Job crafting, leader autonomy support, and passion for work: Testing a model in Australia and China
- PDF / 1,192,903 Bytes
- 15 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 109 Downloads / 232 Views
ORIGINAL PAPER
Job crafting, leader autonomy support, and passion for work: Testing a model in Australia and China Gavin R. Slemp1 · Yukun Zhao2 · Hanchao Hou1 · Robert J. Vallerand3
© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020
Abstract Building on the dualistic model of passion Vallerand (The psychology of passion: A dualistic model Oxford University Press, New York, 2005), we examined a hypothesized model whereby harmonious and obsessive passion mediate the relationships of job crafting and leader autonomy support with work engagement and burnout in both Australian and Chinese work samples. Compared with four alternative models, our results supported the hypothesized model as the best fitting model in both samples, showing cross-sample invariance of factor loadings and regression paths. Across both samples, job crafting and leader autonomy support positively predicted harmonious passion, yet exhibited disparate relations with obsessive passion. Both forms of passion positively predicted work engagement, yet only obsessive passion positively predicted burnout. Findings are consistent with the notion that job crafting is an approach that employees use to internalize harmonious and obsessive passions into work identities, which have corresponding and disparate impacts on work engagement and burnout across cultures. Keywords Job crafting · Leader autonomy support · Dualistic model of passion · Work engagement · Burnout
Introduction Over the past decade, the job design literature has expanded to suggest that employees are not just passive recipients of their work, but instead are active, self-directed agents who craft job boundaries to create a new work experience for themselves (e.g., Slemp 2017; Slemp and Vella-Brodrick 2014; Wrzesniewski and Dutton 2001). This process, known as job crafting, is described as “the physical or cognitive changes that employees make to the task or relational boundaries of their work” (Wrzesniewski and Dutton 2001, p. 179). While the job crafting literature has comprehensively explored the antecedents and consequences of job crafting * Gavin R. Slemp [email protected] 1
Centre for Positive Psychology, Melbourne Graduate School of Education, The University of Melbourne, 100 Leicester Street, Level 2, Parkville, VIC 3010, Australia
2
The Department of Psychology, Tsinghua University, Haidian District, Beijing 100084, China
3
Laboratoire de Recherche Sur Le Comportement Social, Department of Psychology, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montreal, QC, Canada
strategies (see Zhang and Parker 2019; Lichtenthaler and Fischbach 2018, 2019), few studies have explored specific motivational underpinnings that explain relations between job crafting and desired and undesired outcomes in the workplace (cf. Bindl et al. 2018; Slemp and Vella-Brodrick 2014), as well as how job crafting interrelates with leader supports to nurture disparate motivational processes, such as adaptive and maladaptive forms of passion (Vallerand 2015; Vallerand and Houl
Data Loading...
