View
572
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Core self evaluations ppt @ bec doms mba hr
Citation preview
1
Core Self-Evaluations and Job Satisfaction: The Role of Self-
Concordance
2
Core Self-Evaluations (CSE)
Represents the fundamental assessments that people make about their worthiness and competence
Higher-order concept indicated by:1. self-esteem2. locus of control3. neuroticism (emotional stability)4. generalized self-efficacy
The first three of these traits are the most studied in psychology
3
Applications of CSE
CSE has been related to: motivation (Erez & Judge, 2001) job performance (Judge & Bono, 2001) stress (Best, 2003) leadership (Eisenberg, 2000)
The most commonly investigated criterion is job satisfaction
4
.11
.32
.12 .12
.26.32
.24
.40
.58
.52
.36
.45
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
SE GSF LOC ES
Notes: SE=self-esteem; GSF=generalized self-efficacy;LOC=locus of control; ES=emotional stability
End points indicatelimits of 80% CV
CSE – Job Satisfaction
5
CSE – Job SatisfactionExplaining the Relationship
Research indicates that CSE – job satisfaction relationship is mediated by intrinsic job characteristics: High CSE people both attain more complex jobs, and perceive more challenge in jobs of equal complexity
As Judge, Bono, Erez, Locke, and Thoresen (2002) commented, “Other theoretical mechanisms will need to be studied”
6
Self-Concordance
Research suggests that people who chose goals that are concordant with their ideals, interests, and values are happier than those who pursue goals for other (e.g., extrinsic or defensive) reasons (see Sheldon & Elliot, 1997)
Thus, one mechanism that may link CSE and job satisfaction is the motivation underlying goal pursuit
7
Self-Concordance Model
Argues that individuals may pursue a goal for four (NME) types of reasons (Sheldon & Elliot, JPSP, 1998): External—pursuing a goal due to others’ wishes, or to
attain “indirect” rewards Introjected—pursuing a goal to avoid feelings of shame,
guilt, or anxiety Identified—pursuing a goal out of a belief that it is an
important goal to have Intrinsic—pursuing a goal because of the fun and
enjoyment it provides
8
Self-concordantgoals
Job/lifesatisfaction
Goal attainment
Core self-evaluations + +
++
+
Self-esteem
Generalizedself-efficacy
Locus ofcontrol
Neuroticism
Hypothesized Model
9
Method
We conducted two studies Study 1: Examine the mediating role of self-
concordance and goal attainment with respect to the personal goals of a undergraduates
Study 2: Test a model parallel to that in Study 1, but focusing on work goals and job satisfaction (as opposed to personal goals and life satisfaction)
10
Study 1 MethodParticipants and Measures
240 undergraduates Personality and self-concordance were
measured at Time 1, and goal attainment and life satisfaction were measured at Time 2 (N=183)
Core self-evaluations was measured with four individual scales, which then were treated as indicators of a higher-order core self-evaluations concept
11
Study 1 MethodMeasure of Self-Concordance
Participants recorded six short-term goals (goals that could reasonably be attained in the next 60 days)
After identifying their goals, participants reported their reasons for goal pursuit, for each goal separately
Following Sheldon and Elliot (1998):SC = (intrinsic + identified) – (external + introjected)
12
Study 1 MethodOther Measures
Goal attainment. We used two items from prior self-concordance research (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999); participants responded to each of these items for each of their six goals, after two months (responses were averaged across items and goals)
Life satisfaction. Life satisfaction was measured with the five-item Satisfaction with Life Scale
13
Self-concordantgoals
Lifesatisfaction
Goal attainment
Core self-evaluations
.24** .18†
.20**.25**
.47**
Self-esteem
Generalizedself-efficacy
Locus ofcontrol
Neuroticism
Results: Study 1
.95**
.75**
.66**
-.61**
Notes: † p < .10. * p < .05; ** p < .01.2=14.69 (df=10). RMSEA = .05.RMSR = .04. CFI = .99. IFI = .99.
14
Study 2 MethodParticipants and Measures
Participants were employees of a large defense contractor (N=251)
Personality and self-concordance were measured at Time 1, and goal attainment and life satisfaction were measured at Time 2
Core self-evaluations was measured with the same scale as in Study 1
15
Study 2 MethodMeasures
Participants recorded six short-term work goals; otherwise the same measurement approach to self-concordance was followed
Goal attainment was measured in a manner comparable to Study 1
Job satisfaction was measured with the short form of the Brayfield and Rothe (1951) job satisfaction scale
16
Self-concordantgoals
Jobsatisfaction
Goal attainment
Core self-evaluations
.30** .22*
.10.17*
.36**
Self-esteem
Generalizedself-efficacy
Locus ofcontrol
Neuroticism
Results: Study 2
.95**
.76**
.49**
-.76**
Notes: * p < .05; ** p < .01.2=21.82 (df=10). RMSEA = .07.RMSR = .04. CFI = .98. IFI = .98.
17
Discussion
According to the hypothesized model, people with positive self-regard are more likely to have self-concordant goals. In turn, those with more self-concordant goals should be happier and more satisfied with their goals, themselves, and ultimately their lives
Results supported the model
18
Discussion
One of the more important contributions of this research was to illuminate the effect of core self- evaluations on self-concordance and its consequences In both studies, there were significant associations
between core self-evaluations and self-concordance Those with positive core self-evaluations were especially good in
demonstrating this adaptability to select “self-concordant” goals that represent their implicit interests
19
Discussion
Surprisingly, results involving goal attainment were relatively weak Goal attainment did not mediate self-concordance
– satisfaction relationship This relationship may be complex
Whereas setting difficult goals is dissatisfying because they lead to low expectations for goal attainment (Mento, Locke, & Klein, 1992), the attainment of those goals (which is facilitated by the setting of difficult goals) should lead to satisfaction (Locke & Latham, 1990)--i.e., the results may be offsetting
20
Implications
Results join increasing body of research that shows that individuals become more satisfied with job and life through one’s pursuits, if one picks the right goals and does well at them
People with positive core self-evaluations strive for the “right” reasons, and therefore get the “right” results, both of which in turn increase their levels of satisfaction
Moreover, such increases in satisfaction appear to last (both studies were longitudinal) and perhaps lead to even more positive changes in an “upward spiral” of positive outcomes