The Meaning of Work and
Performance-Focused Work
Attitudes Among Midlevel Managers
in the United States and Brazil
K. Peter Kuchinke, PhD, and Edgard B. Cornachione Jr., PhD
S
everal important trends and challenges related to
This survey-based study investigated work meaning and perforthe nature of work and the structure of work
mance-focused work attitudes of some
organizations gave rise to this research study.
315 midlevel managers in diverse indusFirst, a dramatic shift in employment patterns has
tries in the United States and Brazil to
determine similarities, differences, and
occurred in countries around the world from stable,
relationships among absolute and relaorderly career progressions within single organizations
tive meaning of work, work role identito shifting and diverse patterns characterized by selffication, desired work outcomes, and
directed and entrepreneurial work in multiple settings
job satisfaction, career fulfillment, and
organizational commitment. The study
and a variety of roles (Arthur, Inkson, & Pringle, 1999;
found strong levels of absolute work
Inkson, 2007). A second trend is related to the changing
centrality in both countries and similar
nature of work tasks in knowledge- and informationrank orderings for nonwork-related
rich societies where cognitive demands, shifting priodomains of life. Work role identification
patterns differed, and so did the levels of
rities, multiple accountabilities, and role complexity
intrinsic and extrinsic work values. A
have sharply increased at all levels of organizational
small number of demographic and work
hierarchies (Quinn, O’Neill, & St. Clair, 1999). Third,
meaning dimensions predicted job satthe increasingly international orientation of business
isfaction, career fulfillment, and organizational commitment, but this pattern
organizations working in a global environment with
was different for the samples from each
customers, suppliers, subsidiaries, and partners in
country. The article concludes with a
countries around the world offers opportunities for
discussion of these patterns of similarieconomies of scale, exploitation of country-specific
ties and differences for the research and
application of performance theory and
resources, and proximity to markets around the globe,
improvement in cross-cultural settings.
but it has also increased the risk for cross-cultural
conflict, miscommunication, and breakdown of process flows (Harvey, Fisher, McPhail, & Moeller, 2009; Harzing & Van
Ruysseveldt, 2004).
The removal of clear and ubiquitous organizational career paths demands greater attention to personal work values and preferences and
requires that HPT professionals respond in differentiated ways when leading
interventions to solve deficiencies and realize improvement opportunities.
57
PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT QUARTERLY, 23(3) PP. 57–76
& 2010 International Society for Performance Improvement
Published online in Wiley Online Library (wileyonlinelibrary.com). DOI: 10.1002/piq.20090
The changing nature of work processes requires that HPT professionals
refine their understanding of how individuals construe the meaning of
desirable work, work processes, and work outcomes in order to optimize
person-organization and person-task fits. Finally, the increasingly global
orientation of business organizations requires not only the development of a
global mind-set and cultural competencies, but also careful analysis and
detailed understanding of cross-cultural differences
and similarities in order to maximize outcomes and
The removal of clear and
avoid process losses and discontinuities. In short, the
ubiquitous organizational
importance of work-related values, work attitudes,
career paths demands
and expectations of desired work outcomes have
greater attention to
moved to the center of research and practice when
personal work values and
trying to determine how organizations can develop
preferences and requires
and sustain performance-oriented business cultures.
The focus on the meaning of work as the core
that HPT professionals
predictor
variable in this study is justified by previous
respond in differentiated
research.
Its importance has been recognized by
ways when leading
organizational
psychologists (Gamst, 1995) and lainterventions to solve
bor
economists
(Kelly, 2000) and has been linked to
deficiencies and realize
performance dimensions such as retention (Peltier,
improvement
Schibrowsky, & Nill, 2004). A study conducted in the
opportunities.
United Kingdom has shown the link between the way
employees experience work and an ‘‘organization’s
ability to manage change successfully, the ability to retain people; and greater
employee engagement and high performance’’ (Holbeche & Springett, 2004,
p. 3).
Based on these broad arguments, we engaged in an empirical study
among U.S. and Brazilian midlevel managers employed in medium and large
manufacturing and service organizations to better understand their meaning
of work and its relationship to several variables known to predict work
performance: organizational commitment, personal work satisfaction, and
career fulfillment. The study was designed to measure variables at the
individual level of analysis and used a cross-sectional approach. The use of
a convenience sample and a written survey introduced the risk of response
and single-source, single-method bias, and these should be viewed as
limitations to the external validity and generalizability of the results. However, these limitations are inherent in virtually all cross-cultural research
projects, and we believe that the findings, if viewed in light of these
limitations, can add incrementally to the knowledge base in the field, inform
HPT researchers and practitioners, and encourage follow-on research
projects.
The choice to focus this study was driven by similarities and differences
in the socioeconomic profile of the two countries. Brazil ranks as South
America’s largest and, in many aspects, most successful economy, with a
gross domestic product of $1.99 trillion (world rank: 10; United States:
$14.11 trillion, world rank: 2) consisting of 5.5% agriculture, 28.5% industry,
and 66% service activities (United States: 1.2%, 19.6%, and 79.2%, respec58
DOI: 10.1002/piq
Performance Improvement Quarterly
tively). Brazil has an annual growth rate of 5.2% (world rank: 81; United
States: 1.3%, world rank: 181), a population of about 198 million (world rank:
6; United States, 307 million, world rank: 4), and a labor force of about 101
million (work rank: 5; United States: 155 million, world rank: 4) (Central
Intelligence Agency, 2009). Brazil has experienced deep reforms and rapid
transformation to a democratic and free-market-based society and is a
founding member of MERCOSUL, the common market of the South
founded in 1991, comprising 11 countries from Mexico in the North and
virtually all of South America, and aiming at social, political, and economic
integration. Occupying close to half of the land mass of South America and
roughly equal in size to the continental United States, Brazil has undergone
dramatic economic change and development over the past 20 years and
moved from ‘‘one of the most closed economies in the world’’ (O’Keefe &
O’Keefe, 2004, p. 614) to one characterized by trade liberalization, economic
and political reform, and a free market system (Central Intelligence Agency,
2009). As a result, foreign direct investment in Brazil has increased substantially, with the United States ranking as the largest source of exports and
target for imports and increasing numbers and size of business ventures
between the two countries (O’Keefe & O’Keefe, 2004). Of particular interest
has been trade in the agricultural and environmental business sectors, where
Brazil has emerged as the world’s largest source of materials for biofuels and
one of the biggest exporters of agricultural products (Mullins, 2008). Still, as
is the case for the other three BRIC countries of Russia, India, and China,
Brazil continues to suffer from structural barriers that have resulted in a large
gray economy and limit productivity growth in key sectors of the economy
(Elstrodt, Pietracci, & Laboissiere, 2007).
The expertise to develop and manage talent effectively in cross-cultural
environments has not kept pace with the rise in economic and business ties
between the United States and Brazil, with each side harboring ‘‘misperceptions and stereotypes about the other that hamper the development of solid
business relationships’’ (O’Keefe & O’Keefe, 2004, p. 614). Geert Hofstede’s
(1997) framework for describing national cultures provides research-based
details about the similarities and differences of work-related values. Average
work values in the two countries differ in terms of acceptance of differences
in power and status (Power Distance: Brazil higher), individual rather than
collective orientation (Individualism: Brazil lower), valuation of traditional
masculine behaviors such as assertiveness and performance norms (Masculinity: Brazil lower), tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty (Uncertainty
Avoidance: Brazil higher), and decision time horizons focused on long-term
results (Long-Term Orientation: Brazil higher). In contrast to the average
score of other Latin American countries, however, Brazilian work culture has
been described as higher on the Power Distance, Individualism, and Masculinity indexes and slightly lower with respect to Uncertainty Avoidance (see
Table 1).
Hofstede’s work is widely used but reports differences at the country level
of analysis and is thus useful primarily when trying to understand general
tendencies or average values. Individuals or employees of a given organizaVolume 23, Number 3 / 2010
DOI: 10.1002/piq
59
TABLE 1 AVERAGE COMPARATIVE SCORES ON HOFSTEDE’S CULTURAL
DIMENSIONS
BRAZIL
LATIN AMERICA
UNITED STATES
WORLD
Power Distance
69
62
40
55
Individualism
38
15
91
43
Masculinity
49
42
62
50
Uncertainty Avoidance
76
80
46
64
Long-term Orientation
65
NA
29
45
Source. Adapted from Hofstede (1997).
tion in any country, however, may conform to or differ from the country
norm in any or all of the dimensions. Countries with high population
diversity, such as the United States and Brazil, can be expected to have
intranational variation that may in fact be larger than cross-national variation (Tung, 2008). Additional observations about the limitations of this
framework have been discussed frequently, including the likelihood of
response bias and nonequivalence of constructs in different cultures
(Ardichvili & Kuchinke, 2002), and the changes that may have occurred
since the data were collected as a result of shifts in political, societal, and
economic environments (Tang & Koveos, 2008; Wu, 2006). With these
limitations in mind, however, it is reasonable to expect differences in work
values, and thus this study was developed to gain insight into the differences
and similarities of the meaning of work dimensions and several work
attitudes that have been shown in previous studies to be highly predictive
of work performance in organizations in the United States and abroad.
Related Research and Research Questions
Using the most comprehensive framework established to measure the
meaning of work in international settings, we adopted the operational
definition of the meaning of work by England and colleagues (MOW International Research Team, 1987). According to this large cross-cultural project,
the meaning of work can be measured along four dimensions: work centrality,
work outcomes, work role identification, and social norms regarding work.
The original study by the international research team reported results from
eight countries: Belgium, Britain, Germany, The Netherlands, Yugoslavia, the
United States, Japan, and Israel. The original and supporting follow-up studies
found that individuals described work in terms of instrumental and expressive
meanings—work as necessary to procure the necessities of life and as a means
to express a person’s self-concept, identity, and social standing. The United
States ranked in the middle with respect to work centrality, and respondents
identified the intrinsic outcomes of work as secondary to its instrumental
function. In addition, U.S. respondents expressed the obligation for everyone
in society to contribute through work and, not surprising given the highly
60
DOI: 10.1002/piq
Performance Improvement Quarterly
individualistic focus in this society, the responsibility of the individual to obtain
work, even if this means working under undesirable conditions. A variety of
factors influenced the personal meaning that individuals assigned to their
work, and thus several dimensions have been proposed as antecedents (MOW
International Research Team, 1987):
~
~
~
~
~
Demographic characteristics such as age, gender, education, and
ethnicity
Social trends in terms such as age cohort effects on social norms about
working
Family circumstances such as being the sole provider with heavy
financial responsibility
General work conditions in a given industry and specific job characteristics in an organization such as work schedules and physical,
cognitive, and emotional demands
Macroeconomic influences such as the availability of work, unemployment rates, labor compensation, work settings, labor laws, and
technologies employed in organizations in general
Research on the meaning of work in Brazil (significado do trabalho in
Portuguese) appears to be limited, but several Portuguese-language articles
were located. Tolfo and Piccinini (2007) observed that the topic is receiving
increased attention in the Brazilian literature and explored theoretical
perspectives to discriminate work dimensions at the individual, organizational, and societal levels of analysis, stressing the need for a multidisciplinary
approach. A study by Coda and Fonseca (2004) used in-depth interviews with
Brazilian managers and reported highly individual and differentiated conceptions of the role of work in individuals’ lives: ‘‘For each individual, work
assumes a different meaning, a function related to his wishes and needs,
transforming the work itself in an instrument for self-actualization’’ (p. 7;
quotation taken from English language abstract). The authors indicate that
the categories their informants used to describe the meaning of their work
overlapped substantially with those found in the MOW (1987) study, an
interesting cross-validation given that the MOW study used large-scale
survey research and the Brazilian study a phenomenological and qualitative
approach. Borges and Alves Filho (2001) applied a self-developed survey
instrument to measure the value and descriptive attributes of work meaning
with some 650 participants from the health care and banking sectors in the
city of Natal in the Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Norte. They found sectorspecific differences in the motivating potential of work attributes, with bank
employees reporting particularly low levels of work motivation. Respondents
from health care and banking organizations reported similar levels of work
importance. Borges, Lima, Vilela, and Morais (2004), concerned with the link
between the meaning of work and organizational culture, conducted an indepth study involving 46 Brazilian library employees. Based on questionnaires, interviews, and direct observations, the study found links among work
commitment, organizational structure, and employee behaviors. The role of
Volume 23, Number 3 / 2010
DOI: 10.1002/piq
61
work in women’s lives was the focus of an empirical investigation by Losada
and Rocha-Coutinho (2007). Sampling a group of female entrepreneurs, the
authors suggested a balancing role of family involvement to strengthen
success and satisfaction with work. Finally, Ribeiro and Leda (2004) stressed
an issue particularly relevant in the Brazilian context: the influence of
macroeconomic elements such as unemployment and poor work conditions
on the meaning of work.
Although no prior comparative study on the meaning of working in the
United States and Brazil could be located, the review of Brazilian scholarship
on the topic showed themes related to the English literature on the topic but
also supported the need for this current cross-cultural project.
In this study, three constructs measuring work attitudes were used. Job
satisfaction is considered to be one of the most important attitudinal
measures of work that is of importance for individual well-being and
emotional and physical health or decline (Haccoun & Jeanrie, 1995), but
also for organizational outcomes such as retention, organizational citizenship behavior, and performance in general (Carsten & Spector, 1987;
Mathieu & Zajac, 1990; Organ & Konovsky, 1989). In addition, job satisfaction is positively related to job involvement, frequency of interaction with
superiors, and efforts to engage in customer contact (Fields, 2002). Career
fulfillment is a measure of career success and progress toward internally
defined goals for income, advancement, and skill development, and it has
been linked to job performance, personal-organizational goal congruence,
and supervisory support (Fields, 2002). Organizational commitment, a more
recent construct, has gained much attention in the literature because of the
effects of high levels of commitment on work motivation, extra-role
behavior, and intention to stay with the organization (Meyer & Allen,
1997). Little is known in the research literature about the relationship
between the meaning of work and attitudes that are important to work
performance, and no prior studies comparing these constructs in a U.S.Brazilian setting could be found. For this reason, the following three overarching research questions guided this study:
1.
2.
3.
What are the differences and similarities in absolute and relative
work centrality between U.S. and Brazilian midlevel managers?
What aspects of work do U.S. and Brazilian midlevel managers
identify with, and what are their preferred work outcomes?
How are dimensions of the meaning of work related to the
performance-focused work attitudes of job satisfaction, career
fulfillment, and organizational commitment?
Research Design and Method
The population for this study was defined broadly as professional-level
employees with a minimum of 5 years of work experience, a minimum
education level of a bachelor’s degree, and working in medium-size and large
62
DOI: 10.1002/piq
Performance Improvement Quarterly
corporations in the United States and Brazil. This population is important to
the performance requirements of organizations and the economy as a whole
because of their relatively high level of education, their potential for high
value-added contributions to their organizations, and their role as future
leaders (Conger & Benjamin, 1999; Reich, 1991).
Although a representative country-level sampling strategy was beyond
the scope of this project, attempts were made to represent a broad spectrum
of participants and volunteers drawn from a diverse set of industries,
organizations, positions, and demographic characteristics. All participants
were employed full time and were enrolled in executive university programs
on a part-time basis to earn graduate degrees in business administration or
human resources. We served as course instructors, obtained institutional
approval for conducting the study, announced the purpose of the study at the
end of a class session, and issued the invitation to participate. Participants
were given the informed-consent form and told that participation was
entirely voluntary and anonymous; they were assured that the decision to
participate would have no bearing on the course grade or any other aspect of
their academic standing. An e-mail repeating the invitation and providing
the link to the Web-based survey was sent the day after the announcement to
all course participants and also posted on the course Web sites. The survey
was taken online and outside the class time; two reminder e-mails were sent
one and two weeks after the first announcement. We contacted 468 students,
and 313 returned usable survey forms, for a response rate of 69%. Because of
the anonymous nature of the online survey, nonresponse bias could not be
measured in any meaningful manner; in addition, the survey results cannot
be linked back to the employing organizations. Table 2 shows the demographic characteristics of the respondents.
Independent sample t-tests on each of the demographic variables
showed that the respondents worked in organizations of similar size, but
those from the United States were on average older, worked longer hours per
week, represented a higher percentage of men, and had slightly lower levels of
education. Despite the differences in age, and perhaps due to different
employment patterns in the United States, American respondents had
worked significantly fewer years in their current job and reported shorter
tenures with their current employers. Because of the possible influence of
these factors on the experienced meaning of work, they were entered as
control variables in the subsequent regression analyses.
Survey items were taken from the Meaning of Working project (MOW,
1987). Absolute work centrality was defined as the importance assigned to
the primary and paid work role in the context of a person’s overall life and
measured by a single question: ‘‘How important is paid work in your life?’’ In
addition, the lottery question was used to measure the overall importance of
work. This question poses the hypothetical situation of having won an
amount of money large enough to live comfortably for the rest of one’s life
without having to work. Respondents were then asked to indicate their
preferences for each of three possible decisions: stop working altogether,
continue working under changed conditions, or continue working under the
Volume 23, Number 3 / 2010
DOI: 10.1002/piq
63
TABLE 2 DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDENTS
Age
Gender
Education
Years in current job
Years in current organization
Number of employees
Hours per week
COUNTRY
MEAN
SD
United States
39.58
10.55
Brazil
35.91
8.38
United States
1.32
.47
Brazil
1.72
.45
United States
3.59
.66
Brazil
3.79
.55
United States
5.47
7.00
Brazil
8.96
7.43
United States
6.14
5.73
Brazil
9.22
7.92
United States
4.72
2.13
Brazil
4.54
2.25
United States
45.78
9.37
Brazil
41.21
11.48
p
.002
.000
.010
.000
.000
.511
.000
Note. United States: N 5 174; Brazil: N 5 139.
present conditions. Relative work centrality was defined as the importance
assigned to other dimensions of a person’s life: leisure, community, religious
or spiritual engagement, and involvement with family as compared to work.
Four items measured were used with the stem question, ‘‘Compared to
working, how important are the following in your life?’’ followed by the four
nonwork dimensions and a short list of representative examples (for
example, ‘‘My leisure, such as hobbies, sports, recreation, and contacts with
friends’’). Work role identification was defined by the salience rating of five
process aspects of work; a sample question was, ‘‘Thinking about what is
important for you in your work, rate the importance of the products or
services you provide.’’ The construct of valued work outcomes was defined as
the importance rating of different work results, such as pay, serving society,
and job security; a sample question was, ‘‘How important is it for you that
your work brings you status and prestige?’’
Three items measured job satisfaction (Rice, Gentile, & McFarlin, 1991),
defined as the overall affective assessment of one’s job role, and two items
measured career fulfillment (Greenhaus, Parasuranam, & Wormley, 1990),
defined as the global affective assessment of one’s overall career progress.
Organizational commitment was defined as the sense of identification
affiliation, and satisfaction with recognition received with and from one’s
organization; six items measured this construct (Balfour & Wechsler, 1996).
64
DOI: 10.1002/piq
Performance Improvement Quarterly
Many of the early meaning-of-work research studies published results at
the item level of analysis, but more recent publications address factor
structure of the constructs. Snir and Harpaz (2002) examined the stability
of the dimensions of the instrument with responses from equivalent samples
surveyed in 1981 and 1993 using confirmatory factor analysis; they reported
that ‘‘the same six indices (constructs) in the structural model emerged at
both time periods’’ (p. 191). They also recommend examining the factor
structure with new populations and samples, and we followed this advice in
our analysis. The reliability indexes for the dependent variables of job
satisfaction, career satisfaction, and organizational commitment are well
established in previous research and satisfy Nunnally’s (1978) recommendation of a Cronbach alpha of .7 or higher (Rice et al., 1991; Greenhaus et al.,
1990; and Balfour & Wechsler, 1996, respectively).
All meaning-of-work, job and career fulfillment, and organizational
commitment items were measured using a 7-point Likert scale with anchors
of 1 (not at all) to 7 (very much). The lottery question was in a dichotomous
(yes, no) format. For the Brazilian participants, the survey instrument was
translated into Portuguese and then back-translated independently by two
native speakers. The back-translations were checked for accuracy by comparing them with the original English version. Pilot tests were conducted
with 15 Brazilian doctoral students in management who also had multiple
years of employment experience prior to beginning their programs of study.
The results were used to modify and finalize the instrument.
Exploratory data analysis of the entire data set revealed 35 outliers among
the meaning-of-work item responses. All outliers occurred at the high end of
the distribution and were replaced with the next-lower acceptable value as
recommended by Tabachnik and Fidell (2006). In addition, data plots of all
variables were inspected to detect deviations from normal distributions and
equality of error variance. While most variables were positively skewed and
heteroskedastic, these violations of assumptions for the subsequent multiple
regressions were considered slight and as having little effect on significance
tests (Berry & Feldman, 1985).
Findings
While the MOW instrument and most studies based on this framework
(Ardichvili, 2005) report single-item based results, we followed Snir and
Harpaz’s (2002) recommendation and investigated the underlying factor
structure of work role identification and work outcomes in the data set
obtained from the 313 U.S. and Brazilian midlevel professionals. This was
done by first equalizing the samples from the two countries to avoid errors
due to unequal cell size. All 139 Brazilian surveys responses were entered,
and an equal number of responses selected at random from the U.S.
respondents. The subsequent exploratory factor analyses were conducted
separately for each country, and the resulting rotated component matrices
were explored for similarity. For work role identification, no common factors
Volume 23, Number 3 / 2010
DOI: 10.1002/piq
65
resulted, and subsequent analyses were conducted at the item level. For
desired work outcomes, however, two clear and identical factors emerged,
labeled intrinsic (five items: learning, relationships with interesting people,
variety of tasks, interesting work, and autonomy) and extrinsic (four items:
convenient work hours, job security, good match of skills and tasks, and
comfortable working conditions). The reliability indexes for the U.S. and
Brazilian samples for the intrinsic factor were alpha 5 .73 and. 87, respectively, and for the extrinsic factor alpha 5 .72 and. 78, respectively. Seven
items failed to load clearly and were omitted from further analysis. Cronbach
alpha values showed sufficient reliability in each country (Nunnally, 1978).
For the three measures of work attitudes, separate factor analyses and followup reliability analyses were conducted, resulting in sufficient measures of
internal consistency (alpha range .87—.93 for the U.S. and Brazilian respondents for the three constructs).
Descriptive statistics and simple means tests are shown in Table 3. The
absolute importance of work in respondents’ lives for each of the two
countries is high but ranks second to the importance of family, followed by
the importance of involvement in religious activities (ranked third in both
countries), leisure activities, and—rated as least important compared to
work—involvement in community activities. While the rank order of the
absolute and relative meaning of work among respondents from both
countries was the same, the average value for all items was lower in the
Brazilian sample, and particularly so for the relative importance of leisure
and community involvement. This suggests a very similar understanding of
the role of work, family, and religious activities but a lower value of the role of
leisure and engagement in public affairs among Brazilian respondents. The
responses of the lottery question provided further insight into the absolute
meaning of working. As shown in Table 3, respondents from the United
States were far more likely to indicate a preference to stop working
altogether, while Brazilian respondents showed a marked preference to
continue working, albeit under changed (and presumably improved) conditions.
Survey items related to work role identification tapped into the question
of which aspects of work were particularly important to individuals’ sense of
identity as persons and employees. Here, the two samples showed marked
differences. While the relative ranking of the various items differed in the two
samples, there were no differences in the role of coworkers and products or
services produced and delivered. U.S. respondents rated the role of professional membership as an identifying characteristic higher, while Brazilian
employees identified more strongly with the tasks they were performing at
work. Interestingly, identification with their employing company was rated
lowest in both samples.
Respondents from the United States rated both intrinsic and extrinsic
valued work outcomes higher than their Brazilian counterparts did, but each
group reported a preference for the intrinsic aspects of the process of
working. With respect to work attitudes, only one of the three scales
distinguished the two groups, with Brazilian respondents indicating far less
66
DOI: 10.1002/piq
Performance Improvement Quarterly
TABLE 3 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS AND COUNTRY-LEVEL COMPARISONS
UNITED STATES
BRAZIL
CONTRAST
M
SD
M
SD
p
5.82
0.91
5.53
0.95
.01
Leisure
5.41
1.49
4.83
1.61
.00
Community
4.24
1.42
3.50
1.57
.00
Religion
5.55
0.80
5.34
0.70
.02
Family
6.72
0.61
6.51
0.68
.01
Tasks
5.50
0.93
5.32
0.97
.00
Company
5.12
1.38
4.89
1.76
.00
Products/services
5.88
0.93
5.38
1.00
.12
Coworkers
5.99
0.86
5.21
1.02
.24
Profession
5.74
0.93
5.13
0.98
.00
Intrinsic
6.16
0.58
5.46
0.94
.00
Extrinsic
5.78
0.75
5.23
0.92
.01
Absolute meaning of work
Relative to:
Work role identification
Valued work outcomes
Work attitudes
Job satisfaction
5.30
1.30
5.06
2.13
.25
Career fulfillment
5.32
1.29
4.73
2.13
.01
Organizational commitment
4.70
0.68
4.69
0.74
.93
Stop working
1.46
.52
1.81
.51
.00
Continue under same conditions
1.51
.50
1.60
.61
.18
Continue under changed conditions
1.57
.50
1.06
.40
.00
Lottery questiona
Note. United States: N 5 139; Brazil: N 5 139.
a
1 5 yes, 2 5 no.
satisfaction with their overall career to date than the respondents from the
United States.
Table 4 shows the zero-order correlations and Cronbach alpha values for
the multi-item scales for both samples combined. Overall, correlations were
in the low and medium range of ro 5 |.29| and |.30|oro|.50|, respectively
(Cohen, 1988), with only a small number of items and scales being related
highly (and positively). This indicates the relative independence of most
items measured, but also the likelihood of multicollinearity between the
relative importance of community and leisure, religion and community
Volume 23, Number 3 / 2010
DOI: 10.1002/piq
67
TABLE 4 ZERO-ORDER CORRELATIONS AND SCALE RELIABILITIES OF U.S. AND
BRAZILIAN RESPONSES
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
(.80)
12
13
14
15
Work centrality
Absolute
Relative to:
Leisure
0.18
Community
0.22 0.54
Religion
0.19 0.17 0.50
Family work role
identification
0.31 0.42 0.34 0.18
Tasks
0.23 0.28 0.25 0.19 0.21
Company
0.18 0.34 0.34 0.16 0.29 0.42
Products/services 0.24 0.20 0.27 0.22 0.24 0.49 0.43
Coworkers
0.17 0.30 0.29 0.22 0.25 0.42 0.42 0.49
Professional
work outcomes
0.20 0.24 0.25 0.16 0.19 0.37 0.29 0.46 0.44
Intrinsic
0.30 0.48 0.37 0.21 0.37 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.48
0.44
Extrinsic work
attitudes
0.18 0.39 0.34 0.23 0.27 0.38 0.39 0.36 0.41
0.51 0.58 (.75)
Job satisfaction
0.31 0.18 0.22 0.10 0.26 0.25 0.40 0.33 0.23
0.28 0.28 0.22 (.87)
Career satisfaction 0.23 0.14 0.24 0.12 0.22 0.19 0.33 0.26 0.26
0.29 0.33 0.18 0.69 (.93)
Organizational
commitment
0.09 0.09 0.10 0.62 0.45 (.90)
0.21 0.09 0.22 0.18 0.15 0.22 0.36 0.34 0.36
Note. United States: N 5 139; Brazil: N 5 139.
Correlations 1/ .12 are significant at p o .05 or better.
involvement, intrinsic and extrinsic facets of desired work outcomes, and the
three measures of work attitudes.
The final set of analyses addressed the relationship between the meaning
of work and performance-related work attitudes of work satisfaction, career
fulfillment, and organizational commitment. To test these relationships,
hierarchical regression analyses were conducted for each country and for
each of the three measures of work attitude as the dependent variable. In each
analysis, the six distinguishing demographic variables (age, gender, education, years in current job, years with current organization, hours worked per
week) were entered in the first step, followed by the absolute and relative
meanings of work, the work role identification items, and the two scales for
desired work outcomes. Table 5 summarizes the results for the U.S. sample,
showing that a small number of variables were related to the three measures.
Job satisfaction and organizational commitment were associated with the
68
DOI: 10.1002/piq
Performance Improvement Quarterly
TABLE 5 SUMMARY OF HIERARCHICAL REGRESSION ANALYSES FOR THE EFFECTS
OF SELECTED DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS AND MEANING-OF-WORK
ITEMS, UNITED STATES
BETA
TOTAL R2
DR2
Absolute work meaning
.30
.13
.13
Work role identification with
products/services
.32
.23
.10
Education
.25
.08
.08
Absolute work meaning
.20
.13
.05
Work role identification with profession
.29
.21
.08
Absolute work meaning
.26
.13
.13
Work role identification with products/services
.47
.34
.21
VARIABLE
Job Satisfaction
Career Fulfillment
Organizational Commitment
Note. Final models shown, all results significant at po.05 or better.
absolute meaning of work in respondents’ lives and the degree to which they
identified with the products produced and services provided, the latter factor
accounting for nearly one-fifth of the increase in variance explained. Career
fulfillment was related positively to education level, the absolute meaning of
work, and respondents’ level of identification with their profession. Interestingly, only education level, and none of the other demographic or firmrelated measures, was predictive of work attitudes.
A markedly different profile resulted from the regression analyses for the
Brazilian managers (see Table 6). Age-related differences accounted for variation in job satisfaction and organizational commitment, with older employees
showing higher levels of both variables. As in the U.S. sample, the absolute
meaning of work predicted increased job satisfaction, but so did the intrinsic
work outcomes such as learning on the job, task variety, autonomy, and ability to
interact with interesting people at work. In addition, personal identification with
one’s company was strongly related to satisfaction withone’s job. Although rated
lowest for its importance relative to work among Brazilian professional employees, the value of involvement in the community was related strongly with career
fulfillment and also with organizational commitment. Furthermore, personal
identification with one’s company and, in the case of organizational commitment, one’s coworkers emerged as significant predictor variables.
Discussion
The results of this study provide detailed information about the meaning
of work and its influence on performance-related outcome variables among
Volume 23, Number 3 / 2010
DOI: 10.1002/piq
69
TABLE 6 SUMMARY OF HIERARCHICAL REGRESSION ANALYSES FOR THE EFFECTS
OF SELECTED DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS AND MEANING-OF-WORK
ITEMS, BRAZIL
BETA
TOTAL R2
DR2
Age
.16
.05
.05
Absolute work meaning
.15
.10
.05
Desired intrinsic work outcomes
.04
.14
.04
Work role identification with company
.39
.26
.12
Value of community relative to work
.16
.09
.09
Desired intrinsic work outcomes
.11
.13
.04
Work role identification with company
.30
.20
.07
Age
.16
.05
.05
Value of community relative to work
.10
.12
.07
Work role identification with company
.30
.28
.16
Work role identification with coworkers
.30
.35
.07
VARIABLE
Job Satisfaction
Career Fulfillment
Organizational Commitment
Note. Final models shown, all results significant at po.05 or better.
U.S. and Brazilian managers working in diverse medium- and large-size
organizations. The review of literature did not show any prior comparative
studies on these specific topics, and this study is likely the first of its kind and
thus of particular significance for HPT researchers and professionals working in these two countries. The design did not allow for extrapolation of the
results beyond the sample; however, the diverse nature of the respondents
and their home organizations provides a reasonably wide scope but also
indicates the need for follow-up research.
The results suggest that contrary to the generally accepted large degree of
cultural differences between the United States and Brazil, U.S. and Brazilian
managers hold largely similar views about the meaning of work and nonwork
domains of life. Respondents from both countries reported the relative
importance of family, work, religion, leisure, and community in the same
rank order, although Brazilian managers rated each item lower. Both rated
the importance of work in their lives as high but second in rank order to the
role of family.
In both countries, the mean value of family was near the top of the sevenpoint Likert scale (United States: 6.72; Brazil: 6.51), while the absolute value
of work was ranked close to one and one-half standard deviations lower.
Given the large difference in individualism as reported by Hofstede (1997),
this might indicate that the preference for viewing oneself as independent
70
DOI: 10.1002/piq
Performance Improvement Quarterly
from the social group and pursuing one’s own preferences, needs, and rights
expressed in highly individualistic societies (Triandis, 1995) does not extend
to family relations. In other words, family members might be viewed as part of
an extended self and are valued equally high in individualistic and collectivistic societies.
Another similarity between the U.S. and Brazilian respondents was
found in the importance of the other nonwork-related domains of life,
including religion and leisure. Given the difference in religious denominations in both countries, with Brazilians overwhelmingly belonging to the
Roman Catholic faith and a highly diverse set of denominations in the United
States, the study suggests that the importance of religious activities is
independent of a particular faith or church affiliation.
Lowest in both countries was the importance of community involvement, with particularly low ratings for this domain among Brazilian managers. This finding was surprising given the oft-reported collectivist
orientation of Brazilian society that would have suggested a far greater role
of community involvement than in the highly individualistic United States.
In summary, Brazilian and U.S. managers reported largely similar
attitudes related to the meaning of work that did not follow the crosscultural differences reported to exist between the two countries. Although it
is not possible to generalize beyond the sample in this study, the findings
suggest similarity in the valuation of work and nonwork domains in life that
may be attributed to the similar professional roles and might, in fact,
attenuate or even neutralize cross-cultural differences. From a practical
point of view, these similarities bode well for collaboration and joint ventures
in both countries. U.S. American HPT professionals engaged in work in
Brazil should find it easy to establish common ground based on similar workrelated values and should not assume strong differences in work centrality or
the preference rating of work and nonwork factors.
An interesting extension to the findings on work meanings was provided
by the results of the lottery question. There was a stark difference between
respondents from both countries: U.S. managers overwhelmingly selected the
option to stop working altogether in the hypothetical case of a large lottery win,
and Brazilian respondents in equal numbers expressed the preferences to
continue working under changed conditions. While more research is required
to explore this difference, one immediate interpretation would suggest that the
oft-reported high work ethic held in the United States is in fact due not to
choice but to necessity. In this study, U.S. respondents reported both a much
higher relative valuation of leisure compared to work, while Brazilian respondents indicated the desire to continue working even if the means to live
comfortably were readily available. With respondents from both countries
working in similar organizations and professional roles, this may indicate a
higher level of intrinsic work motivation in Brazil—and this finding runs
counter, again, to prevailing popular wisdom and reported research.
Respondents from both countries expressed their primary professional
identification related to the opportunity to have contacts with interesting
coworkers; whether this is due to satisfy social needs (as could be predicted
Volume 23, Number 3 / 2010
DOI: 10.1002/piq
71
Brazilian and U.S.
managers reported largely
similar attitudes related to
the meaning of work that
did not follow the crosscultural differences
reported to exist between
the two countries.
based on collectivist values in Brazil), as a careerenhancing strategy (as reported by Ardichvili, 2005,
on engineers in Russia), or a combination of motives
was not measured by this study and should be
elaborated in follow-on research. Interestingly, however, the factor that was rated the lowest was company affiliation. This indicates that managers in
Brazil and the United States, like other professionals,
might derive their sense of identity primarily from
the work itself, and not from company affiliation. This finding supports the
general tenets of the ‘‘new career’’ literature with its emphasis on selfdirection and responsibility for one’s own career (Inkson, 1997) and, at the
same time, places the responsibility on organizations to make available
interesting work and valuable networks when organizations can no longer
provide traditional career patterns to solicit loyalty and high commitment.
For practice, this would imply the opportunity for HPT professionals to pay
close attention to design factors, such as job enrichment, as well as to
organizational change, such as the creation of communities of practice, both
of which might contribute to the professional exchange among these
professionals and fill personal- and performance-related needs.
The preference for intrinsic work outcomes was found in managers from
both countries, although extrinsic rewards were valued highly as well. This
supports the notion that professionals in both countries are driven by the
desire for meaningful work, which in fact has been described as a need by
professionals around the world (Ardichvili, 2005). It also indicates, however,
that intrinsic aspects of work cannot stand alone without the provision of
extrinsic ones as a foundation, providing further support of Herzberg’s
(1968) two-factor theory of motivation developed several decades ago. For
HPT practice, this finding reinforces the need to balance intrinsic and
extrinsic aspects of work.
As for the dependent variables, managers from both countries scored
similarly high on job satisfaction and also similarly—but far lower—on
organizational commitment. Career fulfillment, however, was significantly
higher among U.S. managers than their Brazilian colleagues. From an
organizational point of view, this latter finding should give pause to Brazilian
firms because it suggests far less satisfaction with a range of work-related
aspects, including income, promotion opportunities, learning challenges,
and person-organization and person-task fit. As a result, turnover intention
can be expected to be higher as individuals seek to improve their careers if
and when the opportunity arises. This study did not address the reasons for
lower levels of career satisfaction among Brazilian managers, an important
area for future research.
The fact that organizational commitment was rated lower than job or
career satisfaction in both samples should, from a performance perspective,
be regarded as a concern. High levels are associated with the intention to stay
with the company, a sense of pride associated with the organization, and a
willingness to exert extra effort. In the absence of commitment to the
72
DOI: 10.1002/piq
Performance Improvement Quarterly
organization, employees can be expected to work to rule, consider leaving,
and feel alienated from their places of work. Again, this study did not
investigate in detail the reasons for these ratings, and follow-on research
should provide detail and explanation.
The regression analyses were conducted to examine the associations
between the meaning of work dimensions and job satisfaction, career
fulfillment, and commitment. A small number of variables emerged as
predictors and explained between 20% and 35% of variation in the performance-related outcome variables. Interestingly, demographic variables
contributed very little, indicating that, apart from education levels and age,
the relationships between meaning of work and the three outcome variables
did not differ by the remaining demographic characteristics. Put differently,
the two samples from the United States and Brazil were homogeneous with
respect to the effect of work meaning and outcomes, with the exception that
U.S. managers with higher levels of education also reported higher levels of
fulfillment with their career in general, and older Brazilian managers felt
more satisfied with their current jobs and felt a higher sense of commitment
to their organizations. For U.S. managers in this study, the absolute meaning
of work in their lives contributed to job satisfaction, career fulfillment, and
organizational commitment. In addition, identification with the products
produced and services added to each outcome.
The pattern differed among Brazilian managers. Here, the most powerful
predictors were work role identification with the company and the value of
community involvement relative to the value of work. While overall identification with one’s company was relatively low, those who did identify with
their employer also reported higher levels of job satisfaction (12% of variation
explained) and greater levels of commitment to the organization (16%
explained). For Brazilian organizations, this finding may present a dilemma.
As the traditional psychological contract of mutual obligation between
employer and employee is weakening in favor of the so-called protean career,
organizations may lose valuable emotional attachment and satisfaction that
have been shown to result in the employees’ intentions to remain with the
organization, exert extra effort, and promote the organizations to friends and
colleagues; it also points to the availability of emotional and cognitive
resources for high levels of performance.
While exploratory in nature, this study resulted in detailed and often
counterintuitive findings about the similarities and differences of work
meaning among two samples of U.S. and Brazilian managers. It offers the
suggestion that managers from both countries share similarities related to
the role of work in their lives and important dimensions related to work. It
also offered insight into differences with respect to the role of work beyond
earning a living and showed that the meaning of work is important to
performance-related work attitudes. These variables were related in significantly different ways in the two samples. Although the design of the study
did not allow generalization, it should provide caution to HPT practitioners
not to jump to stereotypical assumptions when working in U.S.-Brazilian
cross-cultural settings.
Volume 23, Number 3 / 2010
DOI: 10.1002/piq
73
Clearly additional research is needed to determine if similar patterns of
work meaning and its consequences can be found in replications and
research with other populations. The meaning-of-work project was begun
before the current and severe downturn of the global economy, and an
obvious and immediate need is to track how the contraction and recession
have affected attitudes toward work and what changes in HPT practice are
occurring and need to occur. In addition, all large international survey
projects suffer from response and selection bias, and so the inclusion of
broader samples, different employee populations, additional countries, and
the use of in-depth qualitative designs to overcome the shortcomings of
survey-based research are needed to advance this line of research.
The implication for practice remains that U.S. and Brazilian managers
might share many facets of their professional identities, but they also display
different performance outcomes based on their understanding of the meaning of work. In HPT practice, then, an analysis of the personal meaning of
work among a group of employees should be included in the broader
performance analysis approach so that sufficient information about individual value patterns is available to develop effective performance solutions in
cross-cultural settings.
References
Ardichvili, A. (2005). The meaning of working and professional development needs of
employees in a post-communist country. International Journal of Cross-Cultural
Management, 5(1), 105–119.
Ardichvili, A., & Kuchinke, K. P. (2002). The concept of culture in international and
comparative HRD research: Methodological problems and possible solutions.
Human Resource Development Review, 1(2), 145–166.
Arthur, M. B., Inkson, K., & Pringle, J. K. (1999). The new careers: Individual action and
economic change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Balfour, D., & Wechsler. B. (1996). Organizational commitment: Antecedents and outcomes in public organizations. Public Productivity and Management Review, 29,
256–277.
Berry, W. D., & Feldman. S. (1985). Multiple regression in practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Borges, L. O., & Alves Filho, A. (2001). A mensuracao da motivacao e do significado do
trabalho [Measuring motivation and work meaning]. Estudos de psicologia, 6(2),
177–194.
Borges, L. O., Lima, A. M. S., Vilela, E. C., & Morais, S. S. G. (2004). Comprometimento no
trabalho e sua sustentac- ão na cultura e no contexto organizacional [Work commitment and its sustainability in cultural and organizational context]. RAE-Eletronica,
3(1), 2–24.
Carsten, J. M., & Spector, P. E. (1987). Unemployment, job satisfaction, and employee
turnover. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 374–381.
Central Intelligence Agency. (2009). World fact book 2008. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Coda, R., & Fonseca, G. F. (2004). Em busca do significado do trabalho: Relato de um estudo
qualitativo entre executivos [In search for the meaning of work: Results of a
qualitative study of business executives]. Revista Brasiliera de Gestao de Negocios,
6(14), 7–21.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.
74
DOI: 10.1002/piq
Performance Improvement Quarterly
Conger, J. A., & Benjamin, B. (1999). Building leaders: How successful companies develop the
next generation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Elstrodt, H., Pietracci, B., & Laboissiere, M. (2007). Five priorities for Brazil’s economy.
McKinsey Quarterly, 1–4.
Fields, D. L. (2002). Taking the measure of work: A guide to validated scales for organizational
research and diagnosis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gamst, F. C. (1995). Meanings of work: Considerations for the twenty-first century. Albany,
NY: SUNY Press.
Greenhaus, J. H., Parasuranam, A., & Wormley, W. M. (1990). Effect of race on organizational
experience, job performance evaluation, and career outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 33(1), 64–86.
Haccoun, R., & Jeanrie, C. (1995). Self-reports of work absence as a function of personal
attitudes toward absence, and perceptions of the organization. Applied Psychology:
An International Review, 44, 144–170.
Harvey, M., Fisher, R., McPhail, R., & Moeller, M. (2009). Globalization and its impact on
global managers’ decision processes. Human Resource Development International,
12(4), 335–351.
Harzing, A.-W., & van Ruysseveldt, J. (2004). International human resource development
(2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Herzberg, F. (1968). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business
Review, 46(1), 15–23.
Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Holbeche, L., & Springett, N. (2004). In search of meaning in the workplace. St. Leonard’s
Forest, England: Roffey Park Institute.
Inkson, K. (2007). Understanding careers: The metaphors of working life. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Kelly, G. M. (2000). Employment and concepts of work in the new global economy.
International Labour Review, 139(1), 5–32.
Losada, B. L., & Rocha-Coutinho, M. L. (2007). Redefinindo o significado da
atividade profissional para as mulheres: O caso das pequenas empresarias
[Redefining the importance of professional activity among women:
The case of managers of small enterprises]. Psicologia em estudo, 12(3),
493–502.
Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents,
correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin,
108, 171–194.
Meyer, J. P., & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace: Theory, research, and
application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
MOW International Research Team. (1987). The meaning of working. Orlando, FL:
Academic Press.
Mullins, L. (2008, March 3). Fresh profits from the farm: Global economic growth should
keep agricultural prices high. U.S. News & World Report, 59–60.
Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.
O’Keefe, H., & O’Keefe, W. M. (2004). Business behaviors in Brazil and the USA. International
Journal of Social Economics, 31(5/6), 614–622.
Organ, D. W., & Konovsky, M. (1989). Cognitive versus affective determinants of organizational commitment and job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 73,
157–164.
Peltier, J., Schibrowsky, J. A., & Nill, A. (2004, Spring). Crossing cultures: The nursing
shortage is a global problem. Marketing Health Services, 26–33.
Quinn, R. E., O’Neill, R. M., & St. Clair, L. (1999). Pressing problems in modern organizations
(that keep us up at night): Transforming agendas for research and practice. Washington, DC: American Management Association.
Reich, R. (1991). The work of nations: Preparing ourselves for 21st century capitalism. New
York: Knopf.
Volume 23, Number 3 / 2010
DOI: 10.1002/piq
75
Ribeiro, C. V. S., & Leda, D. B. (2004). O significado do trabalho em tempos de reestruturacão produtiva [The meaning of work in times of productive reorganization]. Estudos e
Pesquisas em Psicologia, 4(2), 76–83.
Rice, R. W., Gentile, D. A., & McFarlin, D. B. (1991). Facet importance and job satisfaction.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 76(1), 31–39.
Snir, R., & Harpaz, I. (2002). Work-leisure relations: Leisure orientation and the meaning of
work. Journal of Leisure Research, 34(2), 178–203.
Tabachnik, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2006). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Tang, L., & Koveos, P. E. (2008). A framework to update Hofstede’s cultural value indices:
Economic, dynamic, and institutional stability. Journal of International Business
Studies, 39(6), 1045–1064.
Tolfo, S. R., & Piccinini, V. (2007). Sentidos e significados do trabalho: explorando conceitos,
variaveis e estudos empiricos brasileiros [Senses and meanings of work: Exploring
Brazilian concepts, variables and empirical studies]. Psicologia & Sociedade, 19,
38–46.
Triandis, H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Tung, R. L. (2008). The cross-cultural research imperative: The need to balance crossnational and intra-national diversity. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(1),
41–46.
Wu, M-Y. (2006). Hofstede’s cultural dimensions 30 years later: A study of Taiwan and the
United States. Intercultural Communication Studies, 15(1), 33–42.
K. PETER KUCHINKE
K. Peter Kuchinke, PhD, is associate professor of human resource
development at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, where he
also serves as director of graduate programs. The immediate past editor of
Human Resource Development International, his current research focuses
on cross-cultural research on the meaning of work and on leadership
and organization development from a procedural justice perspective.
Mailing address: 355 Education, 1310 S. Sixth Street, Champaign, IL
61820. E-mail: [email protected]
EDGARD B. CORNACHIONE JR.
Edgard B. Cornachione Jr., PhD, holds PhDs in accounting (University of
São Paulo, Brazil) and in human resource education (University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign). He is associate professor at the University of São
Paulo’s College of Economics, Business and Accounting where he serves as
the chair of the Department of Accounting and Actuarial Sciences. He is a
board member of FIPECAFI (Brazil). His research interests focus on the use
of advanced instructional technologies to support managerial and corporate
education, training, and development. Mailing address: College of Economics, Business and Accounting (FEA/USP), Ave. Prof. Luciano Gualberto, 908
(113 FEA3 Bldg.), São Paulo, SP 05508-900, Brazil. E-mail: [email protected]
76
DOI: 10.1002/piq
Performance Improvement Quarterly