Critical Review On Job Design

1535 Words7 Pages
Critical Review of Job Design Today job design is defined as capturing the individual, group and organisational outcomes and processes of how work is organised and enacted (Parker & Wall, 1998). This definition allows for the inclusion of task characteristics, knowledge elements of the job, social/interpersonal characteristics and the context of the work when structured into an organisation. Job design has continued to play a key role in guiding scholars and practitioners to describe, identify, and determine critical changes to work experiences and behaviours of employees (Tims, M & Baker, A.B, 2010). Job redesign tends to occur when work engagement and performance decreases, and managers are responsible to implement a top-down process…show more content…
It was argued that these 5 core job characteristics influence three critical psychological states (experiences meaningfulness of work, experienced responsibility of work and knowledge of work outcomes), which, in turn, increases the outcome of; work motivation, growth satisfaction, general job satisfaction, and work effectiveness (Hackman and Lawler, 1971). Hackman and Oldham (1976) argued that knowledge and skill, growth need strength and context satisfactions moderate the relationship between the five core job characteristics and the critical psychological states, as well as the relationship between the critical psychological states and the work outcomes (Fried and Ferris, 1987). Despite the JCM’s popularity, it has also attracted criticism form a number of theoretical and empirical perspectives (Grant, A., Fried, Y., & Juillerat, T.). For example, the efficacy of calculating motivating potential score is found to not work as well when predicting outcomes rather than simply adding the five core job characteristics (Parker & Wall, 1998). Another criticism is the JCM only focuses on five job characteristics that influence employees’ experiences and behaviours (Bakker and Demerouti, 2013), causing an argument that the proposed model is not well supported (Parker & Wall, 1998). In terms of methodological criticism, researchers believe there are too few longitudinal field studies. Research shows that the studies conducted are mainly
Open Document