Helena Martins - Thesis Final Presentation-1 · PDF fileHelena Martins, 2008 1 ... 2003), including the need for a more holistic vision of human resources management perspective. As

Helena Martins, 2008 1

Paper Presentation

Impact of Firm-promoted Accreditation of Prior Learning Processes on the Worker-Organization

Relationship: a cross-sectional survey in Portuguese Industrial Firms

Helena Martins Home Tutor | Teresa Rebelo

Host Tutor | Inés Tomás

Erasmus Mundus Work, Organizational and Personnel Psychology (WOP-P) Master

2008

Dedicada à minha Madrinha. Morte é só o nome que damos à tua ausência física. Farás sempre parte das nossas Vidas e vais estar sempre presente. Dedicated to my Godmother Death is merely the name we give to your physical absence. You will always be a part of our Lives and you will always be present.

Helena Martins, 2008 i

Agradecimentos

O desenvolvimento deste trabalho envolveu várias pessoas sem o contributo das

quais teria sido impossível concretizar o mesmo.

Em primeiro lugar, um obrigada sentido às minhas orientadoras, Professora

Doutora Teresa Rebelo e Professora Doutora Inés Tomás, pela seriedade e dedicação

com que encararam este projecto, pelo seu bom senso constante, e pela forma amigável

e consistente com me orientaram e colaboraram comigo, no que foi e continua a ser para

mim um exercício de aprendizagem contínua, mas também de trabalho em equipa.

Aos responsáveis pelas empresas que colaboram neste estudo, pela

disponibilidade e apoio na recolha de dados, em particular, ao Dr. Manuel Rodrigues, à

Dr.ª M.ª José Patrício e à Dr.ª Sara Santos, da Toyota Caetano Portugal e ao Sr. Abílio

Lima e Dr.ª Sónia Mota, da COLEP CCL.

A todos os Professores do Mestrado, em particular aos que leccionaram em

Coimbra e Valencia, pela partilha de conhecimento, mas também pela discussão e

suporte que nos proporcionaram, oferecendo sempre um estímulo extra, quando o

desânimo se queria instalar.

Aos meus colegas de Mestrado (Erasmus Mundus e Mestrado em Psicologia do

Trabalho e das Organizações), por terem sido verdadeiramente como uma família unida

e altruísta com quem sempre podemos contar em todos os momentos desta “aventura”,

bem como pela abertura de horizontes, carinho e amizade.

À Dr.ª Alice Oliveira e à D. Inmaculada Aleixos pela amizade, apoio constante e

preocupação genuína com todos nós.

À minha família, mas em especial aos meus pais e à minha irmã, e aos meus

amigos de sempre pelo apoio incondicional e compreensão para com a indisponibilidade

pessoal e emocional que este trabalho tantas vezes acarretou.

Helena Martins, 2008 ii

Acknowledgments

The development of this work involved several people without whose contribution it

would have been impossible.

First of all, a heart-felt thank you to my tutors, Professor Teresa Rebelo and

Professor Inés Tomás, for the seriousness and dedication devoted to this project, their

constant sensibility and the consistent and friendly way with which they oriented and

cooperated with me, in what was and continues to be, for me, an exercise of continuous

learning and team work.

To the company-responsible people that cooperated with this work, especially for the

availability and support in the data collection stage, namely Dr. Manuel Rodrigues, Dr. M.

José Patrício and Dr. Sara Santos, from Toyota Caetano Portugal and Mr. Abílio Lima and

Dr. Sónia Mota, from COLEP CCL.

To all the Professors in the Masters, especially those who lectured in Coimbra and

Valencia, for sharing the knowledge, but also for the discussion and support that they

provided, always offering an extra stimulus, when motivation tried to fail.

To my colleagues in the Master (Erasmus Mundus and Mestrado em Psicologia do

Trabalho e das Organizações), for truly being an united and altruistic family, with whom we

could always count on in all the moments of this “adventure”, as well as the opening of

horizons, warmth and friendship.

To Dr. Alice Oliveira and Ms. Inmaculada Aleixos, for the friendship, constant

support and genuine concern with all of us.

To my family, especially my parents and my sister, and to my friends of all times,

for the unconditional support and understanding towards the personal and emotional

unavailability that this work often brought about.

Helena Martins, 2008 iii

Index

Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1

Job Satisfaction ............................................................................................ 7

Organizational Commitment...................................................................... 8

Extra-Role Organizational Citizenship Behaviour .................................. 11

Method .................................................................................................................... 14

Sample and data collection procedures ........................................................ 14

Measures ........................................................................................................ 15

Analysis .......................................................................................................... 18

Results ..................................................................................................................... 19

Construct Validity .......................................................................................... 19

Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ) ......................................... 19

Affective, Normative and Continuance Commitment Scale ................... 21 Extra-Role Organizational Citizenship Behaviours: Helping and Voice

Behaviours Scale .................................................................................. 23

Test of hypotheses .......................................................................................... 25

Discussion .............................................................................................................. 28

Conclusions ........................................................................................................... 30

Limitations and Directions for future investigation ...................................... 31

References ............................................................................................................. 31

Appendix – Questionnaire of the Survey ................................................... 38


Impact of Firm-promoted Accreditation of Prior Learning Processes on the Worker-Organization Relationship: a cross-sectional survey in Portuguese Industrial Firms

Helena Martins

Abstract The process of Competences Recognition, Validation and Certification1, also known as

Accreditation of Prior Learning (APL), is an innovative means of attaining school certificates for

individuals without an academic background. The main objective of this process is to validate what

people have learned in informal contexts, in order to attribute academic certificates.

With the increasing interest of the qualification of workers and governmental support, more and

more Portuguese organizations promote this process within their facilities and their work hours. In fact,

nowadays, various Portuguese firms reveal a special concern about learning issues as a key factor in their

competitiveness. Consequently, they tend to invest in strategies oriented towards the enhancement of

human resource competences to improve their learning ability and their performance.

This study explores the relationship between the promotion of this Human Resource

Development Programme and employee’s attitudes (Job Satisfaction and Organizational Commitment)

and behaviours (Extra-role Organizational Citizenship Behaviours) towards the organization they work

for. Results of a cross-sectional survey of Portuguese Industrial Workers (N=135) in two firms showed

that statistical significant results are in the higher levels of Voice Behaviours (a dimension of Extra-role

Organizational Citizenship Behaviour defined as the proactive behaviors that challenge the status quo in

order to improve Organizational Performance) Concretely, results showed significant higher levels of

Voice Behaviours in the groups of workers who were involved or had graduated from the firm promoted

APL process versus those who were not involved in it. This study represents a first approach to the

subject of APL in organizational context in the Portuguese Population and intends to spur future research

in this area.

Keywords: Accreditation of Prior Learning, Life Long Learning, Job Satisfaction, Organizational

Commitment, Organizational Citizenship Behaviours.

Introduction

In an era where the learner’s earlier educational experiences do not always fit

with the reality of a rapidly changing employment market, and jobs are not “for life”,

accompanied by high rates of experience and knowledge redundancy, along with other

contributory discontinuities in career patterns (Dealtry, 2003), the importance of

lifelong learning is stressed, conveying to the pertinence of a competence-based

approach to learning.

1 In Portuguese, “Reconhecimento, Validação e Certificação de Competências” (RVCC).



That is to say that the knowledge-based economy, the new technologies, the

growing speed of technological changes and globalisation all influence the needs to

improve the population’s skills and competences (Colardyn & Bjornavold, 2004), as

well as the recognition and the validation of the ones they already have, acquired in

non-formal and informal contexts.

The term “competence” assumes in this context a primary role, as it has become

a more and more used term. It can be defined in several ways, taking in account two

main components: savoir-mobiliser2 (Perrenoud, 1996), and reflexive attitude, because

the validated experiences in this kind of processes are characterized by the knowledge

acquired by a long practice together with observation and reflexion (Fredy-Pinchot,

2004).

Learning is therefore no longer a preparing exercise from which to launch into a

career but an essential activity of career sustaining and growth (Dealtry, 2003).

The Accreditation of Prior Learning is a process that strives to assess and

recognize the non-formally3 attained knowledge. Usually, the subjects are asked to

demonstrate a set of competences referenced as core to the specific qualification they

are aiming at. This demonstration can have practical elements (such as the French bilan

de compétences) but it usually consists of a portfolio of activities in which the adults

demonstrate certain set of competences (e.g. correct use of language, mathematical

competences, etc.).

In practical terms, the process represents somewhat a change in the traditional

academic paradigm, in the sense that obtaining a certificate by the APL process is not

dependent on the transmitting of new knowledge by a teacher, but on the demonstration

of previously acquired competences by the subjects, in informal contexts. Cardinet

(1989, cit in ANEFA, 2002) refers that:

The educational and training systems must ensure every individual the basic

necessary competences for the knowledge society.

2 As opposed to the traditional savoir-faire, pointing to the integration and even synergy of the resources a competence weighs upon, in the sense that it means mobilising a group of resources – knowledge, attitudes, personal traits, etc. to a certain purpose. 3 By “non formal” we mean both the informal, experience-based learning and the non-formal courses that one may attend that are not accredited.



However, many people acquire them in the course of their lives, astray from

the education and training systems, as a consequence of the different ways of

learning[...]

The accreditation of prior learning from experience, whatever the experience

is, ends up being a fundamental right of the individual. (p.7)

In Europe, despite the differences among the countries that have adopted

accreditation and validation of prior learning systems, there are connecting common

basis and common features, along with an apparent trend to the further promotion of

this kind of validation in other countries as a key point of life-long learning. There is

still, however, a long way to go in terms of European cohesion in order ‘to develop a set

of common principles regarding validation of non-formal and informal learning with

the aim of ensuring greater comparability between approaches in different countries

and at different level’ (Colardyn & Bjornavold, 2004, pp.87)4.

The role of learning validation and accreditation systems is related to the

demand for more co-creative quality assurance solutions in corporate and organizational

learning management (Dealtry, 2003), including the need for a more holistic vision of

human resources management perspective. As we have already said, nowadays, firms

reveal a special concern about learning issues as a key factor in their competitiveness.

Consequently, they tend to invest in strategies oriented towards the enhancement of

human resource competences to improve their learning ability and their performance.

Supporting this investment, a study conducted by Rebelo (2006) reveals that workers’

qualification is a strong facilitator of the existence of a learning culture in organizations,

the type of culture that a leaning organization must have. The results of this study also

support that a learning culture has a positive impact on organizational performance.

The Process of Accreditation of Prior Learning can be developed in a number of

contexts, like refugee camps, centres for the general population, enterprises and

organizations, etc.

4 In Europe, there are APL processes in countries such as Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden and the UK, but the process is not exclusively European, existing also in other Continents, in countries like, Chile, Canada, Malaysia, Korea, USA, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, etc., although having different acronyms such as APEL (Accreditation of Prior Experiential Learning), RPEL (Recognition of Prior Experiential Learning), PLAR (Prior Learning Assessment and Recognition), etc.



This process is carried out by institutions accredited by the same Ministry, called

New Opportunities Centres5, in their own facilities or in organizations that require them

to itinerate there.

In Portugal, the Accreditation of Prior Learning is designed only to attribute

school qualifications (4th, 6th, 9th and, more recently, 12th year of education

equivalences) through a process that involves the attendance of APL sessions where

candidates show some oral communication and citizenship competencies, as well as the

completion of a Personal and Professional Portfolio, where the candidates report

significant past experiences and informally acquired competencies. No previous level of

school attendance is required for any of the levels of accreditation, as long as the adults

prove to possess the competencies referred by the Portuguese Education Ministry in the

law.

In particular, firms have been interested in this kind of validation of their Human

Resources within different schemes and organizational philosophies, cultures and

strategies, as can be seen in Table 1.

Thus, a firm may engage in an APL process for several reasons, depending on

variables such as:

• Focus (individual or collective);

• Purposes/intentions (social recognition, competences management,

professional evolutions, economic positioning, organizational change,

employability promotion, etc.);

• Objectives (social dialogue, assessing/accompanying worker evolution, re-

levelling, reinforcing the corporate image, fitting the qualifications to the

functions, internal and external employability, etc.);

• Implementation strategies (systematically or not, long term or punctually, as

a Human Resource Development instrument, etc.);

• Expected impact (worker motivation, corporate mobility, worker

qualification, organizational performance, corporate social responsibility,

management by values, organizational learning management, etc.),

• Issues faced by the companies at the time;

• Corporate strategy. 5 “Centros de Novas Oportunidades”, in Portuguese.



Table 1 – Factors that impact on the operationalization of the APL process

(Adapted from MEFI, 2004, and Pette & Devin, 2005)

Corporate Choice Dominant Aspect Aimed Main Impact

Individual logic

(case by case)

Social/motivational Social acknowledgement of the offer to

the workers by the company;

Individual Motivation

Individualized HR

management

Ability to evolve and manage

competences;

Evolution Ability

Collective Logic

(profession,

function,

position…)

Collective mise en

ouvre of the APL

Accompany the professional evolutions;

Professionalizing.

Organizational To operationalize choices and

reconfigure the structure

Revalidating of the job/function.

Economic Developing an image in the competitors’

landscape (enhancing a brand image of

quality).

Employability Improving the positioning in the labour

market

However, the APL process in companies does not necessarily entail a formalised

strategic plan, the possible consequences on the workers’ careers are not a fruit of the

validation per se (but of the acquisition of competences implied by it) and most of the

companies involved do not even acknowledge that are managing by competences

(Layec & Leguy, 2006). In fact, this seems to be much more a de facto rather than de

jure process, in the sense that it brings about a serious of issues (like Corporate Social

Responsibility, Management by Competences, Management by Values, Organizational

Learning Management, etc.) that are not always recognized by the actors of the process

themselves.

Nonetheless, it is evident that this process intended as a Human Resources

Development (HRD) instrument or not, impacts on the workers that submit to it. Studies



have shown that the APL impacts mainly on the candidates’ self-representation (e.g.

Layec & Leguy, 2006, François & Botteman, n.d., Prodercom, 2004, CIDEC, 2004), but

also on their representation of the company and it’s proximity towards them (Layec &

Leguy, 20066).

In our study, we intend to investigate the impact of this process in the

relationship of Workers with the Firms they work for. Therefore, our sample was

divided in three groups more or less equally distributed, regarding the level of

involvement in the APL process: not involved, currently involved and graduated from

it. The information regarding which subjects were or had been involved in the process

was given by the firms, where the processes took place, whereas subjects who had not

been involved in the process were identified because their academic background was

below the 9th year (the degree that APL aimed at in both organizations) and because

they self-reported never having been involved in the process.

Since our purpose is to verify the differences between the subjects that were or

are involved in the APL process vs. those workers not involved in it, our hypotheses are

formulated in terms of the groups of workers who have finished the process vs. the

workers who are not involved in it, as well as the workers currently involved in the

process vs. the workers not involved in the process.

Because the Worker-Organization Relationship is such a wide subject, we chose

two types of Job Attitudes (particularly Organizational Commitment and Job

Satisfaction), and one type of Behaviours (namely Extra-Role Organizational

Citizenship Behaviours) as the variables in study. This choice was both consistent with

the few studies on APL in firms we have found, that pointed out these variables as

affected by the APL and with the literary review we conducted, where these three

particular variables often appear together. Our perspective was there for to look into the

Worker-Organization relationship in three different angles: of the Worker with the Job

6 The French Minstère de L’Emploi, de La Cohesion Sociale et du Logement – Délégation

Générale à L’Emploi et la Formation Professionelle promoted in 2006, the report by Layec and Leguy about the APL Process in firms, based in 10 case studies. This study had essentially practical and benchmarking objectives since it was meant to put in evidence the situations and contexts favourable to the use of the APL in firms, advantages in terms of HR Management and how best to conduct the Process in firms in order to help candidates attain success in their task. Although the results are mainly qualitative and concern matters that don’t fit in this paper, the reflections about the APL process. as part of the Corporate Strategy and the mention on page 131 that authors believe from their contact with subjects that he APL modifies the representation that workers have on the company make this study a landmark in the arid landscape of APL in Firms literature.



itself (Job Satisfaction); of the Worker’s attachment to the Organization (Organizational

Commitment) and of the Worker’s actual self-report of going beyond his or her job for

the good of the Organization (Extra-Role Organizational Citizenship Behaviours).

Job Satisfaction

Job Satisfaction has been the focus of thousands of studies and published articles

in industrial-organizational psychology (Resnick & Bond, 2001).

In general, Job Satisfaction is defined as a positive emotional state resulting

from the appraisal of one’s job and is linked to the characteristics of one’s work

(Dressel, 1982; Butler, 1990; Arches, 1991, cit in Sari, 2004), that is to say Job

Satisfaction is usually treated as a collection of feelings or affective responses

associated with the job situation (Imparato, 1972), or “simply how people feel about

different aspects of their jobs” (Spector, 1997, p.2).

Research has positively associated Job Satisfaction with the specific attributes

and occupations of the job, positive attitudes, motivation and life-happiness, leisure and

non-work environment (Tennison, 1996). We hypothesize that Job Satisfaction will

increase with the valuing of the workers competences by the APL process, given the

likelihood of improvement of the positive attitudes, motivation and life-happiness,

commonly associated with a better self-concept (CIDEC, 2004). However, we are

particularly curious about the relationship between APL process and this variable since

it seems also reasonable to formulate that an employee that finds his or her competences

above the job requirements will be less satisfied with it (Person-Job Fit Theory7

[Brkich, Jeffs & Carless, 2002]).

We chose, however, to propose a positive relation between the APL Process and

Job Satisfaction, because we believe that, although plausible, the negative relationship

among the variables will be less common than the one we advocate, since self-efficacy8,

one of the main reported results of the APL process (e.g. CIDEC, 2004) is associated

7 Person-Job fit has been conceptualized as the degree to which an individual’s preferences, knowledge, skills, abilities (KSA), needs, and values match job requirements (Brkich, Jeffs & Carless, 2002). Person-Job Fit is an important determinant of Job Satisfaction (Arvey, Carter, & Buerkley, 1991 cit in Brkich, Jeffs & Carless, 2002). 8 Defined here as the tendency to consider oneself competent (Spector, 1997).



with internal Locus of Control9, and Job Performance10 aspects reported to relate

positively with job satisfaction (O’Brien, 1983, Spector, 1982, cit in Spector, 1997).

Hypotheses 1a: Workers that have concluded the APL process promoted

in their firms will reveal higher Job Satisfaction compared to those

workers who are not engaged in this process.

Hypotheses 1b: Workers that are doing the APL processes promoted in

their firms will reveal higher Job Satisfaction compared to those workers

who are not engaged in this process.

Organizational Commitment

In the last decades, the concept of Organizational Commitment (OC) has grown

in popularity in the literature of industrial/organizational psychology and organizational

behavior (Mathieu & Zajac, 1990).

Mowday, Porter and Steers (1982, cit in Fields, 2002) who did much of the

original research about Organizational Commitment characterized it as a strong belief in

and acceptance of the organization’s goals and values, a willingness to exert

considerable effort on behalf of the organization, and a strong desire to maintain

membership in an organization. Despite the different definitions and measurements of

OC, there is some agreement that it can be considered as a bond that links the individual

to the organization and that it is inversely related to turnover and withdrawal intentions

(Fields, 2002; Allen & Meyer, 1990), although it is obviously very reductive to consider

that Organizational Commitment is only related to focal intentions to remain with the

organization, since “what employees do on the job is arguably as important as whether

they stay or leave” (Meyer and Allen, 1997, p.13), pointing out to some evidence that

Organizational Commitment is associated to different variables of Performance at Work

(e.g attendance at work, in-role job performance) and Employee Well-Being (Meyer &

Allen, 1997).

9 Locus of Control is a cognitive variable that represents an individual’s generalized belief in his or her ability to control positive and negative reinforcements in life. An internal locus of control leads the subjects to believe that they are able to influence reinforcements (Spector, 1997) 10 Job Performance is defined here as how well the person does at the job.



Despite the fact that is was originally conceived as an unidimensional construct

(Becker, 1960; Mowday, Steers & Porter, 1979), nowadays it is consensual that

Organizational Commitment is multidimensional (Bergman, 2006; Fields, 2002; Meyer

& Allen, 1997). This fact is originated in the different however complementary

unidimensional views of Organizational Commitment and permits a broader

understanding and functionality of the construct as well as has important repercussions

in the comprehension of its consequences and interactions with other behavioural

variables (Gelatly, Meyer & Lutchack, 2006).

For present purposes, and albeit the different existing OC models (e.g. Mowday,

Porter and Steers, 1982; O’Reilly & Chatman, 1986), we adopted Meyer and Allen’s

(1991, 1997; Allen & Meyer, 1990) three component model. It is defensible that Meyer

and Allen’s (1991, 1997; Allen & Meyer, 1990) is the most studied and empirically

supported model, prevailing in the literature (Bergman, 2006; Meyer, Stanley,

Herschovitch & Topolnytsky, 2002) and being already explored in diverse contexts and

cultures, although most studies are based in the North American reality (cf. Meyer &

Allen, 1996).

Meyer and Allen (1991, cit in Bartlett, 2001) conceptualize OC divided in three

components (rather than types, since they can co-exist): Affective, Normative and

Continuance Organizational Commitment.

Affective Organizational Commitment can be defined as the emotional

attachment with the organization and is related with the worker-organization

identification; Normative Organizational Commitment is the perceived obligation

(ethical or moral) to remain in the organization and, finally, the Continuance

Organizational Commitment is defined as the perceived costs of leaving the

organization (such as lost of seniority or lower pay).

Literally hundreds of studies have examined the relationships between Affective

Organizational Commitment (AOC) and variables hypothesized to be its antecedents

(Meyer & Allen, 1997). In terms of Organizational Variables, AOC seems to be

positively related to the way organizational-level policies are designed, communicated

and perceived as fair. Person Characteristics research in this area has focused on two

types of variables: demographic variables (e.g., age, gender, tenure) and dispositional

variables (e.g., personality, values).



Overall, the relationship between demographic variables and affective

commitment are neither strong nor consistent (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Dispositional

variables, however, have shown different results, in particular, there is some evidence

that suggests that people’s perceptions of their own competence might play an

important role in the development of AOC (Meyer & Allen, 1997). Of the several

personal characteristics that they examined, Mathieu and Zajac (1990) reported the

strongest link between perceived competence and affective commitment, which leads us

to the following hypotheses:

Hypotheses 2a: Workers that have concluded the APL process

promoted in their firms will reveal higher Affective Organizational

Commitment compared to those workers who are not engaged in this

process.


their firms will reveal higher Affective Organizational Commitment

compared to those workers who are not engaged in this process.

Normative Organizational Commitment (NOC) has been conceptualized to

develop upon several processes. A collection of pressures that individuals feel during

their socialization as newcomers to the organization plays an important role to the

emergence of this kind of OC, as well as the “psychological contract” between an

employee and the organization (Argyris, 1960; Rousseau, 1989, 1995; Schein, 1980, cit

in Meyer & Allen, 1997). A particular type of investment that the organization makes in

the employee – specifically, investments that seem difficult for employees to reciprocate

(Meyer & Allen, 1991; Scholl, 1981, cit in Meyer & Allen, 1997) also appears highly

correlated with the advent of NOC, which leads us to the following hypotheses:

Hypotheses 2c: Workers that have concluded the APL process promoted

in their firms will reveal higher Normative Organizational Commitment


Hypotheses 2d: Workers that are doing the APL processes promoted in

their firms will reveal higher Normative Organizational Commitment




Continuance Commitment has been shown to be related to (a) employees’

perceptions about the lack of transferability of their skills (Allen & Meyer, 1990) and

their education (Lee, 1992, cit in Meyer & Allen, 1997) to other organizations11, as well

as (b) the employee’s recognition that leaving is more costly due to the investments he

or she has made in favour of the organization (side bets) and/or (c) the perceived lack of

available alternatives (Meyer & Allen, 1997).

Thus, and given the fact that the APL process increases the educational level and

Global Self-Esteem (e.g. CIDEC, 2004), therefore, typically, increasing the perception

of available alternatives, it is reasonable to hypothesize that:

Hypotheses 2e: Workers that have concluded the APL process promoted

in their firms will reveal lower Continuance Organizational

Commitment compared to those workers who are not engaged in this

process.

Hypotheses 2f: Workers that are doing the APL processes promoted in

their firms will reveal lower Continuance Organizational Commitment


Extra-Role Organizational Citizenship Behaviour

Organizational Citizenship Behaviour (OCB) can be defined as an individual

behaviour that is discretionary, not contractually guaranteed and that in the aggregate

promotes the effective functioning of the organization (Organ, 1997; Smith, Organ &

Near, 1983).

Organizational Citizenship Behaviour is discretionary in the sense that it is not

an enforceable requirement of the role or the job description, but a matter of personal

choice (such that its omission is generally not understood as punishable) and by “not

contractually guaranteed” we mean that an OCB is not directly or explicitly recognized

by the formal reward system (Organ, 1997).

11 Both Allen and Meyer (1990) and Lee (1992, cit in Meyer & Allen, 1997) demonstrated that employees who thought their educational or training investments were less easily transferable elsewhere expressed stronger Continuance Commitment to their current organization.



For example, spontaneously helping a co-worker when he or she is in an

occasional overload of work can be considered an OCB in the sense that it is

discretionary (spontaneous, even in this case), it is not contractually guaranteed, as it is

a punctual extra-role activity and promotes the effective functioning of the organization,

since it helps maintain productivity in a time of need. This behaviour would stop being

considered an OCB if (a) the person was requested by a supervisor to help the colleague

or in some way the lack of that behaviour would be punishable (e.g. being a doctor and

not helping a person who is having a heart attack in a social event) (b) that collaboration

with the co-worker was held in account for Performance Appraisal or explicitly

rewarded by the formal reward system (e.g. pay, promotions, etc.) or (c) that behaviour

would be counterproductive to the aggregate functioning of the company (e.g. the

person’s task is more complicated/urgent/important that his or her co-worker’s, the

other co-worker is constantly needing help and the person’s intervention masks the need

for another worker in that job or even the co-workers ineffectiveness, etc.).

This construct, however fashionable at the moment, has been much debated over

time due to the concepts of in-role and extra-role behaviour. Although some of the

original articles referred to OCB as extra-role behaviours, further research verified that

much of the OCB’s were perceived by the workers as in-role, rather than extra-role (cf.

Morrison, 1994, cit in Organ, 1997), a question that inheres the very fuzziness of the

concepts “role” and “job” themselves (Organ, 1997).

In order to avoid the discussion between what employees could consider in-role

or extra-role and to distance ourselves from a discussion that is not the focus of this

study, we chose to approach this subject by restricting our research to the impact of the

APL process to Extra-role Behaviour, using Van Dyne and LePine’s (1998) model,

“Helping and Voice Behaviors” (exposed further on). Also, these were the most

reported changed variables after the APL process in firms (e.g. CIDEC, 2004, Layec &

Leguy, 2006).

Helping Behavior is defined as the proactive behavior that emphasizes small acts

of consideration towards other co-workers, and Voice Behaviors are the proactive

behaviors that challenge the status quo in order to improve Organizational Performance.

Both are seen as extra role behaviors that the employees may undertake at their own

time (Fields, 2002).



Ng and Van Dyne (2005) refer that the psycho-social antecedents of Help

Behaviors are essentially group cohesion - defined as “the result of all the forces acting

on the members to remain in the group” (Festinger, 1950, cit in Ng & Van Dyne, 2005)

and cooperative group norms (norms can be defined as regular behavior patterns that

are relatively stable over time and expected by group members [Bettenhausen &

Murnigham, 1991, cit in Ng & Van Dyne, 2005]). Since training as well as the APL

process (given unquestionable contextual similarities) provides a socialization context,

promoting further socialization opportunities and even solidarity among its members

(cf. Geerthuis, Holmes, Geerthuis, Clancy & Bristol, 2002; Bartlett, 2001;

Kontoghiorghes & Bryant, 2004), we propose the following hypotheses:

Hypotheses 3a: Workers that have concluded the APL process promoted

in their firms will report higher Help Behaviours compared to those

workers who are not engaged in this process.


their firms will report higher Help Behaviours compared to those workers

who are not engaged in this process.

Relatively to Voice Behaviours, LePine and Van Dyne (1998) stress the

relevance of Satisfaction with the Group and Global Self Esteem as antecedents of this

variable.

In most organizations, the most proximal work-related source of affect for

employees is their group: when employees must interact with others in their work group

to perform their jobs, their affective response to this interdependence can be a major

source of low and/or high satisfaction (Hackman, 1992, cit in LePine & Van Dyne,

1998). Global Self Esteem, on the other hand, (the degree of positive self-worth that an

individual ascribes to him or herself (Brockner, 1998, cit in LePine & Van Dyne, 1998)

is an important predictor of attitudes and behaviour in work and nonwork contexts

(Brockner, 1988, cit in LePine & Van Dyne, 1998). Global Self Esteem can also be

thought of in terms of self-confidence and generalized self-competence (Tharenou, 1979

cit in LePine & Van Dyne, 1998).

If we consider that one of the main findings on the CIDEC (2004) study on the

impact of the APL process in the Portuguese Population was the increase of the Global



Self Esteem12, due to a greater awareness of each individual’s own competences and

know-how, we are led to formulate the following hypotheses:

Hypotheses 3c: Workers that have concluded the APL process promoted in their

firms will report higher Voice Behaviours compared to those workers who are

not engaged in this process.

Hypotheses 3d: Workers that are doing the APL processes promoted in their

firms will report higher Voice Behaviours compared to those workers who are

not engaged in this process.

Method

Sample and data collection procedures

Data was collected from employees in two industrial organizations. The two

firms we did our research in are major industrial companies of the automobile and

contract manufacturing business.

Operating since 1946 in Portugal, the firm in the automobile business has

currently about 600 workers and operates in almost all areas of the country, although the

subjects we inquired operate in the Centre and North of Portugal.

The contract manufacturing firm was founded in 1965 in Portugal and merged

with another European Company in 2004, expanding throughout Europe ever since. In

Portugal, the company has about 1000 workers and operates in the centre region of

Portugal.

These Organizations were selected to conduct the study in view of the fact that

APL Processes had already occurred and were currently taking place in both firms. This

was an important factor, due to the nature of our study, where more or less equally

distributed groups of subjects in three different stages of the APL process (not involved,

involved and graduated from it) were needed.

12 Despite specific to the Portuguese Population, these findings are supported by other studies conducted abroad such as Coladryn & Bjornavold (2004), Fredy-Pinchot (2004), CIDEC (2004), MEFI (2004) Layec & Leguy (2006), etc.



About 150 questionnaires were distributed in the two firms. The authors tried

to collect themselves as many questionnaires as possible, as to personally assure the

workers of the confidentiality and anonymousness and respond to questions/doubts, but,

due to organizational internal security policies, circa 50% of the questionnaires in both

firms were distributed, grouped and returned to the authors by collaborators of the

Human Resources department of the firms in sealed envelopes.

One hundred questionnaires were distributed in the automobile industry

organization and fifty questionnaires in the contract manufacturing firm, according to

the receptiveness showed by the organizations.

Of these 150 questionnaires, about 90% (N=135) were completed and

returned. Specifically, the questionnaires completed and returned were, in the contract

manufacturing company 96% (N=47) of the originally planned, whereas in the

automobile industry it was 88% (N=88).

The sample is comprised of employees in production (60,7%), clerical (5,2%)

and supervisory (17%) positions (17,1% of the subjects did not respond this item).

Males comprised 70,4% of the sample, females, 28,1% and 1,5% of the subjects did not

respond this item. Workers comprised by this sample were between 27 and 59 years old

with a mean age of 42,5 years and a standard deviation of 6,95. The nature of the

inquired subjects’ contracts was as follows: 89,5% had effective contracts, 8,9% had

termed contracts, 2,2% had temporary contracts, 0,7% had other types of agreement

and 2,2% did not respond this item. Seniority of the inquired subjects varied between 0

and 40 years, with a mean of 17,7 years and a standard deviation of 10,7.

According to the objectives of present research, the sample was divided in

three groups regarding the level of involvement in the APL process: not involved

(31,1%), currently involved (40%) and graduated from it (28,9%).

Our study has a non-experimental comparative design (Robson, 2002).



Measures

Job Satisfaction was assessed using the short version of the MSQ - Minnesota

Satisfaction Questionnaire (Weiss, Dawis, England & Lofquist, 1967), with 20 items. A

5-point Likert-type scale was answered in which choices range from “very dissatisfied

with this aspect of my job” (1) to “very satisfied with this aspect of my job” (5).

Fields (2002, p.7) mentions that over the years, and in several different

investigations where the MSQ was used, different factor solutions were found and refers

to Mathieu’s (1991) work where four factors emerged (satisfaction with working

conditions, satisfaction with leadership, satisfaction with responsibility and satisfaction

with extrinsic rewards) and Moorman’s (1993) work where two factors (one assessing

satisfaction with intrinsic aspects of the job and the other assessing satisfaction with

extrinsic aspects) yield. Spector (1997), however solely mentions two factors solutions

from previous studies for the short version of the MSQ, reporting to the main tendency

of the scale.

Employees’ levels of commitment to their organization were measured using

the revised version of Meyer and Allen’s (1997) 19 item scale: Affective, Normative

and Continuance Commitment Scale (Meyer & Allen, 1997). A 7-point Likert-type

scale was used for measuring respondents’ level of agreement with each statement

(from 1—strongly disagree to 7—strongly agree). In the authors’ version, the Affective

Commitment Subscale contains 6 items, such as “I would be very happy to spend the

rest of my career in this organization”, the Normative Commitment Subscale integrates

6 items, such as “I’d feel guilty if I left my organization now” and the Continuance

Commitment Subscale integrates 7 items, such as “I believe I have too few options to

consider leaving this organization”.

Extra-Role Organizational Citizenship Behaviour was assessed using the 13-

item Helping and Voice Behaviours Scale (Van Dyne & LePine, 1998). Responses to all

items were assessed on 7-point scales (1 -strongly disagree to 7 - strongly agree). The

Helping Behaviours original subscale contains 7 items such as “I volunteer to do things



for this work group” and the Voice Behaviours subscale integrates 6 items, such as “I

develop and make recommendations concerning issues that affect this work group”.

While selecting the instruments we took in consideration the recommendations

for the psychometric evaluation of measures used in organizational research by Meyer

and Allen (1997).

These authors proclaim that scales should have acceptable internal validity - a

minimum .70 alpha is considered, although as Cortina (1993, cit in Fields, 2002) has

noted, measures with more items will typically yield higher coefficient alpha values

than those with fewer items, other things being equal.

This means it is preferable to choose smaller scales, given comparable alpha

values and construct validity estimates. Scales should also be relatively stable across

time, and items that measure one construct should not correlate highly with items

intended to measure unrelated constructs, and correlate with other constructs that are

expected theoretically, that is to say, convergent and discriminant validity should be

considered (Fields, 2002).

To assess Job Satisfaction we considered using several scales, from various

articles and Fields (2002) work, choosing the Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire –

Short Version (Weiss, Dawis, England & Lofquist, 1967), since it presents several

advantages: it is a well known and stable over the time instrument; previous researches

had yielded coefficient alpha values ranging from .85 to .91; is a 20 item scale (in

comparison with the 72 items of the JDI – Job Descriptive Index, for example) and the

MSQ has been widely studied and validated (cf. Mathiew and Farr, 1991, Moorman,

1993, Hart, 1999, etc. cit in Fields, 2002).

Regarding the Organizational Commitment, and as we referred earlier, Meyer

and Allen’s (1991, 1997; Allen & Meyer, 1990) model was the most referenced in the

literature we consulted, and the most used in relational studies.

Hence, we have chosen the 19 item version of this instrument (Meyer & Allen,

1997), in conformity with the above mentioned model. The measure has the advantage



of discriminating and dealing with the different dimensions of commitment instead of

measuring essentially one kind (usually affective commitment), and had previously

reported alpha values of .77<α<.88 for Affective Commitment, .65<α<.86 for

Normative Commitment, .64<α<.86 for Continuance Commitment (Fields, 2002)

The Helping and Voice Behaviors Scale (Van Dyne & LePine, 1998) was

chosen for several reasons for this study.

First of all, and bearing in mind the nature and timings of our investigation we

found it preferable to use scales that could be applied directly to the subjects and not

involve other participants. In that sense we eliminated a priori all the scales that were

supposed to be only responded by supervisors or co-workers (e.g. the Smith, Organ and

Near’s 1983 Organizational Citizenship Behavior scale).

Although not being a very wide OCB Scale, the Helping and Voice Behaviors

Scale addresses the behaviors that prior studies refer as mainly altered by the APL

process (e.g. help between the co-workers [entreajuda], solidarity between co-workers

[PRODERCOM, 2004]). The fact that the scale is rather specific also allows us to stray

from the current theoretical and methodological controversies in this area (regarding

what employees actually consider to be “in-role” or “extra-role” behaviors, and

therefore a citizenship behavior or their implied duty, inhering the very fuzziness of the

concepts “role” and “job” themselves [Morrison, 1994; Organ, 1997]).

This scale is more parsimonious than most (13 items) and reported coefficient

alpha values by other researchers of 85<α<.95 for helping behaviors and .82<α<.96 for

voice behaviors (Fields, 2002).

All scales were translated from the original version to Portuguese and later

back-translated by an English language native speaker with extensive knowledge of the

Portuguese language, who was not familiar with these scales. This procedure leaded to

small changes in the scales. Later on, a talked reflexion was conducted with a small

group of Portuguese Industrial Workers and final adaptations resulted from this

procedure. Changes in the questionnaire were minor, such as the removal of a simple

line in one of the questions and more significant, in terms of the formulation of some



items of the different questionnaires (e.g. “A oportunidade de trabalhar de forma

autónoma na minha função” was suggested instead of the originally translated “A

oportunidade de trabalhar sozinho/a na minha função”; “A relação entre o pagamento e

a quantidade de trabalho que faço” resulted from the discussion, replacing the originally

proposed “O pagamento e a quantidade de trabalho que faço”) The final version of the

questionnaire that was used in the study is included as an appendix of this paper.

Analysis

Construct validity estimates the ability of an instrument to measure the

underlying construct of interest (Ellenbecker & Byleckie, 2005). Exploratory factor

analysis (EFA) has traditionally been employed by researchers as a tool to determine the

number of underlying dimensions in a data set (Hinkin, 1995, cit in Brkich, Jeffs &

Carless, 2002) by grouping together variables that are correlated (Tabachnik & Fidell,

2007). Since none of the three questionnaires had been validated for the Portuguese

Industrial Workers Population, we chose to perform an exploratory factor analyses.

To test our hypotheses, we used a multivariate analysis of variance

(MANOVA) design to analyse the data. The independent variables were the three

different levels of APL Process Development (not involved, currently involved and

graduated from it). The dependent variables were Job Satisfaction (2 types: Internal and

External Satisfaction), Organizational Commitment (3 components: Affective,

Normative and Continuance Commitment) and Extra-Role Organizational Citizenship

Behaviours (2 types: Helping Behaviours and Voice Behaviours). Our primary interest

in the MANOVA design was to test for the overall statistical difference of the main

effect and interaction terms. We subsequently used Games-Howell as a post hoc

procedure to examine the substantive nature of main effect differences when they were

found to be statistically significant, given the fact that Levene’s test did not reveal

equality of variances between the groups (Pestana & Gageiro, 2005).



Results Construct Validity

In our study, principal factors extraction with varimax rotation was performed

on the 20 items from the MSQ (Weiss, Dawis, England & Lofquist, 1967), and on the

19 items of the Affective, Normative and Continuance Commitment Scale (Meyer &

Allen, 1997). Oblique rotation was used on the 13 items of the Helping and Voice

Behaviours Scale (Van Dyne & LePine, 1998): theory suggests that good citizenship is

demonstrated by high levels of both substantive categories (Van Dyne, Graham &

Dienesch, 1994), thus, Helping and Voice Behaviours should be positively correlated

rather than orthogonally related, as is the present case (r=.74, p<.01).

Missing Values Analysis above 15% led us to eliminate some cases prior to

factorial analysis (4 for the MSQ, 9 for the Commitment Scale and 6 for the Helping

and Voice Behaviours Scale).13

Principal components extraction was used prior to principal axis factoring

extraction to estimate number of factors, presence of outliers, absence of

multicollinearity and factorability of the correlation matrices (Tabachnick & Fidell,

2007). The principal components analysis was, therefore, used as an initial step of the

Factor Analysis that produced the prevailing results, since the purpose of our work was

a “theoretical solution uncontaminated by unique and error variability" and we had

designed our study “on the basis of underlying constructs [...] expected to produce

scores in the observed variables” (Tabachnik & Fidell, 2007, p.635).

Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire (MSQ)

Regarding the MSQ, two factors were extracted using principal axis factoring

with varimax rotation, accounting for 43,2% of the variance. Communality values

tended to be high, with a cut off point of 0.32 (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007) for inclusion

of a variable in interpretation of a factor. Six of the twenty variables loaded very closely

in both factors (with a difference lesser than .01) which led us to eliminate them from

13 The remaining Missing Values were replaced by the mean of the item.



the analysis14. Loadings of variables on factors and communalities are shown in Table

2. Variables are ordered and grouped by size of loading to facilitate interpretation.

Table 2 - Varimax rotated factor matrix based on correlations among the items of the MSQ and communalities (h2).

Extrinsic Job

Satisfaction

Intrinsic Job

Satisfaction

h2

17. The working conditions. ,719 ,047 ,519 9. The way company policies are put into practice. ,685 ,259 ,537 7. Competence of my supervisor in making decisions. ,683 ,168 ,495

6. The way my boss handles his men. ,610 ,387 ,522 18. The chance for advancement on this job. ,603 ,346 ,483 19. The pay and the amount of work I do. ,603 ,214 ,409 1. Being able to keep busy all the time. ,599 ,234 ,414 16. The freedom to use my own judgement. ,534 ,368 ,421 5. The chance to be “somebody” in the community. ,109 ,754 ,580 13. The chance to do something that makes use of my abilities. ,290 ,675 ,540

3. The chance to do things for other people. ,150 ,531 ,305 4. The chance to work alone in the job. ,146 ,530 ,302 12. The chance to tell people what to do. ,234 ,457 ,264 20. The chance to try my own methods of doing the job. ,309 ,402 ,257

% of Variance accounted for 35,6% 7,6%

We named the two factors intrinsic satisfaction (concerning the nature of the

job tasks themselves and how people feel about the work they do, e.g. “the chance to do

something that makes use of my abilities”), and extrinsic satisfaction (referring to

aspects of work that have little to do with the job tasks or the work itself, e.g. “The

working conditions”) according to the content of the items and to what has been most

commonly mentioned in the literature as the results of the Factoring Analysis of the

short version of the MSQ, here used (Spector, 1997)

Although some communalities were below the cut-off point (,32), we chose to

keep the items since there is a good factor loading discrimination and in order to

maintain a balanced number of items in both scales, fundamental in this case, in order to

keep the scale coherent. 14 The eliminated items were: “2. The feeling of accomplishment I get from the job.”. “8. The way that my job provides for steady employment”, “10. The chance to do different things form time to time.”, “11. The praise I get for doing a good job.”, “14. Being able to do things that do not go against my conscience.”, and “15. The way co-workers get along with each other.”.



Affective, Normative and Continuance Commitment Scale

The 19 items comprising the scale were subjected to an exploratory factor

analysis, with principal axis factoring. Three factors, accounting for 51,4% of the total

variance were extracted and rotated to a varimax criterion. The items and their factor

loadings are reported in Table 3. In view of the fact that the reverse score items

clustered in dissonance with the remaining scale (given by values of corrected item-total

statistics, ranging between 0,187 and -0,149) we were led to eliminate all the reverse

score items present in this scale15. One of the items in the Continuance Commitment

Scale (“15. If I hadn’t given so much of myself to this company, I would consider

working for another company”) and another from the Affective Commitment Scale (“1.

This organization has a great deal of personal meaning to me.”) were also eliminated

due to low communalities.

Taken together, our results regarding this scale suggest that each of the

psychological states identified in the literature as “commitment” to the organization can

be reliably measured. The independence of the scores of the Continuance Commitment

Scale from the ones on the other two measures was expected. Not expected, however,

was the significant relationship between Affective Organizational Commitment and

Normative Organizational Commitment. In the Portuguese Industrial Workers

population, items from both scales appeared mixed, suggesting that feelings of

obligation to maintain membership in the organization, although not identical to

feelings of desire, may be meaningfully linked, as had already been suggested by Allen

and Meyer (1990) and Herrbach (2006).

15 The reverse score items present in the original scale, eliminated from this factorial solution are: “2. I do not feel a strong sense of belonging in my organization.”, “9. I do not feel emotionally attached to this organization.”; “12. I do not feel any obligation to remain with my current employer” “16. I do not feel “part of the family” at my organization”;.



Table 3 - Varimax rotated factor matrix based on correlations among the items of the affective, continuance and normative commitment scales and respective communalities (h2).

Continuance

Commitment

Normative

Commitment

Affective

Commitment

h2

14. I believe that I have too few options to consider leaving this organization. ,716 ,083 ,080 ,526

7. One of the few negative consequences of leaving this organization would be the scarcity of available alternatives.

,671 ,098 ,112 ,472

13. It would be very difficult to leave this organization now, even if I wanted to.

,609 ,336 ,284 ,564

19. Too much of my life would be disrupted if I decided I wanted to leave my organization now.

,606 ,263 ,152 ,459

8. One of the major reasons I continue to work for this organization is that leaving would require a considerable personal sacrifice; another organization may not match the overall benefits I have here.

,590 ,194 ,128 ,402

18. Right now, staying with my organization is a matter of necessity as much as desire.

,578 ,154 ,356 ,484

6. I really feel as if this organization’s problems are my own ,024 ,740 ,397 ,706

5. I would not leave my organization right now because I have a sense of obligation to the people in it

,266 ,625 ,315 ,561

17. I would feel guilty if I left my organization now ,185 ,623 ,104 ,434

4. Even if it were to my advantage, I do not feel it would be right to leave my organization now.

,295 ,612 ,139 ,481

10. I owe a great deal to this organization. ,112 ,239 ,726 ,597

11. This organization deserves my loyalty. ,239 ,179 ,725 ,615

3. I would be very happy to spend the rest of my carreer in this organization. ,257 ,280 ,480 ,375

% of variance accounted for 20,9% 16,4% 14,1%

Thus, as was presented before, we considered Normative Commitment, the

factor that includes items 4, 5, 6, and 17 (three of which originally included in the



Normative Commitment Scale and one, 6, in the Affective Commitment Scale). These

items semantically report to the feeling of guilt associated with withdrawal intentions,

revealing a feeling of moral obligation/responsibility to remain.

We considered Affective Commitment the factor that includes items 3, 10 and

11 (one originally included in the Affective Commitment Scale, and two, 10 and 11, in

the Normative Commitment Scale), in the sense that the items translate a feeling of

loyalty towards the company reflecting an emotional relationship with it.

In another work Martins, Rebelo and Tomás (in print) have done a Confirmatory

Factor Analysis of this factorial solution using a sample of 307 subjects of the

Portuguese Industrial Workers Population. Results pointed to the best fit of this model

for this specific population.

This has in some way confirmed our belief that these particular dimensions

reflect the specificities of the Portuguese industrial workers population, reporting to

values and circumstances that are distinct from the North-American reality, and include,

for example, a lower tolerance towards professional risk and uncertainty (cf. Hofstede,

1980), that might be translated, for example in an affective bond of loyalty, reflecting

more a feeling of debt to the employer than a feeling of belonging and satisfaction with

the company. (cf. Martins, Rebelo & Tomás, in print, for further details).

Extra-Role Organizational Citizenship Behaviours: Helping and Voice

Behaviours Scale

Self-report responses of employees to the 13 item-scale were factor-analysed

using principal axis factoring. We specified oblique rotation for the analysis of this

scale since we verified that the dimensions (Helping Behaviours and Voice Behaviours)

were positively correlated rather than orthogonally related (r=.74, p<.01), confirming

what was mentioned by the authors of the scale in the seminal articles (LePine & Van

Dyne, 1998; Van Dyne & Le Pine, 1998).

Two items were deleted for loading in both factors simultaneously16; Table 4

lists the 11 remaining items, their factor loadings and communalities. Factor 1 contains

16 The deleted items were: “7. I speak up and encourage others in this group to get involved in issues that affect this group.” and “11. I develop and make recommendations about matters concerning issues that affect this work group.”



nine Helping Behaviour items, representing the proactive behavior that emphasizes

small acts of consideration to other co-workers; Factor 2 contains two items,

representing Voice Behaviors, the proactive behaviors that express a challenge the

status quo in order to improve Organizational Performance.

Table 4 - Oblimin rotated pattern matrix based on correlations among the items of the

helping and voice behaviour scale and communalities (h2)

Help Behavio

urs

Voice Behavio

urs h2

8. I help others in this group with their work responsibilities. ,910 -,129 ,731

4. I attend functions that help the work group ,909 -,084 ,767 5. I assist others in this group with their work for the benefit the work group. ,832 ,050 ,743

3. I help others in this group to learn about the work ,798 -,038 ,613 9. I get involved to benefit this work group ,771 -,015 ,585 6. I communicate my opinions about work issues to others in this group, even if my opinion is different and others disagree with me.

,740 -,034 ,527

1. I help to orientate new employees in this group ,719 ,176 ,657 10. I volunteer to do things for my work group. ,703 ,081 ,551 2. I speak up in this group with ideas for new projects or changes in procedures. ,637 ,238 ,594

13. I get involved in matters which affect the quality of life in this group -,085 ,982 ,899

12. I keep myself well informed about issues where my opinion might be useful to this work group. ,252 ,522 ,450

% of Variance accounted for 55,5% 9,2%

In summary, the results of the exploratory factor analysis generally support the

two substantive categories originally predicted by the authors of the scale (Helping and

Voice Behaviours), although the distribution of the items across the two factors did not

follow the exact original pattern proposed by the authors, especially in Voice

Behaviours where the only two items of the scale are positively correlated (r=.60,

p<.01).

All three scales and its factors presented high levels of reliability, with α

values of 0,88 for the MSQ (0,87 for the internal satisfaction factor and 0,77 for the

external satisfaction factor), 0,81 for the Affective, Normative and Continuance Scale

(0,75 for the Affective Commitment Scale, 0,81 for the Normative Commitment Scale



and 0,84 for the Continuance Commitment Scale) and 0,93 for the Helping and Voice

Behaviours Scale (0,75 for the Voice Behaviours Scale and 0,94 for the Helping

Behaviours Scale).

Test of hypotheses

MANOVA was used for the analysis with the sequential adjustment for

nonorthogonality, in the case of Helping and Voice Behaviours (since they were

positively rather than orthogonally correlated). The total N was reduced from 135 to

131 for Job Satisfaction, 126 for Organizational Commitment and 129 for Helping and

Voice Behaviours, due to the deletion of severe outlier cases.

With the use of Wilk’s criterion, we found the set of Helping and Voice

Behaviours to be significantly affected by the participation on the APL Process,

Λ=0,880, F(4 ,240)=3,943, p=0,04, η2= 0,062. However, univariate tests revealed

significant differences to be specifically in Voice Behaviours, and Games-Howell post

hoc procedure that these difference were between the workers who had already

graduated and the workers not involved in the process (mean difference = .79 for

p= 0,006), as well as the workers currently involved versus the workers not involved in

the APL process (mean difference = .67 for p= 0,03).

There was no statistically significant multivariate effect for Job Satisfaction,

Λ=0,987, F(4, 252)= 0,405; p=0,805, η2= 0,006, or Organizational Commitment, Λ=0,973,

F(6 , 240)= 0,555; p=0,766, η2= 0,014.

Hence, workers who are currently undergoing the APL process as well as

workers who have graduated from the APL process seem to display higher levels of

proactive behaviors that challenge the status quo in order to improve Organizational

Performance (Voice Behaviors).



Table 5 – Averages and Standard Deviations of Job Satisfaction (Intrinsic and Extrinsic Job Satisfaction), Organizational Commitment (Affective Organizational Commitment, Normative Organizational Commitment, and Continuance Organizational Commitment) and Extra-Role Organizational Citizenship Behaviours (Helping Behaviours and Voice Behaviours) as a function of the status in face of the APL Process.

Variable Intrinsic Job Satisfaction

N=134

Extrinsic Job Satisfaction

N=134

Affective Organization

al Commitment

N=132

Normative Organization

al Commitment

N=132

Continuance Organization

al Commitment

N=132

Help

Behaviours N=133

Voice

Behaviours N=133

M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD M SD APL Status

Not involved 4,00 ,643 3,61 ,844 5,39 1,44 4,63 1,332 4,97 1,452 5,93 ,773 5,21 1,354

Involved 3,94 ,695 3,49 ,778 5,50 1,10 4,35 1,538 4,97 1,302 5,99 ,825 5,88 ,904

Graduated from it 4,04 ,496 3,62 ,590 5,63 ,87 4,51 1,144 4,89 ,874 6,20 ,572 6,00 ,677

Although the Multivariate Analysis of Variance yielded statistical significance

only in terms of Voice Behaviours, tendencies of the variables generally don’t seem to

strand from what had been hypothesized, as one can observe in the figures below.

situation of respondent towards the APL processgraduated from itcurrently involvednot involved

Mea

n

5

4

3

2

1

0

Extrinsic Job Satisfaction

Intrinsic Job Satisfaction

Figure 1 - Graphical depiction of the differences between the three levels of

APL process situation in terms of the two dimensions of Job Satisfaction



situation of respondent towards the APL processgraduated from itcurretly involvednot involved

Mea

n

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

Affective Organizational Commitment Average Score

Normative Organizational Commitment Average Score

Continuance Organizational Commitment Average Score


APL process situation in terms of the three components of Organizational Commitment

situation of respondent towards the APL processgraduated from itcurrently involvednot involved

Mea

n

6

4

2

0

Help Behaviour Average Score

Voice Behaviour Average Score


APL process situation in terms of the two levels of Helping and Voice Behaviours



Discussion

Although Accreditation of Prior Learning has existed in Portugal since 2003,

and there are increasingly more studies about the impact of the process, there was a void

in the investigation of how this process effects on firms. The research that does exist

focuses on the individual and on educational features that APL implies. Our research

presents a first effort to understand the implications of this Human Resource

Development instrument in the functioning of organizations, having, in this sense, a

primary character.

Drawing from Social Exchange Theory (Homans, 1958, Gouldner, 1960, Blau,

1964, cit in Coyle-Shapiro, Shore, Taylor & Tetrick 2004), and more specifically from

Psychological Contracts literature (e.g. Rousseau, 1995), it is proposed that employees

would most likely want to reciprocate the companies’ interest in their development with

higher levels of Job Satisfaction, Organizational Commitment and Organizational

Citizenship Behaviour. We verified that although, generally, variables (with the clear

exception of the Normative Organizational Commitment) reported the expected

tendency, as is visible in the graphics in the Results section, statistical significance was

only found in Voice Behaviours, the proactive behaviors that challenge the status quo in

order to improve Organizational Performance, namely, in terms of involvement in

matters which affect the quality of life in the group and in keeping well informed about

issues where one’s opinion might be useful to the work group.

This finding, although somewhat different from what we had predicted, makes

sense in view of the fact that all the studies that we consulted (Coladryn & Bjornavold,

2004, Fredy-Pinchot, 2004, CIDEC, 2004, MEFI, 2004, Layec & Leguy, 2006, etc.)

point out that the absolute main effect of the APL process in the individual is the boost

in self confidence, self-concept and self esteem, which in it’s turn is the major

antecedent of Voice Behaviours (Van Dyne & LePine, 1998).

It is important to stress that statistical significance was only found in the above

mentioned variable, although the remaining results, namely the variables that did not

follow the tendency we had predicted originally can also provide some interesting

insights. Thus, although our original propositions make sense, there can be covariates

that we have not accounted for, since not all results follow the tendency of our



hypotheses. Namely, in terms of Job Satisfaction (Intrinsic and Extrinsic)17, for the

group currently involved in the APL process, vs. the group not involved in the same

process; in terms of Normative Commitment (in both subjects that had already

concluded and that were currently involved in the process)18 and, finally, in terms of

Continuance Commitment, in the comparison of the subjects currently involved in the

process vs. subjects not involved in the process at all19.

We believe that the lower Job Satisfaction, both intrinsic and extrinsic, in the

group of workers currently undergoing the APL process vs. the ones not involved can

essentially be associated with a decrease of the life quality and a more difficult work-

life balance, brought about by the effort and time that developing this enterprise

encompasses., resulting in this tendency.

Therefore, while developing the process and in the sense of the widely

accepted theory that Job Satisfaction is very related to Life Satisfaction it self (Spector,

1997), it is possible to conjecture that while involved in the APL Process, subjects may

experience more stress and anxiety and have less time to themselves and their family,

therefore decreasing their Life Satisfaction and thus, also the Job Satisfaction. The

situation seems to reverse as soon as their original balance is restored with the plus of

an increased feeling of self-efficacy and internal Locus of Control, that outputs the

tendency for a higher level of overall Job Satisfaction

Regarding the results of Normative Commitment, the well known demand of

the modern labour market that encourages workers to practice lifelong learning can also

be seen as a demand with a direct enforcement by the companies (e.g., workers who

don’t keep evolving don’t progress in their careers and are more likely to be fired); this

may bring about a sense of necessity rather than opportunity to initiatives like

promoting the APL Process in the company, therefore associating pressure and a sense

of obligation to it. In this context, the worker may see the APL process not as something

17 Hypotheses 1b: Workers that are doing the APL processes promoted in their firms will reveal higher Job Satisfaction compared to those workers who are not engaged in this process. 18 Hypotheses 2c: Workers that have concluded the APL process promoted in their firms will reveal higher Normative Organizational Commitment compared to those workers who are not engaged in this process. Hypotheses 2d: Workers that are doing the APL processes promoted in their firms will reveal higher Normative Organizational Commitment compared to those workers who are not engaged in this process. 19 Hypotheses 2f: Workers that are doing the APL processes promoted in their firms will reveal lower Continuance Organizational Commitment compared to those workers who are not engaged in this process.



that is being offered but as something that is being implicitly demanded of him or her,

thus altering the sense of the ongoing social exchange and reducing the feeling of moral

obligation to remain in the organization (Normative Commitment), usually preceded by

feelings of owing towards the employer/organization. Currently, in both companies,

although the APL sessions are done on the workers after work hours, sessions are held

in company premises, making it visible to administration and colleagues whether or not

workers are developing this qualification effort.

Concerning Continuance Commitment, actually, despite the discrepancy with

Hypotheses 2f., results don’t dismay our reasoning, in the sense that the levels of

Continuance Commitment are only lower as we predicted in the group that has already

finished the process. That is to say, that only after being certified and having increased

their qualifications/school level, do subjects tend to perceive an increased number of

available alternatives to their current job, and therefore display lower levels of

Continuance Commitment.

We think that these dissonant results play a role as important as the ones that

supported our hypotheses in explaining why workers don’t seem to change their

attitudes in a statistically significant manner (Job Satisfaction and Organizational

Commitment), although interestingly enough, they modify their behaviours (Voice

Behaviours, in this case) in a statistically significant manner, in a way that is positive

for the firm.

Conclusions

It is commonly accepted in the management literature that organizations need

employees who are willing to exceed their formal job requirements (Barnard, 1938;

Katz, 1964; Katz & Kahn, 1978; cit in Morrison, 1994).

This study has shown that firm promoted Accreditation of Prior Learning has an

impact in the workers pro-active behaviour towards Organizational Performance.

Workers who have had their competences validated and workers involved in APL tend

to display a higher involvement in matters which affect the quality of life in their group,

and make a larger effort to keep themselves well informed about issues where their

opinion might be useful to their work group.



This study represents an important effort in the job of adapting the three scales

to the Portuguese Industrial workers population, since a good part of the work

(translation, back-translation, talked reflection and an Exploratory Factor Analysis

procedure) is done, although having relatively small N for this task, since we have

below 300 respondents (Tabachnik & Fidell, 2007).

We believe that the clues provided by the present study will contribute to the

research of APL as a blooming new valid approach to life-long learning, organizational

learning management and human resource development practice.

In practical terms we hope our contribution will aid the improvement of the use

and implementation of APL processes in Portuguese firms, since it has become clear

that there are some positive changes in the Worker-Organization relationship.

Limitations and Directions for future investigation

One of the limitations of the present study is its cross-sectional design. So, for

future research, we think it would be interesting to make a longitudinal study, with this

population, in order to understand the evolutions of these and other dependent variables

that could be relevant (such as the innovations of workers in their work context). Also,

there is another status concerning the APL process that due to circumstantial constraints

could not be included in this study: the workers who have started the APL process but

that for one reason or another didn’t conclude it, that is to say, gave up. Does the

Worker-Organization Relationship suffer any changes? And if so, what are they?

We also think it would be very interesting to understand how the reverse

relationship (Organization-Worker) is affected by the APL process, e.g., since we found

that workers who had finished successfully the APL process reported higher levels of

Voice Behaviours, does that mean that companies tend to empower their workers more,

after they validated their informal and non-formal competencies?



References

Allen, N. J., & Meyer, J. P. (1990). The measurement and antecedents of affective,

continuance, and normative commitment to the organization. Journal of

Occupational Psychology, 63, 1–18.

Allen, N. J. & Meyer, J. P. (1996). Affective, continuance, and normative commitment

to the organization: An examination of construct validity. Journal of vocational

behavior, 49, 252 - 276.

Associação Nacional de Educação e Formação de Adultos - ANEFA (2002). Centros de

reconhecimento, validação e certificação de competências - roteiro estruturante.

[Competences’ recognition, validation and certification centres – structuring

guidelines]. Lisboa: Associação Nacional de Educação e Formação de Adultos

Bartlett, K. R. (2001). The relationship between training and organizational

commitment: A study in the heath care field. Human Resource Development

Quarterly, 12(4), 335-352.

Becker, H. S. (1960). Notes on the concept of commitment. American Journal of

Sociology, 66, 32-42.

Bergman, M. E. (2006). The relationship between affective and normative commitment:

review and research agenda. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27, 645–663.

Brkich, M., Jeffs, D., & Carless, S. A. (2002). A global self-report measure of person-

job fit European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18(1), 43–51.

Centro Interdisciplinar de Estudos Económicos - CIDEC (2004). O impacto do

reconhecimento de competências adquiridas ao longo da vida. [The impact of the

recognition of life-long acquired competences]. Lisboa: DGFV – Direcção Geral de

Formação Vocacional.

Colardyn, D. & Bjornavold, J. (2004). Validation of formal, non-formal and informal

learning: policy and practices in EU member states. European Journal of Education,

39(1), 69-89.

Coyle-Shapiro, J. A., Shore, M. L., Taylor, M. S. & Tetrick, L. (2005). The employment

relationship – examining psychological and contextual perspectives. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.



Dealtry, R. (2003). Issues relating to learning accreditation in corporate university

management. Journal of Workplace Learning, 15(2), 80-86.

Ellenbecker, C. H. & Byleckie, J. J. (2005). Home healthcare nurses’ job satisfaction

scale: refinement and psychometric testing. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(1),

70–78.

Ferreira, M. M. (2005). Empenhamento organizacional de profissionais de saúde em

hospitais com diferentes modelos de gestão. [Organizational commitment of health

professionals in hospitals with different management models]. Unpublished doctoral

thesis, Escola de Economia e Gestão da Universidade do Minho.

Fields, D. L. (2002). Taking the measure of work: a guide to validated scales for

organizational research and diagnosis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

François, P. H. & Botteman, A. E. (n.d.). Theórie sociale cognitive de Bandura et bilan

de compétences: aplications, recherches et perspectives critiques [Bandura’s social-

cognitive theory and the bilan de compétences: applications, researches andcritical

perspectives]. CARRIÉROlogie, 519-543.

Fredy-Pinchot, A. (2004). Chronique: Points de vue de practiciens [Cronicle:

Pratctitioners’ points of view]. Revue de Géstion des Ressources Humaines, 52, 63-

67.

Gellatly, I. R., Meyer, J. P. & Luchak, A. A. (2006). Combined effects of the three

commitment components on focal and discretionary behaviors: A test of Meyer and

Herscovitch’s propositions. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 69, 331–345.

Geerthuis, S., Holmes, M., Geerthuis H., Clancy, D. & Bristol, A. (2002). Evaluation of

workplace learning. Journal of Workplace Learning, 14(1/2), 11-18.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work related

values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Imparato, N. (1972). Relationship between Porter's need satisfaction questionnaire and

the job descriptive index. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56(5), 397-405.

Kontoghiorghes, C. & Bryant, N. (2004). Exploring employee commitment in a service

organization in the health care insurance industry. Organizational Development

Journal, 22(3), 59-72.

Layec, J. & Leguy, P. (2006). La VAE dans les entreprises: un atout collectif? Etude

des pratiques dans des TPE, PME/PMI et collectivites territoriales [The APL in

firms: a colective iniative? Study of practices in Smal and Medium Enterprises and



collective territories]. Ministère De l’Emploi, De La Cohésion Sociale et Du

Logement - Délégation Générale à l’Emploi et la Formation Professionnelle.

LePine, J. A. & Van Dyne, L. (1998). Predicting voice behaviour in work groups.

Journal of Applied Psychology, 81(6), 853-868.

Martins, H. M., Rebelo, T. & Tomás, I. (in print). Escala de compromisso

organizacional - afectivo, normativo e de continuidade (ECO-ANC) [Organizational

commitment scale: affective, normative and continuance (OCS – ANC)]. In C.

Machado, M. Gonçalves, L. Almeida, & M. Simões (Eds.) Instrumentos de

Avaliação Psicológica adaptados à População Portuguesa, Vol. 4. Braga: Quarteto

Editores.

Mathieu, J. E. & Zajac, D. M. (1990). A review and meta-analysis of the antecedents,

correlates, and consequences of organizational commitment. Psychological Bulletin,

108(2), 171–194.

MEFI - Ministère de L'Économie, des Finances et de l'Industrie (2004). Gagner en

compétences pour gagner en compétitivité: Les pratiques de validation des acquis

de l'expérience (VAE) dans les entreprises industrielles et de services à l'industrie

[Gaining in competences in order to gain in competitivity: The accreditation of

prior learning (APL) prectices in industrial and industry abiding service firms].

Ministère de L'Économie, des Finances et de l'Industrie.

Meyer, J. P. & Allen, N. J. (1997). Commitment in the workplace – theory, research and

application. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications – International Educational and

Professional Publisher.

Meyer, J. P., Stanley, D. J., Herscovitch, L., & Topolnytsky, L. (2002). Affective,

continuance, and normative commitment to the organization: a meta-analysis of

antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 61, 20–

52.

Morrison, E. W. (1994). Role definitions and organizational citizenship behaviour: the

importance of the employee's perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 37(6),

1543-1567.

Mowday, R. T., Porter, L. W., & Steers, R. M. (1982). Employee-organization linkages:

the psychology of commitment, absenteeism, and turnover. New York: Academic

Press.



Mowday, R. T., Steers, R. M. & Porter, L. W. (1979). The measurement of

organizational commitment. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 14, 224-247.

Ng, K. Y. & Van Dyne, L. (2005). Antecedents and performance consequences of

helping behaviour in work groups – A multilevel analysis. Group & Organization

Management, 30(5), 510-540.

O’Reilly, C. A., & Chatman, J. (1986). Organizational commitment and psychological

attachment: The effects of compliance, identification, and internalization on

prosocial behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 492–499.

Organ, D. W. (1997) Organizational citizenship behaviour: It's construct clean-up time.

Human Performance, 10(2), 85-97.

Perrenoud, P. (1996). Formation continue et développement de compétences

professionnelles [Continuous training and the development of professional

competences]. L’Éducateur, 9, 28-33.

Pette, X. & Devin, C. (2005). Gagner en compétences pour gagner en compétitivité:

Les pratiques de validation des acquis de l'expérience (VAE) dans les entreprises

industrielles et de services à l'industrie [Gaining in competences in order to gain in

competitivity: The accreditation of prior learning (APL) prectices in industrial and

industry abiding service firms]. Ministère de L'Économie, des Finances et de

l'Industrie.

Pestana, M. H. & Gageiro, J. N. (2005). Análise de dados para ciências sociais - a

complementaridade do SPSS [Data analysis for social sciences – the complement of

SPSS] (4th Ed.). Lisboa: Edições Sílabo.

Prodercom (2004). Avaliação do impacte dos processos RVCC - estudo de caso

[Evaluation of the impact of APL processes - case study]. Prodercom.

Rebelo, T. (2006). Orientação cultural para a aprendizagem nas organizações:

Condicionantes e consequentes [Cultural orientation towards learning in

organizations: conditionings and consequences]. Unpublished doctoral thesis,

Faculdade de Psicologia e de Ciências da Educação da Universidade de Coimbra.

Resnick, S. G. & Bond, G. R. (2001). The Indiana job satisfaction scale - Job

satisfaction in vocational rehabilitation for people with severe mental illness.

Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 25(1), 12-19.

Robson, C. (2002). Real world research (2nd Ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.



Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations – understanding

written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications –

International Educational and Professional Publisher.

Sari, H. (2004). An analysis of burnout and Job Satisfaction among Turkish special

school headteachers and teachers, and the factors affecting their burnout and Job

Satisfaction. Educational Studies, 30(3), 291-306.

Smith, A. C., Organ, D. W. & Near, J. P. (1983). Organizational citizenship behaviour:

Its nature and antecedents. Journal of Applied Psychology, 68(4), 653-663.

Spector, P. E. (1997). Job satisfaction – application, assessment, causes, and

consequence. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications – International Educational

and Professional Publisher.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston:

Allyn & Bacon.

Tennison, G. M. (1996). The determination of the universal variables of job satisfaction

through content analysis. Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the School of

Education Curriculum and Instruction in partial fulfilment of the Requirements for

the Degree Doctor of Education, University of San Francisco.

Van Dyne, L. & LePine, J. A. (1998). Helping and voice extra-role behaviours:

evidence of construct and predictive validity. Academy of Management Journal,

41(1), p. 108-119.

Van Dyne, L.; Graham, J. W. & Dienesch, R. M. (1994). Organizational citizenship

behaviour: construct redefinition, measurement, and validation. Academy of

Management Journal, 37(4), 765-802



Appendix

Questionnaire of the Survey


FACULDADE DE PSICOLOGIA E CIÊNCIAS DA EDUCAÇÃO

UNIVERSIDADE DE COIMBRA NEFOG – Núcleo de Estudos e Formação em Organização e Gestão

O presente questionário insere-se num estudo sobre o impacto do processo de

Reconhecimento, Validação e Certificação de Competências (RVCC) nas Empresas.

Todas as respostas que lhe solicitamos são rigorosamente anónimas e confidenciais.

Leia com atenção as instruções que lhe são dadas, certificando-se de que compreendeu

correctamente o modo como deverá responder. Responda sempre de acordo com aquilo

que faz, sente ou pensa, pois não existem respostas correctas ou incorrectas, nem boas

ou más respostas.

Muito obrigado pela sua colaboração!


Caracterização 1 Sexo: Masculino…. Feminino…. 2 Idade: ____ anos

3 Tipo de Contrato Temporário Efectivo Contrato a

termo Outro Qual?___________________

4 Onde desempenha funções (Departamento e/ou Secção): 5 Função que actualmente desempenha 6 Há quanto tempo está na empresa:

Se não está nem nunca esteve envolvido no processo de RVCC, responda à secção 1;

Se está de momento a frequentar o processo, passe para a secção 2;

Se já concluiu o processo, preencha a secção 3.

1 Responda a esta secção apenas se não frequenta nem nunca frequentou o processo de RVCC

Qual é a sua habilitação escolar? a) inferior ao 1.º Ciclo de Ensino Básico (antiga 4.ª classe) b) 1.º Ciclo de Ensino Básico (antiga 4.ª classe) c) 2.º Ciclo de Ensino Básico (antigo Ciclo Preparatório) d) Frequência do 3.º Ciclo de Ensino Básico (7.º ao 9.º ano), embora incompleto

Considera importante para si vir a frequentar o processo de RVCC?

Nada importante

Pouco importante

Mais ou menos

importante Importante Muito

importante

2 Responda a esta secção apenas se está actualmente a frequentar o processo de RVCC

Antes de ingressar no processo de Reconhecimento, Validação e Certificação de Competências (RVCC), qual era a sua habilitação escolar? a) inferior ao 1.º Ciclo de Ensino Básico (antiga 4.ª classe) b) 1.º Ciclo de Ensino Básico (antiga 4.ª classe) c) 2.º Ciclo de Ensino Básico (antigo Ciclo Preparatório) d) Frequência do 3.º Ciclo de Ensino Básico (7.º ao 9.º ano), embora incompleto

Quando começou o processo (mês e ano) ? _______________

Considera importante para si frequentar o processo de RVCC?

Nada importante

Pouco importante

Mais ou menos


importante

3 Responda a esta secção apenas se já concluiu o processo de RVCC

Antes de ingressar no processo de Reconhecimento, Validação e Certificação de Competências (RVCC), qual era a sua habilitação escolar? a) inferior ao 1.º Ciclo de Ensino Básico (antiga 4.ª classe) b) 1.º Ciclo de Ensino Básico (antiga 4.ª classe) c) 2.º Ciclo de Ensino Básico (antigo Ciclo Preparatório) d) Frequência do 3.º Ciclo de Ensino Básico (7.º ao 9.º ano), embora incompleto

Qual é a sua actual situação escolar? Há quanto tempo concluiu o processo (mês e ano) ? _______________ Desde que concluiu, mudou de funções? Não Sim Se respondeu que sim, qual a sua função anterior? Desde que concluiu, mudou de categoria profissional? Não Sim Se respondeu que sim, que outros benefícios trouxe?

Considera que foi importante para si frequentar o processo de RVCC?

Nada importante

Pouco importante

Mais ou menos


importante


Responda às seguintes questões, indicando a sua opinião de 1 (muito insatisfeito com este

aspecto do meu trabalho) a 5 (muito satisfeito com este aspecto do meu trabalho)

Mui

to In

satis

feito

com

est

e as

pect

o do

meu

trab

alho

Insa

tisfe

ito c

om e

ste

aspe

cto

do m

eu tr

abal

ho

Não

con

sigo

dec

idir

se e

stou

satis

feito

ou

insa

tisfe

ito c

om

este

asp

ecto

do

meu

trab

alho

Satis

feito

com

est

e as

pect

o do

meu

trab

alho

Mui

to sa

tisfe

ito c

om e

ste

aspe

cto

do m

eu tr

abal

ho

1. A forma como o meu trabalho me permite estar ocupado o tempo todo. 1 2 3 4 5

2. A sensação de realização pessoal que o meu trabalho me dá. 1 2 3 4 5

3. A oportunidade de fazer coisas pelos outros. 1 2 3 4 5

4. A oportunidade de trabalhar de forma autónoma na minha função. 1 2 3 4 5

5. A oportunidade de ser alguém na comunidade. 1 2 3 4 5

6. A forma como o meu chefe lida com os seus subordinados. 1 2 3 4 5

7. A competência do meu supervisor em termos de tomada de decisão. 1 2 3 4 5

8. A forma como a minha função me permite ter um emprego seguro. 1 2 3 4 5

9. A forma como as políticas da empresa são postas em prática. 1 2 3 4 5

10. A oportunidade de fazer coisas diferentes de tempos a tempos. 1 2 3 4 5

11. O reconhecimento que tenho por fazer um bom trabalho. 1 2 3 4 5

12. A oportunidade de dizer aos outros o que fazer. 1 2 3 4 5

13. A oportunidade de fazer algo que me permite utilizar as minhas capacidades. 1 2 3 4 5

14. Poder fazer coisas que não vão contra a minha consciência. 1 2 3 4 5

15. A forma como os colegas se dão uns com os outros. 1 2 3 4 5

16. A liberdade para tomar algumas decisões. 1 2 3 4 5

17. As condições de trabalho. 1 2 3 4 5

18. A oportunidade de progressão neste trabalho. 1 2 3 4 5

19. A relação entre o pagamento e a quantidade de trabalho que faço. 1 2 3 4 5

20. A oportunidade de usar os meus próprios métodos para fazer o meu trabalho. 1 2 3 4 5


Responda às seguintes questões, indicando a sua opinião de 1 (discordo completamente) a 7

(concordo completamente).

Dis

cord

o C

ompl

etam

ente

Dis

cord

o B

asta

nte

Dis

cord

o Li

geira

men

te

Não

Con

cord

o ne

m D

isco

rdo

Con

cord

o Li

geira

men

te

Con

cord

o B

asta

nte

Con

cord

o C

ompl

etam

ente

1. Esta empresa tem muito significado pessoal para mim. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2. Não tenho um grande sentimento de pertença para com esta empresa. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3. Gostaria muito de desenvolver o resto da minha carreira nesta empresa 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4. Mesmo sendo vantajoso para mim, não acho que fosse correcto deixar a

minha empresa agora. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

5. Não deixaria a minha empresa neste momento porque me sinto obrigado/a para com as pessoas que nela trabalham. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6. Sinto mesmo os problemas desta empresa como meus. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7. Uma das poucas consequências negativas de deixar esta empresa seria a

falta de alternativas disponíveis. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8. Uma das maiores razões para eu continuar a trabalhar nesta empresa é que sair iria requerer um sacrifício pessoal muito considerável (outra empresa poderia não oferecer todos os benefícios que tenho aqui).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

9. Não me sinto ligado emocionalmente a esta empresa. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10. Devo muito a esta empresa. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 11. Esta empresa merece a minha lealdade. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 12. Não sinto qualquer obrigação de permanecer com o meu empregador

actual. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

13. Seria muito difícil deixar esta empresa agora, mesmo se eu quisesse. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 14. Sinto que tenho muito poucas opções para considerar sair desta

empresa. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

15. Se já não tivesse dado tanto de mim a esta empresa, consideraria trabalhar noutro sítio. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

16. Não me sinto como fazendo “parte da família” nesta empresa. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 17. Sentir-me-ia culpado/a se deixasse a minha empresa agora. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 18. Neste momento, permanecer na minha empresa é uma questão tanto de

necessidade, como de vontade. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

19. Demasiadas coisas na minha vida seriam “abaladas” se eu decidisse sair da minha empresa agora. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7


Responda às seguintes questões, indicando a sua opinião de 1 (discordo completamente) a 7

(concordo completamente).

Dis

cord

o C

ompl

etam

ente

Dis

cord

o B

asta

nte

Dis

cord

o Li

geira

men

te

Não

Con

cord

o ne

m D

isco

rdo

Con

cord

o Li

geira

men

te

Con

cord

o B

asta

nte

Con

cord

o C

ompl

etam

ente

1. Ajudo a orientar novos empregados no meu grupo de trabalho. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 2. Falo no meu grupo sobre ideias para novos projectos e mudanças nos

procedimentos. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

3. Ajudo outros no grupo a aprender sobre o trabalho. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 4. Desempenho algumas funções para ajudar o grupo de trabalho. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 5. Ajudo outros colegas do grupo no seu trabalho de forma a beneficiar

todo grupo. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6. Comunico as minhas opiniões acerca do trabalho a outras pessoas do grupo, mesmo que as minhas opiniões sejam diferentes ou se discordarem de mim.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

7. Falo e encorajo outros colegas a envolver-se em assuntos que dizem respeito a este grupo. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

8. Ajudo outras pessoas no grupo nas suas responsabilidades no trabalho. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9. Envolvo-me para beneficiar o grupo de trabalho. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10. Ofereço-me para fazer coisas pelo meu grupo de trabalho. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 11. Desenvolvo e faço recomendações sobre assuntos que dizem respeito

ao meu grupo de trabalho. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

12. Mantenho-me bem informado acerca de assuntos em que a minha opinião possa ser útil a este grupo de trabalho. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

13. Envolvo-me em assuntos que dizem respeito à qualidade de vida deste grupo. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Muito Obrigada pela sua Colaboração!

Documents

Helena Martins - Thesis Final Presentation-1 · PDF fileHelena Martins, 2008 1 ... 2003), including the need for a more holistic vision of human resources management perspective. As