Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress...

13
University of Cologne Department of Economic and Social Psychology Christian Bosau & Lorenz Fischer Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure?

Transcript of Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress...

Page 1: Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress EAWOP Santiago de Compostela 2009

University of Cologne

Department of Economic and Social Psychology

Christian Bosau & Lorenz Fischer

Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we

measure?

Page 2: Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress EAWOP Santiago de Compostela 2009

Bosau & Fischer – job satisfaction cross-culturally 13. – 16.05.2009 – EAWOP 2009 – Santiago de Compostela Seite 2

Background of the study

Job satisfaction (JS) in research: §  JS is the most widely studied topic in organizational psychology (Judge et al., 2001)

§  however, most studies are anglo-american è can we generalize the results?!?

Are we really measuring „true“ satisfation?

Job satisfaction (JS) in organizations: §  keyword: international employee satisfaction survey §  the absolute level of JS often has direct consequences for leaders §  intercultural measurement problems often are NOT considered

Main question: How can we compare the results of JS across national and cultural borders?

Page 3: Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress EAWOP Santiago de Compostela 2009

Bosau & Fischer – job satisfaction cross-culturally 13. – 16.05.2009 – EAWOP 2009 – Santiago de Compostela Seite 3

Cross-cultural JS-results

8,4 8,48,2

8,18,0 7,9 7,9 7,8 7,8 7,7 7,7 7,7 7,7 7,7 7,6 7,6 7,6 7,6 7,6 7,6 7,5 7,5 7,5 7,5

7,3 7,3 7,2 7,1 7,1 7,1 7,1 7,1 7,0 7,0 7,0 6,9 6,9 6,96,7 6,7 6,6 6,6 6,6 6,5

6,2 6,15,9

5,5

5

6

7

8

9

Switz

erla

nd

Mal

ta

Den

mar

k

Nor

way

Cana

da

Icel

and

Irela

nd

Aus

tria

U

SA

Swed

en

Bel

gium

Nor

th Ir

elan

d

Mex

ico

Japa

n

A

rgen

tina

Chi

le

Finl

and

Net

herla

nds

Bra

zil

Lu

xem

bour

g

Pola

nd

Nig

eria

Po

rtuga

l

U

nite

d K

ingd

om

Italy

G

erm

any

- W

est

Sl

oven

ia

C

zech

Rep

ublic

Hun

gary

Sout

h A

frica

-

Whi

te

G

erm

any

- Ea

st

Spai

n

Indi

a

Chin

a

Sl

ovak

ia

Fran

ce

Li

thua

nia

Gre

ece

Cro

atia

Esto

nia

Rum

ania

Latv

ia

B

ulga

ria

Kor

ea

Rus

sia

Turk

ey

Ukr

aine

Bel

arus

•  results from World-Values-Survey:

•  very often: deskriptive intercultural results are published (Slocum & Topichak, 1972; Lincoln et al, 1981; Griffeth & Hom, 1987; Near & Rechner, 1993; Chiu & Kosinski, 1999; van de Vliert & Janssen, 2002; Llorente & Macias, 2005)

Unclear: Can we really just interpret those descriptive differences of JS directly?

Page 4: Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress EAWOP Santiago de Compostela 2009

Bosau & Fischer – job satisfaction cross-culturally 13. – 16.05.2009 – EAWOP 2009 – Santiago de Compostela Seite 4

Problems of cross-cultural research

response styles and culture: §  different cultures show different response styles, e.g. acquiescence (ARS) (Hui & Triandis, 1989; Johnson et al., 1997; Chen et al.; 1995; Takahashi et al., 2002; Harzing, 2006)

§  different response style should be understood as different communicational behaviour, not just methodological bias (Smith, 2004; Smith & Fischer R., 2006)

standardising of measures (see Fischer, R.; 2004): with-in-subject, group centering, grand mean centering

problems: §  measures are not independent from each other anymore §  absolute level of measures is lost §  interpretation is possible only in relation to standardising value (group or grand mean, etc.)

What can we do about it?

Note: Especially problematic if we want to compare absolute measurements, like JS-levels of countries/subsidiaries/etc.!

Page 5: Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress EAWOP Santiago de Compostela 2009

Bosau & Fischer – job satisfaction cross-culturally 13. – 16.05.2009 – EAWOP 2009 – Santiago de Compostela Seite 5

Method - secondary analysis

§  Data from World-Values-Survey & Eurobarometer

§  operationalisation of acquiescence response style (see Harzing, 2006) : acquiescence-index 5-point-scale: ALL items, having received 5 or 4 MINUS ALL items, having received 2 or 1

§  aggregation to national level

§  correlation of national means (controlled for soziodemographic differences of nations, i.e. age, gender)

Important question: How will the JS-measurement be influenced by response styles?

Page 6: Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress EAWOP Santiago de Compostela 2009

Bosau & Fischer – job satisfaction cross-culturally 13. – 16.05.2009 – EAWOP 2009 – Santiago de Compostela Seite 6

Nation-level-results - 1

results: §  job satisfaction and ARS are indeed correlated: BUT negatively. §  i.e., high measures of job satisfaction only occur in countries/cultures with small or no ARS response tendency norms Keeping in mind: in all countries respondents are on average satisfied with their jobs §  Note: if ARS exist, respondents do not report dissatisfaction but only lower satisfaction §  Fits with the self-construal results of Markus & Kitayama (1991): interdependent/collectivist people – having higher ARS – are restrained in telling their personal feelings.

-.13 (14)

-.68** (11)

-.59*** (16)

-.71*** (16)

-.68*** (16)

Job Satisfaction (nation-level-mean from

Eurobarometer)1

-.29 (25) ARS-index from Hofstede (2001)

-.47** (23) ARS-index from Harzing (2006)

-.38*** (47) ARS-index 3 aus WVS (4-point-scale ‚agree/disagree‘-label)

-.47*** (42) ARS-index 2 from WVS (5-point-scale ‚important/unimportant‘-label)

-.47*** (46) ARS-index 1 from WVS (5-point-scale ‚agree/disagree‘-label)

Job Satisfaction (nation-level-mean from World-Values-Survey)1

1 pearson-correlation coefficient; significance: *** p < .01, ** p < .05, * p < .10; in parentheses: number of countries

Page 7: Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress EAWOP Santiago de Compostela 2009

Bosau & Fischer – job satisfaction cross-culturally 13. – 16.05.2009 – EAWOP 2009 – Santiago de Compostela Seite 7

Nation-level-results - 2

-.13 (14)

-.68** (11)

-.59*** (16)

-.71*** (16)

-.68*** (16)

Job Satisfaction (nation-level-mean from

Eurobarometer)1

-.29 (25) ARS-index from Hofstede (2001)

-.47** (23) ARS-index from Harzing (2006)

-.38*** (47) ARS-index 3 aus WVS (4-point-scale ‚agree/disagree‘-label)

-.47*** (42) ARS-index 2 from WVS (5-point-scale ‚important/unimportant‘-label)

-.47*** (46) ARS-index 1 from WVS (5-point-scale ‚agree/disagree‘-label)

Job Satisfaction (nation-level-mean from World-Values-Survey)1

1 pearson-correlation coefficient; significance: *** p < .01, ** p < .05, * p < .10; in parentheses number of countries

§  the correlation is higher in european nations (countries of the EU)!

§  Note: european nations have – on average – better working conditions, since economic wealth is higher (compared wordwidely) §  we know: job satisfaction measurements are certainly influenced by working conditions as well – not only communicational norms

Page 8: Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress EAWOP Santiago de Compostela 2009

Bosau & Fischer – job satisfaction cross-culturally 13. – 16.05.2009 – EAWOP 2009 – Santiago de Compostela Seite 8

Re-test of WVS-data

§  Operationalisation working conditions : GDP (gross domestic product)

§  Median split into good (rich countries) and bad (poor countries) working conditions

Rich countries Poor countries

Job satisfaction (nation-level-mean from World-Values-Survey)

Job satisfaction (nation-level-means from

Word-Values-Survey)

ARS-index 1 from WVS (5-point-scale ‚agree/disagree‘-label) -.51* (22) -.02 (24)

ARS-index 2 from WVS (5-point-scale ‚important/unimportant‘-label) -.51*** (22) -.34 (20)

ARS-index 3 aus WVS (4-point-scale ‚agree/disagree‘-label) -.37* (23) -.04 (24)

ARS-index from Harzing (2006) -.61** (13) .08 (10)

ARS-index from Hofstede (2001) -.34 (19) sample to small

§  result: correlation remains important and significant only in rich countries with good working conditions, almost no correlation within poor countries with bad working conditions §  possible interpretation: following communicational norms becomes important only if a sufficient working standard is established

1 pearson-correlation coefficient; significance: *** p < .01, ** p < .05, * p < .10; in parentheses (number of countries)

Page 9: Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress EAWOP Santiago de Compostela 2009

Bosau & Fischer – job satisfaction cross-culturally 13. – 16.05.2009 – EAWOP 2009 – Santiago de Compostela Seite 9

New findings and current research

relationship of culture and response behaviour: §  Acquiescence is high in cultures characterized by high collectivism (Harzing, 2006; Smith 2004)

new results: negativ relationship of acquiescence and job satisfaction (in rich countries)

We already know:

relationship of culture and job satisfaction: §  JS-Level is higher in individualistic countries (see Hofstede, Judge, etc.)

hypothesis: relationship of IND and JS might be only a spurious correlation

relationship instead: culture à response tendency à JS-measure IND JS

ARS

+

- -

Page 10: Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress EAWOP Santiago de Compostela 2009

Bosau & Fischer – job satisfaction cross-culturally 13. – 16.05.2009 – EAWOP 2009 – Santiago de Compostela Seite 10

§  statistical analysis: mediation analysis (Baron & Kenney, 1986)

Test of mediation model

analysis by rich countries of WVS (N=21)

§  interpretation: relationship of culture and JS can be (almost completely) mediated by ARS; thus: culture à response tendency à JS-level

total effect Individualism (Hofstede) job satisfaction β = .39* (p=.08)

mediation model

job satisfaction β = .20 (p=.39)

β = -.49** (p=.03) β = -.39 (p=.11)

Individualism (Hofstede)

ARS

§  same analysis with poor countries showed no total and no mediation effect

§  using several indicators for Individualism, ARS and job satisfaction in 8 different mediation models we always get the same pattern of results

Page 11: Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress EAWOP Santiago de Compostela 2009

Bosau & Fischer – job satisfaction cross-culturally 13. – 16.05.2009 – EAWOP 2009 – Santiago de Compostela Seite 11

§  statistical analysis: stepwise multilevel analysis with HLM 6 (Bryk & Raudenbush)

Multi-Level analysis

analysis by rich countries of WVS (N=21)

ARS individual individual level

national level ARS norm

JS

.072 -1.43* Step 2: ARS norm 5.31** (1)

Step 3: ARS individual .07 .078 4.31** (1)

Step 4: ARS individual – random slope 70.60** (1)

§  result: negative relationship with national ARS norm remains significant; on individual level no clear relationship of ARS and JS

§  same analysis with poor countries showed no effects at all

Step 1: Basic Model, controlled for age & gender

unstand. beta SE increase in model fit Chi-Square (df)

Step 5: ARS norm x ARS individual -.04 .889 0.002 (1)

Page 12: Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress EAWOP Santiago de Compostela 2009

Bosau & Fischer – job satisfaction cross-culturally 13. – 16.05.2009 – EAWOP 2009 – Santiago de Compostela Seite 12

Conclusion

Results: §  indeed: JS-measurements are influenced by response styles (ARS) §  consequence: measurements from different cultures cannot be compared directly §  national level: negative relationship, i.e. the higher the norm to agree, the more moderate the JS-measurement §  individual level: no clear relationship, i.e. in some countries negative and in some countries positive §  individualism-JS-relationship can be understood as a spurious correlation §  instead: cultural values and their socialization leeds to a specific communication style that in turn influences the JS-measurements

In conclusion: Cross-culturally, we are not measuring „true“ satisfaction. To a great extent we are getting results that are an expression of culturally socialized communication norms!

Page 13: Job satisfaction cross-culturally: Is it just acquiescence what we measure? Presentation Congress EAWOP Santiago de Compostela 2009

Bosau & Fischer – job satisfaction cross-culturally 13. – 16.05.2009 – EAWOP 2009 – Santiago de Compostela Seite 13

contact details: Christian Bosau Dipl.-Psych. & Master of HRM & IR

Department of Economic and Social Psychology University of Cologne Herbert-Lewin-Str.2 50931 Cologne/Germany Tel. +49 (0)221 470-4120 [email protected]

Thanks for your attention