prace:zakladni_aspekty_psychologie_prace_a_organizace:empiricka_studie
Rozdíly
Zde můžete vidět rozdíly mezi vybranou verzí a aktuální verzí dané stránky.
Obě strany předchozí revizePředchozí verzeNásledující verze | Předchozí verze | ||
prace:zakladni_aspekty_psychologie_prace_a_organizace:empiricka_studie [2013/12/30 22:18] – Martin Malec | prace:zakladni_aspekty_psychologie_prace_a_organizace:empiricka_studie [2013/12/31 03:37] (aktuální) – Martin Malec | ||
---|---|---|---|
Řádek 1: | Řádek 1: | ||
- | **(1) Ng, T. W. H. and Feldman, D. C. (2012), Employee voice behavior: A meta-analytic test of the conservation of resources framework. //Journal of Organizational Behavior//, 33: 216–234. doi: 10.1002/ | + | **(1) Ng, T. W. H. and Feldman, D. C. (2012). Employee voice behavior: A meta-analytic test of the conservation of resources framework. //Journal of Organizational Behavior// 33, 216–234. doi: [[http:// |
- | ==== INTRODUCTION ==== | + | ==== INTRODUCTION |
* voice: “constructive change‐oriented communication intended to improve the situation” (LePine and Van Dyne, 2001) | * voice: “constructive change‐oriented communication intended to improve the situation” (LePine and Van Dyne, 2001) | ||
* “positive voice” - improving the situation at work | * “positive voice” - improving the situation at work | ||
Řádek 22: | Řádek 22: | ||
* 3 % -1990, 18 % 1990-1999, **79 % 2000-** | * 3 % -1990, 18 % 1990-1999, **79 % 2000-** | ||
* 71 %: **self‐report measures of voice**, avg.rel.: α=0.77; for rest: α=0.88 | * 71 %: **self‐report measures of voice**, avg.rel.: α=0.77; for rest: α=0.88 | ||
- | ==== results and discussion | + | ==== RESULTS |
- | ==== own discussion to the article | + | * ad H1) employees who reported higher levels of job stressors and strains also reported less use of //voice// |
+ | * ad H2) social stressors and strains are negatively related to voice, stronger than H1 | ||
+ | * ad H3) organizational stressors and strains are negatively related to voice | ||
+ | * in all cases support for resource conservation tenet (7/10 signif.) | ||
+ | * ad H4) opposite, here resource acquisition premise is valid (" | ||
+ | ====DISCUSSION==== | ||
+ | * COR theory (Hobfoll, 1989) is a useful alternative lens (to the reciprocation) for | ||
+ | - explaining the motivation behind the use of voice and for | ||
+ | - the effects of voice on performance behavior | ||
+ | * resouce conservation argument works for H1-H3, resource acquisition for H4 | ||
+ | * **" | ||
+ | * **" | ||
+ | * // | ||
+ | * "up to some optimal point, stress motivates employees to keep focus and to work hard at the task at hand. After that point, too much stress may lead employees to divert their attention to conserving and protecting resources instead." | ||
+ | * since //Human Relations School// 1940-1950s " | ||
+ | * "key to energizing greater voice behavior is improving workplace conditions for employees" | ||
+ | * **360‐degree performance appraisals** might be more appropriate than supervisor ratings alone when assessing voice | ||
+ | <WRAP center round tip> | ||
+ | Nejde o klasickou metaanalýzu, | ||
+ | </ |
prace/zakladni_aspekty_psychologie_prace_a_organizace/empiricka_studie.1388438327.txt.gz · Poslední úprava: 2013/12/30 22:18 autor: Martin Malec