender ª
Organizational tenure
Educational level
Organization b
Age
R²
F R²
R²
F R²
.044
1.138 0.34
.044
1.138 0.34
.202
3.286 0.00
.158
5.649 0.00
Note:
a Gender was coded 0 (male) and 1 (female)
b Organization was coded 0 (Kema) and 1 (Eiffel)
Y. Peters
30
The moderating effect of age on the relation between perceived job characteristics and job
satisfaction
In this regression analysis, the job characteristics were entered in model 1 as
independent variables and job satisfaction as dependent variable. The first model explained
21,9% of the variance for job satisfaction. In the second model the control variables were
added and this model explained 27,3% of the variance for job satisfaction, but this change in
explained variance is non-significant F (5,144) = 2.107, p = 0.07. In model 3, the interaction
effect is added and resulted in an explained variance of 30,3%. The results show a nonsignificance change in model 3 F (5,139) = 1.235, p = 0.30. Based on this regression analysis,
six hypotheses can be assessed (hypothesis 2b and hypotheses 6,7,8,9 and 10)
To test hypothesis 2b, „the perceived five job characteristics, including, skill variety,
task identity, task significance, autonomy, feedback are positively related to job satisfaction‟
the results in model 2 can be used. The results show that two of the five job characteristics, task
significance and autonomy, do have a positive effect on job satisfaction (see table 7). Therefore
the hypothesis can be confirmed for task significance and autonomy. The other three job
characteristics, skill variety, task identity and job feedback do not have a significant effect on
job satisfaction and therefore no support was found for these hypothesis.
Hypotheses 6,7,8,9 and 10, about the moderating effect of age on the relationship
between the job characteristics (separately) and job satisfaction, cannot be confirmed. None of
the interaction effects have a significant effect on job satisfaction (see table 7). Because the
direction of the interaction effect is not the same for all the job characteristics, the hypotheses
will be summarized below.
Hypothesis 6 „the effect of perceived skill variety on job satisfaction will be strengthened with
age‟ cannot be confirmed.
Hypothesis 7 „the effect of perceived task identity on job satisfaction will be strengthened with
age‟ cannot be confirmed
Hypothesis 8 „the effect of perceived task significance on job satisfaction will be strengthened
with age cannot be confirmed.
Hypothesis 9 „the effect of perceived autonomy on job satisfaction will be strengthened with
age‟ cannot be confirmed.
Hypothesis 10 „the effect of perceived job feedback on job satisfaction will be weakened with
age‟ cannot be confirmed.
Y. Peters
31
Table 7: Multiple regression predicting job satisfaction, standardized regression coefficients (N=157)
Job satisfaction
Model 1
ß
p
Model 2
ß
p
Model 3
ß
p
-.026
-.021
.200
.280
.183
.046
-.061
.236
.256
.155
0.69
0.52
0.01
0.02
0.07
.053
-.083
.247
.260
.134
0.65
0.93
0.01
0.02
0.13
Gender ª
Organizational tenure b
Educational level
Organization
.053
.075
-.081
-.075
0.48
0.55
0.32
0.40
.056
.104
-.067
-.067
0.46
0.41
0.42
0.46
Age
.092
0.44
.089
0.46
-.131
-.138
.155
.185
.012
0.28
0.18
0.10
0.10
0.90
Independent variables
Skill variety
Task identity
Task significance
Autonomy
Job feedback
0.81
0.83
0.02
0.01
0.03
Control variables
Interaction
Skill variety x age
Task identity x age
Task significance x age
Autonomy x age
Job feedback x age
R²
F R²
R²
F R²
.219
8.372 0.00
.219
8.372 0.00
.273
5.395 0.00
.053
2.107 0.07
.303
4.038 0.00
.031
1.235 0.30
Note:
a Gender was coded 0 (male) and 1 (female)
b Organization was coded 0 (Kema) and 1 (Eiffel)
The mediating effect of job satisfaction
In order to test hypothesis 4b, predicting that job satisfaction mediated the relationship
between the job characteristics and motivation to continue to work, path analysis was
considered as the appropriate analysis to be used. The direct effect of task significance and
autonomy on job satisfaction were significant (see figure 4), but the direct effect of job
satisfaction (the effect of the mediator on the outcome variable) was not significant.
Therefore no (partial) mediating effect was found (see figure 4) and no further analyses are
necessary. Hypothesis 4b‟the perceived job characteristics are indirectly positively related to
motivation to continue to work through job satisfaction‟ has been rejected.
Y. Peters
32
Job
satisfaction
ß = .256, p = 0.02
ß = .169, p = 0.06
autonomy
Motivation to continue to work
ß = -.112, p = 0.34
Job
satisfaction
ß = .236, p = 0.01
ß = .169, p = 0.06
task significance
Motivation to continue to work
ß = -.029, p = 0.76
Figure 4: mediating effect of job satisfaction
Y. Peters
33
Conceptual models: a summary
Age
+
Perceived
Motivating
Potential Score
+
+
Motivation to
continue to work
Job satisfaction
ß = .448***
+
Figure 5: Research model with Beta-values for the significant relationships on an aggregated level
Note. *** p < .001, ** p >.01, *p > .05
Age
Perceived
Job characteristics
Skill variety
Task identity
Task
significance
Autonomy
+
+
ß = .236**
+
+
+
+
+
+
ß = .256* +
-
job satisfaction
+
Motivation
to continue
to work
Job feedback
+
Figure 6: Research model with Beta-values for the significant relationships on a disaggregated level
Note. *** p < .001, ** p >.01, *p > .05
Y. Peters
34
Conclusion and discussion
In this study the model of Hackman and Oldham with it‟s origin in the 70‟s is partly
tested with age as a supplement and motivation to continue to work as a „new concept‟. So an
„old model‟ is extended with a „new concept‟. The model is tested at two levels, at an
aggregated (MPS) and at a disaggregated level (five job characteristics separately). The
purpose is to examine if older people experience more job satisfaction through the presence of
the job characteristics compared to younger people and if older people, who are satisfied with
their job, are more willing to continue to work. In order to examine the different assumptions,
data was gathered through a questionnaire and resulted in a sample size of 157 working people.
This study produced some unexpected but interesting results. A positive relation between MPS
and job satisfaction was found in this research. Another positive relation which was found in
this study is the relation between two of the job characteristics (task significance and
autonomy) and job satisfaction. This is partly in line with previous research, because various
research found a positive relation for all five the job characteristics. In contrast with the
expectation that age has a moderating effect on the relation between the job
characteristics/MPS and job satisfaction which was not affirmed in this study. The expectation
that the job characteristics/MPS have a positive indirect effect on motivation to continue to
work through job satisfaction is also not confirmed by the results in this study. One of the job
characteristics, job feedback, seemed to have a positive direct effect on motivation to continue
to work, but this is probably a spurious relation as there is no causal connection between these
variables. No relation was found between MPS and motivation to continue to work. The theory
suggested a positive relation between job satisfaction and motivation to continue to work, but
surprisingly the results did not show a relation at all, therefore the mediating effect of job
satisfaction could also not be confirmed. In sum, MPS, autonomy and task significance are
positively related to job satisfaction. The other expected relations based on the model of
Hackman and Oldham (1976) are not confirmed in this study. These results are discussed
below.
The effect of MPS/the five perceived job characteristics and job satisfaction on motivation
to continue to work
MPS/the perceived job characteristics
According to the job characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham, 1976), the five job
characteristics have a positive effect on different work outcomes, like work motivation. The
Y. Peters
35
results show only a positive effect of job feedback on motivation to continue to work, which is
probably due to a third variable. Organizational tenure, as a control variable, is significantly
correlated with both job feedback and motivation to continue to work. It is possible that
motivation to continue to work decreases as well as job feedback increases due to
organizational tenure through which a relation between motivation to continue to work and job
feedback arises. A regression analysis without this control variable confirmed this expectation;
the relation was not significant anymore. It seems that organizational tenure influences (in a
negative way) motivation to continue to work instead of the job characteristics. The other four
job characteristics did not show a positive effect on motivation to continue to work, which is
not surprising because of the missing correlation between each of the job characteristics and
motivation to continue to work. The same accounts for the relation between MPS and
motivation to continue to work, which is also not surprising because MPS is a single index
which reflects the five job characteristics.
A possible explanation for both the missing relations is the variety in used definitions of
the dependent variable, „motivation‟, in earlier research. In this research the focus lies on
motivation to continue to work, instead of work motivation in general. The relation between the
job characteristics and work motivation is investigated and confirmed (Bassey, 2002; Fried &
Ferris, 1987), but the relation between the job characteristics and motivation to continue to
work is not proven yet. It is likely that the job characteristics are also important in order to
motivate people to stay in the labour market, because they are critical for achieving employees
motivation. However, the relation between the job characteristics and motivation to continue to
work could not be confirmed in this study. Based on these results, the characteristics are not
critical in achieving motivation to continue to work and do not motivate people to stay longer
in the labour market. An explanation could be that there are other reasons why people want to
continue to work. External factors could have a relevant influence on people‟s motivation to
continue to work for example, the financial context, expected future income from work, income
level, gender, marital status, partner‟s income level, the health status from employees and
whether partner has taken early retirement and whether friends had taken early retirement
(Humphrey, Costigan, Pickering, Stratford & Barnes (2003). Templer, Amstrong-Stassen and
Cattaneo (2010) focused for example on three specific motives that older people have indicated
as important in influencing their decision to continue to work: financial necessity in which age,
gender and marital status would predict financial reasons for continuing to work, work
fulfilment and generativity (refers to having the opportunity to share knowledge and experience
with younger generations). The results suggest that the power of financial rewards varies for
Y. Peters
36
different groups of employees and certainly varies according to age, gender and marital status.
The focus should not only be on financial rewards but also on work fulfilment and generativity
motives that also influence the decision of older workers to continue working (Templer et al.,
2010). The factors that are associated with work fulfilment and generativity motives are workrelated and can be influenced by organizational policies and practices. For employers, it is
important to retain older workers who want to remain rather than those who are forced to
remain (Templer et al., 2010). In line with this, Armstrong-Stassen (2008) found that
organizations that invest in training and development practices for all their employees,
including older people, will be more successful in retaining older employees than organizations
that are not investing in these practices for all their employees. According to Shacklock et al.,
(2009) the importance of work, flexibility at work and interests outside of work are important
factors that influence the decision to continue working.
The reliability analysis showed a low reliability of the scales which measure the five job
characteristics. Two of the scales showed a Cronbach alpha coefficient below .60, which could
be a reason why the results did not show a relation between the job characteristics and
motivation to continue to work.
Job satisfaction
The expectation was that there would be a positive relation between job satisfaction and
motivation to continue to work. However, the results did not show a relation between these
variables at all. It is possible that other motives are stronger than job satisfaction and therefore
no relation was found between job satisfaction and motivation to continue to work.
Shacklock and Brunetto (2011) investigated the impact of work-related factors on the
intentions of older workers to continue in employment. Some examples of work related
variables that have a positive effect on the motivation to continue to work are: flexible working
arrangements, interests outside work and interpersonal relationships. The variable importance
of work has a negative effect on motivation to continue to work (Shacklock et al., 2009). Job
satisfaction is probably not that important to motivate older workers to continue to work.
Another possible explanation for the missing relation between job satisfaction and
motivation to continue to work is the opposite relation between job satisfaction and motivation
to continue to work for older and younger employees. A positive relation on the one hand and a
negative relation on the other hand could neutralizes the relation between the two variables,
and as a consequence, no relation can be found at all. Age as moderator on the relation between
job satisfaction and motivation to continue to work could solve this problem. The data was split
Y. Peters
37
into two age categories (age < 50 and age ≥ 50) in order to find out if there is a difference in the
correlation between the two age categories, job satisfaction and motivation to continue to work.
For the age category age < 50 (N = 128), a significant correlation was found between age and
job satisfaction (r = .251, p < 0.01) and also between job satisfaction and motivation to
continue to work (r = .226, p < 0.05). For the age category age ≥ 50 (N = 29), no significant
correlations were found between age, job satisfaction and motivation to continue to work. The
N of the two categories show an unequal spreading between the two categories, through which
the results for the category age ≥ 50 are not representative. However, there are differences in
the correlation between the two age categories and future research should find out whether age
moderates the effect on the relation between job satisfaction and motivation to continue to
work.
The moderating effect of age on the relation between MPS/job characteristics and job
satisfaction
MPS/job characteristics and job satisfaction
The results of this study did not show that all the job characteristics have a positive
effect on job satisfaction. Only two of the five characteristics, task significance and autonomy
have a significant positive effect on job satisfaction. This result supports partly existing
research (Chang & Lee, 2006; Humphrey et al., 2007; Fried & Ferris, 1987).
The job characteristics together in a single MPS index lead to a significant effect on job
satisfaction, but the job characteristics as separate variables in a regression analysis lead to only
two significant relations. An explanation could be that the strong correlation between the job
characteristics suppressed the effect of the job characteristics separately. Because of that only
the variables with the strongest effect, task significance and autonomy, show a positive relation
with job satisfaction. The assumption of collinearity was checked and the results indicated that
the collinearity assumption was not violated. Despite of this, the results of the factor analysis
showed a one factor solution instead of a five factor solution, which means that the respondents
did not clearly noticed the five different constructs.
Only 15 items of the Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS) were used in order to measure the
five job characteristics, while the JDS consists of 83 items in total. In this research job
satisfaction is measured through the VBBA (van Veldhoven & Meijman, 2008) instead of the
Job Diagnostic Survey, because the reliability of the VBBA scale is higher than the JDS scale.
The JDS is developed and tested as a whole by Hackman and Oldham (1976). The JDS is not
used completely in this study and this could be an explanation why hypothesis two only can be
Y. Peters
38
confirmed partly. It is possible that the JDS only works as a whole and not with only 15 items
in combination with different scales.
Another explanation could be that the job characteristics model with it‟s origin in the
late 70‟s has been obsolete, since it came into existence more then 30 years ago. You could say
that this was expected, but based on recent studies (Chang & Lee, 2006; Visser-Lapré, 2008), it
was expected that the model of Hackman and Oldham (1976) still works. However the results
of this study show the opposite. Therefore an explanation could be that the nature of work has
changed during the years. Work activities and life activities are brought together through worklife integration (Friedman, Christensen & De Groot, 1998). Flexible work situations, which are
not time and place specific, made that the distinction between work and non-work has been
blurred (Smith, 1997). An example of the flexible work situation is virtual work, through which
employers and employees can work at any place at any time (Torraco, 2005). The job
characteristics model (Hackman & Oldham, 1976) was never intended to explain how to design
the five job characteristics in modern work environments characterized by the geographical and
temporal separation of the worker from supervisors and others (Torraco, 2005). The job
characteristics model discusses work design only at the job and task level, but nowadays there
is a need for a multilevel work design theory which relates to multiple levels of the
organization (Torraco, 2005).
The moderating effect of age
The stereotypical managerial view with regard to older workers is that they are
unwilling or unable to learn new skills. Previous research found the opposite. Older people also
want an interesting job and they also want to improve existing and acquire new skills (Kooij et
al., 2008). In fact this is important in order to motivate older people to remain in the workforce
(Armstrong -Stassen, 2009). In this study no moderating effect of age was found in the relation
between MPS and job satisfaction. The same is appropriate for the relation between the
perceived job characteristics and job satisfaction with age as moderator.
Therefore it is important that both younger and older people have an interesting job and
can improve and acquire new skills. Age has no moderating effect on the relation between for
example skill variety and job satisfaction. Continued opportunities to upgrade existing and
acquire new skills is an example of an HR practice which is related to job satisfaction and
could motivate older people to continue to work (Armstrong - Stassen, 2009). Another HR
practice to increase job satisfaction and to motivate older people, is to ensure that they have
Y. Peters
39
interesting work. It is possible that these HR practices have more influence on job satisfaction
and the decision of older workers to continue to work.
Another explanation is that there are maybe no differences in the motives for younger or
older people. It could be that it is not necessary to motivate ageing employees differently. The
results in this study imply that this is not necessary for the five job characteristics.
It is just important to make sure that employees have all five the job characteristics in
their job because MPS has a positive effect on job satisfaction.
The mediating effect of job satisfaction
The results in this study could not confirm the expectation that there is an indirect effect
between the job characteristics and motivation to continue to work through job satisfaction.
A possible explanation is that job satisfaction is not the right mediator in this relation. Job
satisfaction refers to affective feelings specific towards the job or work role which is in line
with the job characteristics, because they are also job specific, but the relation with motivation
to continue to work is missing.
In the correlation matrix (table 3) no significant correlation was found between one of
the job characteristics and motivation to continue to work, whereas all the five job
characteristics correlate with job satisfaction. There is also no correlation found between job
satisfaction and motivation to continue to work, which could indicate that there is no link
between the job characteristics and job satisfaction on the one hand and motivation on the other
hand.
As mentioned earlier, employees are most likely motivated by other motivators instead
of job specific motivators. An example could be affective commitment as mediator (Kuvaas,
2006) and high commitment HR practices as motivators (Kooij, 2010). High commitment HR
practices have a stronger association with affective commitment than with job satisfaction
(Kooij, 2010). This is because affective commitment refers to affective feelings towards the
organization in general and the social exchange theory argues that employees view high
commitment HR practices as organizational support, which leads to a stronger association
between affective commitment and high commitment HR practices (Kooij, 2010). According to
the social exchange theory, motivation to continue to work is also positively influenced by high
commitment HR practices (Kooij, 2010). High commitment HR practices could have an
indirect effect on motivation to continue to work, through affective commitment. Maybe it is
not the job, but the commitment to the organization which can motivate people to continue
working.
Y. Peters
40
It is also possible that other motives are stronger than job satisfaction and therefore no
relation was found between job satisfaction and motivation to continue to work. Because of the
missing relation between these two variables, the five job characteristics separately, even as the
MPS, have no influence on motivation to continue to work. Autonomy, task significance and
the MPS have a positive effect on job satisfaction but do not effect people‟s motivation to
continue to work. The five job characteristics and job satisfaction are probably not that
important for employees‟ motivation to continue to work.
Limitations and directions for future research
There are some limitations in this study that should be considered when
interpreting the results.
The use of a cross-sectional design makes it difficult to make causal inferences about
the relations among the job characteristics, job satisfaction and motivation to continue to work.
A recommendation for future research is to conduct a longitudinal research to investigate if the
motivators to continue to work changes with age. A panel study, in which the same group of
people receive the same questionnaires through the different life stages, is needed in order to
investigate if there are differences between the answers of the same group of ageing people.
This opens the possibility to find out if the needs of different HR practices or motivators
change with age. A well-known disadvantage of this method is the high costs and time which
are needed to do this research.
Because only few empirical research was found for the parts of the conceptual model
used in this research and also little evidence was found for the moderator effect of age, more
research about how to motivate older people and the moderating effect of age between job
characteristics and job satisfaction is needed.
Furthermore, the reliability of the scales to measure the five job characteristics is low
(not above the accepted rule of thumb of α 0.6 - 0.7, which indicates acceptable reliability).
The Job Diagnostic Survey (Hackman & Oldham, 1976) exists already 30 years. It is therefore
possible that the JDS is not representative anymore. This is also plausible because of the low
reliability of the scales in this study. In line with this, another limitation is that not the whole
job characteristics model like Hackman and Oldham (1976) developed it, is used in this study,
which could have influenced the results in this research.
The sample size is important in order to find certain relations. An effect of autonomy on
job satisfaction already exists and the effect of job satisfaction on motivation to continue to
Y. Peters
41
work is nearly significant (ß = .169, p = 0.06). On the other hand, the missing correlation
between job satisfaction and motivation to continue to work is an indication that there is no
causal connection. It is likely that the mediating effect, where job satisfaction the mediator is,
will be significant if the sample size is larger, but the missing correlation indicates a spurious
relation. So a direction for future research in general is to take a larger sample size in order to
find relations who are now nearly significant, but in case of the mediating effect in this study
attention has to be paid to the possibility of a spurious relation.
An other recommendation for future research is the use of a qualitative research method
in order to investigate what motivates both older and younger people. Interviewing people is a
possibility to find out what motivates employees and if there is a difference between the
motives to continue to work between younger and older people. A selection can be made from
the answers received in the interviews with the most important motivators for younger and
older people. In a quantitative study one could investigate if age has a moderating effect in the
relation between the motivators and job satisfaction or motivation to continue to work in
different samples.
It is likely that organizational tenure is the third factor which caused the spurious
relation between job feedback and motivation to continue to work. A correlation between
motivation to continue to work was found even as a significant effect on motivation to continue
to work. A few studies have investigated the relation between organizational tenure and
motivation to work. Kuvaas (2006) investigated this relation and found a positive relation
between organizational tenure and intrinsic motivation. Therefore it is worthy to investigate
this relation in dept, because motivation to work differs from motivation to continue to work
and because of the negative correlation which was found in this study. Further research is
necessary to draw a conclusion about the direction of the relation between organizational
tenure and motivation to work.
Implications
Practical implications
Despite these limitations and suggestions for future research, the results of this study do
have practical implications as well. There are several results that provide interesting insights
for organizations. First, employers should be aware of the important role of task significance
and autonomy for both older and younger employees because no moderating effect of age was
found. These two job characteristics have a positive effect on job satisfaction irrespective of
age. In spite of the fact that the other three characteristics have no significant effect on job
Y. Peters
42
satisfaction separately, they are also important in relation with job satisfaction, because the
MPS does have a significant effect on job satisfaction.
Furthermore, the fact that job satisfaction has no influence on motivation to continue to
work means that not job satisfaction but other variables motivate employees to continue to
work. Organizations do not have to pay extra attention to job satisfaction if they want to
motivate their employees to continue to work.
Theoretical implications
The results in this study extend the limited knowledge about factors affecting older
workers‟ intentions to continue in employment. Are there differences in motivators between
younger and older people? The results show that prejudices about older workers and what
motivates them are not always true. Older workers also want to learn and be challenged by new
issues. It is also important to know, that in this study, there is no relation between job
satisfaction and motivation to continue to work, which means that other factors are important to
motivate people to continue to work. Future research can focus on other factors instead of job
satisfaction.
Another theoretical implication is that the use of the job characteristics model should be
reconsidered because of the low reliability of the scales and the different ways to execute the
model. Entering all the five characteristics together in a model leads to only two significant job
characteristics (task significance and autonomy) on job satisfaction. The five job characteristics
together as a motivating potential score lead to a significant effect on job satisfaction; due to
this, the importance of all the job characteristics can be acknowledged. Such results may be
very helpful in the assignment of individuals to particular jobs. Substantially more research is
needed on individual differences in general and on the outcomes. Different results in various
studies with the same job characteristics as independent variable and job satisfaction as
dependent variable implies that it is important to investigate how to use the job characteristics
model through which the best results can be accomplished.
The original model of Hackman and Oldham (1976) was extended with age as
moderator and motivation to continue to work as outcome variable in this research. This
extended model did not show the expected relations in this research, through which extension
of a original model should be reconsidered.
The assumption that older people need different job characteristics in order to be
satisfied with their job compared to younger people is not truly supported by the results in this
research, which does not mean that there are no differences in the way employees, in different
Y. Peters
43
age categories, can be motivated to continue to work. It implies that another approach is needed
to investigate which factors affect older workers‟ intentions to continue in employment.
Y. Peters
44
References
Aldag, R.J., & Brief, A.P. (1976). Age and reactions to task characteristics. Journal of
Employment Counseling, 13(3), 109-114.
Armstrong-Stassen, M. (2008). Organisational practices and the post-retirement employment
experience of older workers. Human Resource Management Journal, 18(1), 36-53.
Baltes, P.B. (1987). Theoretical Propositions of Life-Span Developmental Psychology: on the
Dynamics Between Growth and Decline. Developmental Psychology, 23, 611-626.
Bassey, M. (2002). Motivation and work: investigation and analysis of motivational factors at
Work. Available at: www.ep.liu.se/exjobb/eki/2002/fek/009/
Beehr, T. A., Glazer. S., Nielson, N.L., & Farmer, S.J. (2000). Work and nonwork predictors of
employees retirement ages. Journal of Vocational Behavior 57, 206-255.
Behson, S.J., Eddy, E.R., & Lorenzet, S.J. (2000). The importance of the critical
psychological states in the job characteristics model: a meta-analytic and structural
equations modelling examination. Current Research in Social Psychology, 5 (12), 170189.
Van Den Berg, P.T., & Van Der Velde, M.E.G. (2005). Relationships of functional flexibility
with individual and work factors. Journal of Business and Psychology, 20, 111-129.
Bhuian, S.N., Al-Shammari, E.S., & Jefri, O.A. (1996). Organization commitment, job
satisfaction and job characteristics: an empirical study of expatriates in Saudi Arabia.
International Journal of Commerce & Management, 6 (3), 57-80.
Bidewell, J., Griffin, B., & Hesketh, B. (2006). Timing of retirement: Including a delay
discounting perspective in retirement models. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 68, 368–
387.
Y. Peters
45
Buelens, M., & Van den Broek, H. (2007). An Analysis of Differences in Work Motivation
between Public and Private Sector Organizations. Public Administration Review, 67,
65-74.
Chang, S., & Lee, M. (2006). Relationships among personality traits, job characteristics, job
satisfaction and organizational commitment – an empirical study in Taiwan. The
Business Review Cambridge, 6, 201-207.
Cultureel Bureau voor de Statistiek (2008). Nationale enquête arbeidsomstandigheden 2008.
retrieved from http://www.tno.nl/downloads/Rapport-NEA-2008.pdf
Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek (2009). Kerncijfers van de bevolkingsprognose, 20082050 retreived from
http://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?DM=SLNL&PA=71867NED&D1=46&D2=a&D3=a&HDR=G1&STB=G2,T&VW=T
Debnath, S.C., Tandon, S., & Pointer, L.V. (2007). Designing business school courses to
promote student motivation: an application of the job characteristics model. Journal of
Management Education, 31, 812-831.
Eichar, D.M., Norland, S., Brady, E.M. & Fortinsky, R.H. (1991). The job satisfaction of
older workers. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 12, 609-620.
Fisher III, S.H., & Herrick, R. (2002). Whistle while you work: job satisfaction and retirement
from the U.S. house. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 27, 445-457.
Fried, Y., & Ferris, G. R. (1987). The validity of the job characteristics model: A review and
meta-analysis. Personnel Psychology, 40, 287-322.
Friedman, S.D., Christensen, P.,& de Groot, J. (1998). Work and life: The end of the zero-sum
game. Harvard Business Review, 76, 6, 119-129.
Garg, P., & Rastogi, R. (2005). New model of job design: motivating employees‟ performance.
Y. Peters
46
Journal of Management Development, 25, 572-587.
Gerhart, B. (1987). How important are dispositional factors as determinants of job satisfaction?
Implications for job design and other personnel programs. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 72, 366-373.
Glisson, C., & Durick, M. (1988). Predictors of job satisfaction and organizational
commitment. Administrative Science Quarterly, 33 (1), 61-81.
Hackman, R.J., Oldham, G., Janson, R., & Purdy, K. (1975). A new strategy for job
enrichment. California Management Review. 17, 57-71.
Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a
theory. Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 16, 250-279.
Hackman, J.R. & Oldham, G.R. (1980). Work Redesign. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
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
Humphrey, A., Costigan, P., Pickering, K., Stratford, N. and Barnes, M. (2003), “Factors
affecting the labour market participation of older workers”, Research Report No. 200,
Department for Work and Pensions, available at:
http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd5/rports2005-2006/ageposfar8.pdf (accessed 10
October 2010).
Iverson, R.D., & Currivan, D.B. (2003). Union participation, job satisfaction, and employee
turnover: an event-history analysis of the exit-voice hypothesis. Industrial Relations 42
(1), 101-105.
Johns, G., Xie, J., & Fang, Y. (1992). Mediating and moderating effects in job design. Journal
of Management, 18, 657-676.
Y. Peters
47
De Jonge, J.(1995). Job Autonomy, Well-being, and Health: A study among Dutch health care
workers. Maastricht: Datawyse.
Kanfer, R., & Ackerman, P.L. (2004). Aging, adult development, and work motivation.
Academy of Management Review, 29, 440–458.
Katz, R. (1978). The influence of job longevity on employee reactions to task characteristics.
Human Relations, 31, 703-725.
Kavanaugh, J., & Duffy, J.A., & Lilly, J. (2006). The relationship between job satisfaction
and demographic variables for healthcare professionals. Management Research News,
29, 304-325
Kooij, T.A.M. (2010). Motivating Older Workers A Lifespan Perspective on the Role of
Perceived HR Practices. Dissertation, Amsterdam, The Netherlands: University of
Amsterdam.
Kooij, T.A.M., De Lange, A.H., Jansen, P. G.W. & Dikkers, J.S.E. (2008). Older workers‟
motivation to continue to work: five meanings of age; a conceptual review. Journal of
Managerial Psychology, 23, 364-394.
Kuvaas, B. (2006), Work performance, affective commitment, and work motivation: the roles
of pay administration and pay level. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 27, 365–385.
De Lange, A., Taris, T., Jansen, P., Kompier, M., Houtman, I. & Bongers, P. (2005). Werk en
motivatie om te leren: zijn er verschillen tussen jongere en oudere werknemers?
Gedrag & Organisatie, 18, 309-325.
De Lange, W., & Thijssen, J. (2007). De waardevolle senior: personeelsbeleid voor oudere
werknemers. Amsterdam: Weka.
Lee, R. & Wilbur, E.R. (1985). Age, education, job tenure, salary, job characteristics, and job
satisfaction: a multivariate analysis. Human Relations, 38, 781-791.
Y. Peters
48
Millette, V. & Gagne´, M. (2008). Designing volunteers‟ tasks to maximize motivation,
satisfaction and performance: The impact of job characteristics on volunteer
engagement. Motivation and Emotion, 32, 11–22.
Moynihan, D.P., & Pandey, S.K. (2007). Finding workable levers over work motivation:
Comparing job satisfaction, job involvement, and organizational commitment.
Administration and society,39, 803-832.
Nakhata, C. (2010). The Relationship between Job Dimensions and Job Satisfaction of SME
Entrepreneurs in Thailand. The Journal of American Academy of Business, 15, 220-227.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Pallant, J. (2005). SPSS survival manual. Open University Press: New York.
Paynter, J.L. (2004). The motivational profiles of teachers: Teachers‟ preferences for
extrinsic, intrinsic, and moral motivators. Unpublished dissertation, The John Hopkins
University,Baltimore. In Kooij, T.A.M. (2010). Motivating Older Workers A Lifespan
Perspective on the Role of Perceived HR Practices. Dissertation, Amsterdam, The
Netherlands: University of Amsterdam.
Pool, S.W. (1997). The relationship of job satisfaction with substitutes of leadership, leadership
behaviour and work motivation. The Journal of Psychology, 131(3), 271-283.
Schmitt, N., & McCune, J.T. (1981). The relationship between job attitudes and the decision to
retire. Academy of Management Journal, 24, 795-802.
Schwab, D.P. & Heneman, H.G. (1977). Age and Satisfaction with dimensions of work.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 10, 212–220.
Shacklock, K., Brunetto, Y., & Nelson, S. (2009). The different variables that affect older
Y. Peters
49
males‟ and females‟ intentions to continue working. Asia Pacific Journal of Human
Resources, 47, 79-101.
Sibbald, B., & Bojke, C., & Gravelle, H. (2003). Primary care - National survey of job
satisfaction and retirement intentions among general practitioners in England. British
Medical Journal, 326, 22-23.
Smith, V. (1997). New forms of work organization. Annual Review of Sociology, 23, 315–339.
Spector, P.E. (1997). Job satisfaction: Application, Assessment, Cause, and Consequences.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Templer, A., Amstrong-Stassen, M., & Cattaneo, J. (2010). Antecedents of older workers‟
motives for continuing to work. Career Development International, 15, 479-500.
Topa, G., Moriano, J.A., Depolo, M., Alcover, C., & Morales, J.F. (2007). Antecedents and
consequences of retirement planning and decision-making: A meta-analysis and model.
Journal of Vocational Behavior 75, 38–55.
Torraco, R.J. (2005). Work Design Theory: A review and critique with implications for human
resource development. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 16, 1, 85-109.
United Nations (2007). World Economic and Social Survey 2007. Development in an Ageing
World. New York: United Nation Publication.
Van Veldhoven, M., Meijman, T.F. (2008). Het meten van psychosociale arbeidsbelasting met
een vragenlijst: de vragenlijst beleving en beoordeling van de arbeid (VBBA).
Nederlands Instituut voor Arbeidsomstandigheden, Amsterdam.
Vinke, Rob H.W. (2002). ''Zoeken naar intrinsieke motivatie.'' Gids voor
Personeelsmanagement, 81, 16-19.
Visser-Lapré, M.M. (2008). Van “vergrijzing naar verzilvering”. Ministerie van Sociale Zaken
en Werkgelegenheid: Den Haag
Y. Peters
50
Warr, P. (2001). Age and work behaviour: Physical attributes, cognitive abilities, knowledge,
personality traits, and motives. International Review of Industrial and Organizational
Psychology, 16, 1–36.
Wernimont, P.F. (1966). Intrinsic and extrinsic factors in job satisfaction. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 50(1), 41-50.
Y. Peters
51
Appendix A
Measurement scales
Since the questionnaires in this research are distributed in the Netherlands, the items can be
found below in Dutch.
Plezier in het werk
neutraal
Mee
eens
neutraal
Helemaal
mee oneens
Mee
eens
Helemaal
mee eens
Mee
oneens
Helemaal
mee eens
1
2
3
4
5
6
Ik vind mijn werk nog steeds boeiend, elke dag weer.
Ik doe mijn werk omdat het moet, daarmee is alles wel gezegd.
Na zo‟n vijf jaar heb je het in dit werk wel gezien.
Het idee dat ik dit werk nog tot mijn pensioen moet doen, benauwt me.
Ik heb plezier in mijn werk.
Ik moet telkens weerstand bij mezelf overwinnen om mijn werk te doen.
Motivatie om door te werken
Taakkenmerken
In dit deel van de vragenlijst wordt u verzocht aan te geven in welke mate de omschrijvingen
van toepassing zijn op uw werk. Probeer hier de kenmerken van uw werk zo zorgvuldig
mogelijk aan te geven.
Zet een cirkel om het cijfer (1 t/m 7) dat de beste beschrijving van uw werk geeft. Bij een
aantal cijfers staat een beschrijving om de richting van het antwoord aan te geven, waardoor de
tussenliggende nummers tussen 2 beschrijvingen in vallen, deze kunnen ook ingevuld worden.
Probeer niet te lang stil te staan bij het antwoorden en geef zoveel mogelijk uw eerste reactie.
1.
Hoeveel zelfstandigheid heeft u in uw werk? Dat wil zeggen, in welke mate beslist u
zelf wat u moet doen?
1--------------------- 2-------------- 3---------------- 4-----------------5-----------------6-----------------------7
Erg weinig; ik heb er
vrijwel niets over te
Y. Peters
Niet veel; er is wel veel
geregeld en voorgeschreven
Erg veel; ik kan bijna volledig
beslissen wanneer en hoe het
52
Helemaal
mee
oneens
Mee
oneens
1 Onvoorziene omstandigheden daar gelaten, blijf ik doorwerken zolang ik kan
2 Als ik de volledige vrije keuze zou hebben zou ik prefereren om te blijven werken
3 Ik verwacht zo lang als mogelijk te blijven werken.
zeggen hoe ik moet
werken en wanneer
iets moet worden gedaan.
2.
maar ik moet ook wel zelf
bepaalde beslissingen over
het werk nemen.
werk gedaan moet worden.
In welke mate levert u een “afgerond” en duidelijk herkenbaar stuk werk?
Dat wil zeggen, is het een afgerond stuk werk met een duidelijk begin en eind? Of
is het een (klein) deel van een (groot) geheel, dat door anderen of machinaal wordt
afgemaakt?
1--------------------- 2-------------- 3---------------- 4-----------------5--------------6---------------- 7
Mijn werk is slechts
een klein onderdeel
van het eindproduct of
de diensten die verleend
worden, mijn eigen
aandeel is nauwelijks
terug te vinden in het
eindproduct of in de
diensten die verleend
worden
3.
Mijn werk is een middelgroot
“brok” van het totale werk
mijn eigen aandeel is terug
te vinden in het uiteindelijke
resultaat
Mijn werk is een duidelijk
afgeronde bijdrage aan het
eindproduct of de verleende
diensten
Hoeveel afwisseling is er in uw werk? Dat wil zeggen, in welke mate moet u
verschillende dingen doen bij uw werk?
1--------------------- 2-------------- 3---------------- 4-----------------5------------------6-------------------------7
Erg weinig; het werk
vraagt steeds weer
het uitvoeren van dezelfde
routine handelingen
4.
Niet veel afwisseling
Erg veel; er zit veel
afwisseling in het werk,
de uitvoering hiervan vraagt
het gebruik van uiteenlopende
bekwaamheden.
Hoe belangrijk is uw werk in het algemeen?
Dat wil zeggen, kan uw werk grote invloed hebben op het leven of het welzijn van
andere mensen?
1-------------------------2-------------------3----------------4-----------------5---------------6----------------7
Niet erg belangrijk,
wat ik doe heeft
praktisch geen invloed
op het leven en welzijn
van andere mensen.
5.
Nogal belangrijk
Erg belangrijk; mijn werk kan
erg belangrijk zijn voor het
leven en welzijn van andere
mensen
In welke mate merkt u bij het uitvoeren van uw werk zelf hoe goed u het doet; los
van wat uw collega‟s of leidinggevende(n) ervan vinden?
1--------------------- 2---------------3----------------4-------------------5-----------------6------------------7
Erg weinig; het werk
zo dat ik altijd maar
door zou kunnen werken zonder
er ooit achter te komen hoe goed ik het doe.
Y. Peters
Soms; de ene keer merk ik
het terwijl ik bezig ben, de
andere keer merk ik het niet
Erg veel; het werk is zodanig is
dat ik tijdens het werk bijna
voortdurend merk hoe goed ik
het doe.
53
Hieronder vindt u een aantal beweringen die gebruikt kunnen worden voor het omschrijven van
uw werk. Wilt u bij iedere bewering aangeven of deze al dan niet van toepassing is voor uw
werk. Probeer uw antwoord – na zorgvuldig lezen van de vragen – zo snel mogelijk te geven.
Zet achter iedere bewering het cijfer dat aangeeft in hoeverre deze bewering juist is als
aanduiding van uw werk, los van de vraag hoeveel u om uw werk geeft.
Hoe nauwkeurig omschrijft de stelling uw werk?
1
Volkomen
Onjuist
2
Grotendeels
onjuist
3
Enigszins
onjuist
4
weet het niet
5
Enigszins
juist
6
7
Grotendeels
juist
Volkomen
juist
Vul hier uw cijfer in ↓
1. Het werk vereist een grote vakbekwaamheid…………………………………………………
--
2. Het werk geeft mij niet de kans een stuk werk in zijn geheel te doen ………………………..
--
3. Bij het doen van het werk kan ik er gemakkelijk achterkomen hoe goed ik het doe …………
--
4. Het werk bestaat uit erg eenvoudige routinewerkzaamheden …………………………………
--
5. Hoe ik mijn werk doe, kan voor een heleboel andere mensen belangrijke gevolgen hebben …
--
6. Ik krijg geen kans mijn werk naar eigen inzicht en goeddunken uit te voeren
………………
--
7. Het werk geeft mij de gelegenheid om werk waaraan ik begin, helemaal zelfstandig af te maken.. -8. Het werk biedt erg weinig aanknopingspunten om na te gaan of ik het goed doe, of niet …….
--
9. Ik heb heel wat gelegenheid om mijn werk zelfstandig te doen ………………………………… . -10. Het werk zelf is niet erg belangrijk binnen het grotere geheel …………………………………
Y. Peters
--
54
Appendix B
Factor Analyses
The job characteristics model (Hackman and Oldham, 1976)
Table 1: Job characteristics: Principal Factor Analysis
Factor
1
werk bestaat uit eenvoudige routinewerkzaamheden
-,718
weinig aanknopingspunten om na te gaan of ik het goed doe
-,646
geen kans om werk in z'n geheel te doen
-,627
grote vakbekwaamheid vereist
,597
afwisseling in werk
,596
zelfstandigheid in werk
,592
afgerond en duidelijk herkenbaar stuk werk
,584
job feedback
,577
geen kans om werk naar eigen inzicht te doen
-,571
werk zelf is niet belangrijk in het grotere geheel
-,550
hoe belangrijk is werk in het algemeen
,495
belangrijke gevolgen van mijn werk voor andere mensen
,462
gelegenheid om werk zelfstandig af te maken
,447
veel gelegenheid om werk zelfstandig te doen
,437
gemakkelijk erachter kunnen komen hoe goed ik het doe
,340
Eigenvalues
Total variance explained
Cronbachs alpha
4.654
31,03%
.83
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Y. Peters
55
Y. Peters
56
Job satisfaction (Van Veldhoven & Meijman, 2008)
Table 2: Job characteristics: Principal Factor Analysis
Factor
1
idee om dit werk te blijven doen tot pensioen, benauwt me
,774
boeiend werk, elke dag weer
-,767
ik heb plezier in mijn werk
-,742
werken omdat het moet, daarmee is alles gezegd
,730
telkens weerstand overwinnen om het werk te doen
,683
na 5 jaar heb je het wel gezien in dit werk
,640
Eigenvalues
Total variance explained
Cronbachs alpha
3,148
52,47%
.81
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Y. Peters
57
Motivation to continue to work
Table 3: motivation to continue to work: Principal Factor Analysis
Factor
1
ik verwacht zo lang als mogelijk te blijven werken
,899
doorwerken zolang ik kan
,868
bij keuzevrijheid, doorwerken zolang ik kan
,826
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Y. Peters
58
Y. Peters
59