AGE-RELATED DIFFERENCES AS A FACTOR IN THE RELATION
BETWEEN JOB CHARACTERISTICS AND WORK MOTIVATION
Master Thesis, MscBA, specialization Human Resource Management University of Groningen, Faculty of Economics and Business
August 13, 2010 GERRIEN MEIJER Student number: 1335669 Veemarkstraat 91a 9724 GB Groningen Phone: 06 45692215 Email: gfmmeijer@gmail.com
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT……….………3
1. INTRODUCTION………4
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK………6
2.1 The concept of aging………6
2.2 Age, regulatory focus and work motivation………...10
2.3 Age, emotionally meaningful motives and work motivation……….15
3. METHOD………...………...16 3.1 Procedure………....16 3.2 Participants……….17 3.3 Measures……….18 4. RESULTS………...………20
4.1 Correlations and descriptive statistics………20
4.2 Data analysis and testing hypotheses……….21
5. DISCUSSION………...28
5.1 Main findings……….28
5.2 Theoretical and practical implications………...29
5.3 Limitations and future research directions……….……….…………...31
5.4 Conclusions…….………..….…....32
AGE-RELATED DIFFERENCES AS A FACTOR IN THE RELATION BETWEEN JOB CHARACTERISTICS AND WORK MOTIVATION
ABSTRACT
This thesis contributes to research on age and work motivation by proposing that age is related to changes in self-regulation and that higher age is associated with a decrease in promotion focus and an increase in prevention focus. Further, it is predicted that the importance of emotionally meaningful motives will increase with age. It is examined how age-related differences in self-regulation and emotionally meaningful motives moderate the relationship between job characteristics and work motivation. Results showed a significant negative relationship between age and promotion focus, and a moderating effect of promotion focus on the relationship between task identity and work motivation. Also, evidence was found that age positively moderates the relationship between task significance and work motivation. However, in contrast with that hypothesized, no significant effect of age on
emotionally meaningful motives was found. Implications of these findings and possibilities for future research are discussed.
Key words: age, regulatory focus, emotionally meaningful motives, job characteristics, work
1. INTRODUCTION
The Netherlands is aging rapidly. The proportion of older individuals in the Dutch population, as in many other countries around the world, is rising due to lower fertility rates and increased life expectancy (UN, 2007). Not only the average age of the total population is rising, but also the potential workforce is aging. The proportion of people aged 55 and above within the potential Dutch workforce has increased from 14% in 1998 to 19% in 2008, and the average age of the Dutch workforce has increased from 38.3 in 2001 to 40.3 in 2008 (CBS Stat line, 2009).
The participation rate of older workers in the Dutch labor market is currently low (Kooij, 2009). Many older workers are leaving the workforce early due to the possibility of early retirement. Growing unemployment in the seventies and eighties in the Netherlands has led to the possibility of early retirement. Different policies and regulations have been created to offer older workers the possibility to leave the workforce before the age of 65. Because of the aging potential workforce and the low participation rate of older workers it is expected that the potential workforce will shrink in the future and will result in a tight labor market and loss of employees with valuable knowledge and skills. Therefore, there is a growing need for older workers to extend their working life and remain active in the workforce for a longer period of time. For this reason, the Dutch government is also taking more measures to stimulate older workers to continue to work and has recently been debating to move the retirement age of 65 years up to 67 years.
This raises interesting questions about the relationships between age and motivation. For example, do factors influencing work motivation change during the life span? In order to develop organizational policies and HR practices for aging workers, it is necessary to understand the motives of older workers and the influence of aging.
Research on aging at work is expanding rapidly. Relevant new research has been published on, for example, the relationship between age and performance (Ng & Feldman, 2008) and
age-stereotyping (Maurer, Barbeite, Weiss & Lippstrue, 2008; Posthuma & Campion, 2009; Van der Heijden, De Lange, Demerouti & Van der Heijde, 2009). However, research on age and motivation is limited (Kooij et. al., 2008). Few studies focused on the influence of aging on work motivation. Aging and adult development represent important but largely unexplored influences on work motivation. This thesis will contribute to research on age and motivation in two ways. First, we will examine the possibility that age is related to changes in self-regulation and the importance of emotionally
meaningful motives, and that these changes have consequences for older employees’ motivation. Second, it is examined whether the relationship between age-related differences, in self-regulation and motives, and work motivation is contingent upon characteristics of the job. This thesis will explore how age-related differences in regulatory focus and emotionally meaningful motives will influence the relationship between job characteristics and work motivation.
2. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK
2.1 The concept of aging
Aging refers to all possible changes that occur in biological, psychological, and social functioning over time and, therefore, affects each individual on the personal, organizational, and societal levels (Kooij et al., 2008; De Lange, Taris, Jansen, Smulders, Houtman, & Kompier, 2006; Settersten & Mayer, 1997; Sterns & Miklos, 1995). According to Kanfer and Ackerman (2004), chronological age serves as a indicator for age-related processes that have a direct or indirect influence on work
outcomes. Individuals with the same chronological age may differ on various aspects in life, such as health or career stage. These individual differences imply that age cannot be defined or conceptualized in one single way (Kanfer & Ackerman, 2004; Lange et. al., 2006; Kooij et. al., 2008). The way age is conceptualized is of importance for the relation between age and work-related outcomes such as job involvement and job satisfaction (Kooij et. al., 2008).
Sterns and Doverspike (1989) distinguished five different approaches to conceptualize aging of workers: (1) Chronological age: in this approach the distinction between younger and older workers is based on calendar age. (2) Functional age: is based on a worker’s performance. There can be a great variation in individual abilities and functioning throughout different ages, because, as chronological age increases, individuals go through various biological an psychological changes. (3) Psychosocial or subjective age: refers to the self and the social perception of age. Self perception of age refers to how old an individual feels. For example, aging results in a shift in an individual’s time orientation from ‘life lived from birth’ to ‘time left until death’ (Carstensen, 1995). This shift in the individual’s time orientation may have a number of consequences. Perception of age is likely to affect self-efficacy, which is very important for an individual’s motivation to act. Another
issues, such as decision making regarding promotions and performance evaluations (Kooij et al., 2008). (4) Organizational age: refers to the aging of individuals in jobs and organizations. Here the focus is on the time spend on the same job or organization. (5) The life span concept of age: the lifespan approach is based on a number of the previous approaches but emphasizes the intra-individual changes as individuals move through adulthood and older adulthood. Life span age can be best
measured by life stage or family status (De Lange et. al., 2006; Sterns & Doverspike, 1989; Sterns & Miklos, 1995). Although it is clear that other conceptualizations of age are useful, this research will focus on the relationship between motivation and chronological age. The use of chronological age facilitates translation of findings to the organizational environment, where chronological age is the main indicator of aging in the workplace (Kooij, 2009). However, the hypotheses presented in this thesis are build upon the concepts of subjective age and life span age.
Kanfer and Ackerman (2004) suggest that changes during adult development can be captured in four distinct patterns of development; loss, growth, reorganization, and exchange. Loss is associated with a gradual decline in cognitive abilities over the life span. Particularly, fluid intellectual abilities, such as working memory, abstract reasoning, and processing of new information, decline during adult development. Growth is associated with gains in crystallized intellectual abilities, such as general knowledge, extend of vocabulary, and verbal comprehension. Reorganization refers to the shift in the individual’s time orientation and is related with a shift in social motives from gaining resources to obtaining affective rewards (Carstensen, 1995). Finally, exchange refers to changes in trait levels across the life span: extroversion, neuroticism, and openness to new experiences decline with age, but levels of conscientiousness and agreeableness increase with age (Jones & Meredith, 1996; Warr, Miles & Platt, 2001). Also, there is an increase with age in generativity motives (providing emotional support to others) (McAdams, de St. Aubin & Logan, 1993), the importance of protecting self concept (Maurer, 2001), and emotional regulation (Carstensen, Paspuathi, Mayr & Nesselroade, 2000).
are not fixed before reaching adulthood, (2) adult development is a sequential and generally orderly progression, and (3) development in adulthood is not simply an extension of child and adolescent development. Additionally, it proposes that person-environment interactions create different pathways of adult development and action opportunities. Two prominent life span theories will be used in this thesis to understand the process of aging.
Firstly, the life span theory of Selection Optimization and Compensation (SOC) (Baltes, Staudinger & Lindenberger, 1999) proposes that an individual should aim to maximize age-related gains and minimize age-related losses. For example, individuals may compensate for declines in fluid intellectual abilities by selecting jobs and goals and by using self-regulatory strategies that optimize existing knowledge and skills (Kanfer & Ackerman, 2004). Self-regulation refers to the process in which people seek to align their behaviors and self conceptions with appropriate goals and standards. The regulation processes include selecting viable outcomes, optimizing resources to reach those desirable outcomes, and compensating for the loss of outcome-relevant means. The regulation processes are aimed at the allocation of resources to different types of life goals, namely growth, maintenance, and regulation of loss. SOC theory suggests that resources allocated to growth will decrease with age and resources allocated to maintenance and regulation of loss will increase with age (Baltes et al., 1999).
This assumption is supported by research on protecting the self-concept (Maurer, 2001). Individuals are sensitive to changes in their abilities with increasing age and, therefore, look for ways to act that serve to protect their overarching self-concept. Strategies for protecting the self-concept are avoidance and compensation. Protecting the self-concept seems to be one of the leading determinants of the avoidance of some types of career development activities by older workers (Maurer, 2001). Also, Freund (2006) found that the main goal focus of younger adults was on optimization and growth, but that older adults showed a stronger focus on compensation goals directed towards prevention of further resource loss.
processes by focusing on regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1998). Regulatory focus theory is based on the basic motivational principle that people approach pleasure and avoid pain, and suggests that there are two distinct types of regulatory foci, a promotion focus and a prevention focus (Higgins, 1998). A promotion focus is concerned with advancement, growth and accomplishment, goals are hopes and aspirations and the strategic inclination is to make progress. The focus is eagerness to attain advancement and gains. In contrast, a prevention focus is associated with security, safety and
responsibilities, goals are duties and obligations and the strategic inclination is to avoid mistakes and assure safety and non-loss. When engaged in a promotion-focused self-regulatory process people’s growth and developments needs motivate them to try to bring themselves into alignment with their ideal selves, whereas engaged in a prevention-focused self-regulatory process people’s security needs motivate them to try to bring themselves into alignment with their ought selves (Brockner & Higgins, 2001).
Because goal focus on growth and optimization decreases with age, it is expected that older individuals are less promotion focused. In contrast, it is expected that older individuals are more prevention focused, because of the increase in goal focus on maintenance and regulation of loss with age. Therefore, it is predicted:
Hypothesis 1a. Age is negatively related to promotion focus.
Hypothesis 1b. Age is positively related to prevention focus.
motivational shift leads to changes in the dynamic interaction between individuals and their
environments and greater investments in the quality of important social relationships. Socioemotional selectivity theory predicts that individuals select goals based on their perceptions of the future as being limited or open-ended (Carstensen & Lang, 2002). Goals are often set within the context of time and goal selection depends fundamentally on the perception of time. Socioemotional selectivity theory focuses on two main types of goals, namely knowledge-related goals, such as acquiring knowledge or making new social contacts, and emotionally meaningful goals, such as balancing emotional states or sensing that one is needed by others (Carstensen et. al., 2003). When time is perceived as open-ended, goals aimed at optimizing the future are selected. Goals are focused on receiving social acceptance and on career interests, such as becoming financially independent. In contrast, when time is limited, emotionally meaningful goals become relatively more important because they are more associated with achieving short-term benefits. People will use their remaining time for experiences that seem most emotionally meaningful to them and, therefore, focusing on those goals and relationships that appear to match these expectations.
Thus, in line with socioemotional selectivity theory it appears that age leads to increased motivation to derive emotional meaning from life (Carstensen et al., 2003). Emotionally meaningful motives become more important with age. Therefore, it is predicted:
Hypothesis 1c. Age is positively related to emotionally meaningful motives
2.2 Age, regulatory focus and work motivation
behavioural element direction is examined, because it is expected that the direction of motivation (values, needs and goals) is likely to change with age.
The importance of the context of motivation has been recognized much more in the recent years (Latham & Pinder, 2005). The relationship between individual differences and both individual and organizational outcomes is contingent upon various features of the environment, such as
characteristics of the job or the organization as a whole (Kristof, 1996). Contextual factors and the interplay between context and the individual should be taken into account in organizational behavior (Nord & Fox, 1996). Therefore, the job environment is taken into account in this thesis. The job environment affects and is affected by a person’s needs, personality, and values (Latham & Pinder, 2005). Work motivation may be high or low depending on the fit between the characteristics of the job and the person’s needs, values, and goals. In this thesis the influence of the fit between age-related differences in regulatory focus and goal selection and characteristics of the job on motivation will be analyzed.
The Job Characteristics Model, developed by Hackman and Oldham (1976), will be used to specify the conditions under which individuals will become motivated to perform effectively in their jobs. The Job Characteristics Model presents five core job characteristics (skill variety, task identity, task significance, autonomy, and feedback) which influence three critical psychological states (experienced meaningfulness of work, experienced responsibility for outcomes of work, and
knowledge of actual results of the work activities), which in turn affect work outcomes (internal work motivation, growth satisfaction, overall job satisfaction, work effectiveness, and absenteeism). Additionally, Hackman and Oldham propose that the relationship between job characteristics, critical psychological states and work outcomes is moderated by employee growth need strength and context satisfaction. In this research three job characteristics will be analyzed, namely skill variety, task identity and task significance. These three job characteristics together influence the critical
meaningfulness becomes more important with age, and therefore, it will be interesting to explore the influence of age on these three job characteristics.
First the focus will be on the influence of age-related differences in regulatory focus on the relationship between the job characteristics and work motivation. The degree of fit between the regulatory focus orientation of people and their environment has important implications. Greater person-environment fit in regulatory focus leads to higher work motivation (Brockner & Higgins, 2001; Higgins, 2000). However, further research is needed on how organizational variables and regulatory focus processes relate to each other (Brockner & Higgins, 2001). More research on the consequences of a person’s regulatory focus orientation in work settings would extend the
understanding of regulatory focus theory. Therefore, it will be interesting to explore the influence of age and regulatory focus on the relationship between job characteristics and work motivation. This will be discussed next for the job characteristics skill variety and task identity separately. The hypotheses presented in this thesis are shown in Figure 1.
Skill variety refers to the degree to which a job requires a variety of activities in carrying out the work (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). These activities involve the use of different skills and abilities. When a job requires people to carry out activities that challenge their skills and abilities, than that job is experienced as being meaningful which will, therefore, increase work motivation (Hackman & Oldham, 1976). In this thesis it is expected that the positive relationship between skill variety and work motivation becomes weaker as an individual ages. As mentioned before, it is
expected that promotion focus will decrease with age and prevention focus will increase with age. This process may be responsible for the moderating effect of age on the relationship between skill variety and work motivation. When jobs are high on the core work characteristics, employees who are more focused on obtaining feelings of accomplishment and growth tend to have higher motivation
Figure 1 Research model: age moderates the relationship between the job characteristics (skill variety, task identity, and task significance) and work motivation. These moderations are mediated by promotion focus, prevention focus and emotionally meaningful motives.
On the other hand, older adults are more focused on protecting their self-concept by assuring safety and avoid making mistakes (Higgins, 1998). When a job requires people to carry out a larger variety of activities, the chance of failure will increase and, therefore, it is also expected that older adults show a decrease in the need for skill variety. Summarized, age interacts with skill variety and negatively moderates the relationship between skill variety and work motivation. The process responsible for this moderation is the decrease in promotion focus with age and the increase in prevention focus with age. Therefore, it is predicted:
Hypothesis 2b. The relationship between skill variety and work motivation becomes weaker as age increases.
Hypothesis 2c. The interaction between skill variety and age is mediated by the interaction between skill variety and promotion focus.
Hypothesis 2d. The interaction between skill variety and age is mediated by the interaction between skill variety and prevention focus.
Task identity refers to the degree to which the job requires to complete a ‘whole’ and
motivation. The process responsible for this moderation is the decrease in promotion focus with age and the increase in prevention focus with age. Therefore, it is predicted:
Hypothesis 3a. Task identity is positively related to work motivation
Hypothesis 3b. The relationship between task identity and work motivation becomes weaker as age increases.
Hypothesis 3c. The interaction between task identity and age is mediated by the interaction between task identity and promotion focus.
Hypothesis 3d. The interaction between task identity and age is mediated by the interaction between task identity and prevention focus.
2.3 Age, emotionally meaningful motives and work motivation
Finally, we examine the influence of age-related differences in emotionally meaningful motives on the relationship between task significance and work motivation. Task significance refers to the degree to which a job has a substantial impact on the lives or work of others, whether within the own
Because task significance is associated with the importance of the impact of the job on the well-being of others, the motivational shift towards emotionally meaningful motives may lead to an increase in the perceived importance of task significance. High task significance leads to higher perceptions of social impact and sense that one is needed by others, as employees are performing a job that has an important impact on and value to other people within or outside its own organization. Summarized, age interacts with task significance and positively moderates the relationship between task significance and work motivation. The process responsible for this moderation is the increased importance of emotionally meaningful motives with age. Therefore, it is predicted:
Hypothesis 4a. Task significance is positively related to work motivation
Hypothesis 4b. The relationship between task significance and work motivation becomes stronger as age increases.
Hypothesis 4c. The interaction between task significance and age is mediated by the interaction between task significance and emotionally meaningful motives.
3. METHOD
3.1 Procedure
This research was conducted within an organization operating in the Fast Moving Consumer Goods industry. In consultation with the HR Manager, the technical service department within the
the department were needed to ensure the presence of differences in job characteristics. Third, an equal distribution of age among the employees of the department was an important criteria. The department needed to contain a workforce of both younger and older workers. The technical service department met these criteria.
The technical service department is responsible for the maintenance of the technical
installations of the organization’s customers. The jobs within the technical service department can be divided in four categories: technical mechanic 1 (TM1), responsible for the cleaning of technical installations and small repairs; technical mechanic 2 (TM2), responsible for maintenance of technical installations and the prevention and solutions of technical failures; back office, among other things responsible for planning and work preparation; and managers. The department is spread throughout different locations within the Netherlands.
Data during this research were collected using written questionnaires. The questionnaires were filled out during the two-weekly meeting between the manager and employees. The manager and employees present at the meeting were informed about the purpose and method of the research and were then asked to individually fill out the questionnaire. It was pointed out that the data would be kept confidential. The participants were not asked to fill out their name on the questionnaire. An instruction was also given on the first page of the questionnaire, containing the same information. The participants had the opportunity to ask questions when filling out the questionnaires. For two locations it was not possible to attend the two-weekly meeting. In this case the questionnaires were given to the manager of the location. The manager was asked to ensure the employees filled out the questionnaires and to return the filled out questionnaires by mail.
3.2 Participants
A total of 121 questionnaires were distributed among the employees of the technical service
employees did fill out the questionnaires, but did not fill out their age. These questionnaires were not used in this research. The other part of these employees refused to fill out the questionnaire. They did not feel comfortable answering the questions.
The total number of participants within each job is distributed as follows: 56 technical mechanics 2, 31 technical mechanics 1, 25 Back office employees and 3 Managers. Among the participants were 100 men and 5 women, 10 participants did not fill out their gender. The average age of the participants was 44.9 years and ranged from 25 to 65 years.
3.3 Measures
Job characteristics. The three job characteristics skill variety, task identity and task significance were measured using 9 items from the first two parts of the Job Diagnostic Survey (Hackman & Oldham, 1974). Skill variety, task identity and task significance were each measured through 3 of these items. Skill variety was measured with items like ‘How much variety is there in your job?’ and ‘The job requires me to use a number of complex and high level skills’. Task identity was measured with items like ‘To what extend does your job involve doing a “whole” and identifiable piece of work?’ and ‘The job provides me the chance to completely finish the pieces of work I begin’. Examples of items measuring task significance were ‘In general, how significant or important is your job?’ and ‘The job is one where a lot of other people can be affected by how well the work gets done’. Participants responded to items on a seven point scale, with responses ranging from 1 (very little) to 7 (very much) to items from part one of the Job Diagnostic Survey and responses ranging from 1 (very inaccurate) to 7 (very accurate) to items from part two of the diagnostic survey. The items of the Job Diagnostic Survey were translated into Dutch.
Regulatory focus. Regulatory focus was measured using the Promotion / Prevention Scale
(Lockwood, Jordan, & Kunda, 2002). This scale contained a total of 18 items. Prevention focus and Promotion focus were each measured through nine of these items. Items measuring prevention focus were for example ‘ I often imagine myself experiencing bad things that I fear might happen to me’ and ‘I frequently think about how I can prevent failures in my life’. Promotion focus was measured by items like ‘I frequently imagine how I will achieve my hopes and aspirations’ and ‘I typically focus on the success I hope to achieve in the future’. Participants answered on a seven point scale to what extend the items applied to them, with responses ranging from 1 (completely not applies to me) to 7 (completely applies to me). The items were translated into Dutch. Cronbach’s alpha was .77 for prevention focus and .78 for promotion focus. The reliabilities of the prevention focus and promotion focus scales are thus acceptable.
Emotionally meaningful motives. Emotionally meaningful motives were measured with 6 items. These items were part of the Work Values Questionnaire, which contained a total of 24 items (Elizur, Borg, Hunt, & Beck, 1991). The 6 items selected to measure emotionally meaningful motives were ‘Contribution to society’, ‘ Esteem, that you are valued as a person’, ‘Meaningful work’, ‘Opportunity to meet people and interact with them’ , ‘Supervisor, a fair and considerate boss’ and ‘Recognition for doing a good job’. Participants answered on a seven point scale to what extend they found these work values important in their job, with responses ranging from 1 (not very important) to 7 (very important). The items were translated into Dutch. Cronbach’s alpha for emotionally
meaningful motives was .66. The reliability for emotionally meaningful motives is slightly low, but still acceptable.
4. RESULTS
4.1 Correlations and descriptive statistics
The means, standard deviations and correlations of the different variables in the research model are presented in table 1. The control variables gender, education and job title were also included in the analysis. Because of the categorical nature of these variables different dummy variables were
generated. A dummy variable was created for gender, with male coded as 0 en female coded as 1. For education a dummy variable was created, with lower education (Lower Vocational Education and Intermediate Vocational Education) coded as 0 and higher education (Higher Vocational Education) coded as 1. For job title the following three dummy variables were created: a dummy variable (job title 1) coded 1 for technical mechanic 2 (TM2), a dummy variable (job title 2) coded 1 for Manager, and a dummy variable (job title 3) coded 1 for Back office. Technical mechanic 1 (TM1) served as the control group.
As expected, the correlation analysis showed that there is a negative significant correlation between age and promotion focus (r = -.26, p < .01) and a positive significant relation between age and emotionally meaningful motives (r = .21, p < .05). However, there was no significant relation between age and prevention focus (r = .06, p > .10). Therefore, hypothesis 1b is rejected and the relationship between age and prevention focus will not be further analyzed. 1 The correlation analysis also showed that there is a positive significant relation between skill variety and motivation (r = .23, p < .05), between task identity and motivation (r = .21, p < .05) and between task significance and motivation (r = .27, p < .01) . Furthermore, there was a positive significant relation between emotionally meaningful motives and motivation (r = .36, p < .01). Promotion focus was not significantly related to motivation (r = .06, p > .10).
1
Table 1. Means, standard deviations and correlations between variables. Variables M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1. Gender¹ 0.05 0.21 . 2. Age 44.90 10.08 -.22* . 3. Education² 0.11 0.31 .23* -.27** . 4. job title 1³ 0.49 0.50 -.24* -.23* -.37** . 5. job title 2³ 0.03 0.16 -.04 -.03 .50** -.16 . 6. job title 3³ 0.22 0.41 .53** -.23* .47** -.51** -.09 . 7. Skill variety 5.23 0.99 -.03 -.01 .03 .34** .11 -.02 (.66) 8. Task identity 5.06 1.14 .07 .11 -.31** .01 -.12 -.31** -.04 (.74) 9. Task Significance 5.36 0.92 -.06 .11 -.03 -.15 .16 .05 .17 .07 (.65) 10. Promotion focus 4.28 0.86 .18 -.26** .18 -.08 .03 .21* -.09 .01 .04 (.78) 11. Prevention focus 2.82 0.91 .13 .06 -.02 .01 -.17 -.11 -.24* -.04 -.20* .27** (.77)
12. Emotionally meaningful motives 6.01 0.53 .03 .21* -.09 -.11 -.02 -.04 .18 .06 .29** .23* -.03 (.66)
13. Motivation 4.37 0.49 .13 .04 .05 -.16 .01 .16 .23* .21* .27** .06 -.32** .36** (.81)
Note. ** = p ≤ .01; * = p ≤ .05; alpha reliability coefficients are shown in parentheses on diagonal ¹ Gender: 0 = male, 1 = female
² Education: 0 = Lower/Intermediate Vocational Education, 1 = Higher Vocational Education ³ Job title 1: 0 = TM1/Manager/Back office, 1 = TM2
Job title 2: 0 = TM1/TM2/Back office, 1 = Manager Job title 3: 0 = TM1/TM2//Manager, 1 = Back office
4.2. Data analysis and testing hypotheses
The hypotheses in this research were tested using hierarchical multiple regression analysis. For each variable in the regression analyses, except for the outcome variable and dummy variables, the standardized value was used. The control variables gender, education and job title were included in the first step of each regression analysis as independent variables. Age was also included in this part of the analysis.
(β = -.02, p < .05). This corresponded with the negative relation found in the correlations analysis. Therefore, hypothesis 1a is accepted. The relationship between age and prevention focus was not further analyzed as hypothesis 1b was already rejected in the correlation analysis. The positive relation between age and emotionally meaningful motives found in the correlation analysis was not confirmed by the regression analysis (β = .01, p > .10). There was no support for a significant relation between age and emotionally meaningful motives. Hypothesis 1c is rejected.
Table 2. Results regression analysis promotion focus and emotionally meaningful motives
Predictors Promotion Focus Em. meaningful motives
Gender .23 (.46) .29 (.88) Education -.02 (-.04) .03 (.08) Jobtitle 1 -.06 (-.03) -.03 (-.20) Jobtitle 2 .18 (.25) .04 (.09) Jobtitle 3 .24 (.52) -.14 (-.45) Age -.02 (-2.40)* .01 (1.56) R² .12+ .05
Note. ** = p ≤ .01; * = p ≤ .05; + = p ≤ .10; beta coefficients are shown; t-values are shown in parentheses
Age, promotion focus, work motivation. Next, the moderating effect of age on the relationship between the different job characteristics and motivation was tested. It was expected that promotion focus mediates the moderating effect of age on the relationship between the three job characteristics and motivation. According to Muller, Judd and Yzerbyt (2005), mediated moderation can happen only when moderation occurs: in this case the magnitude of the overall treatment effect of the job
characteristics on the motivation depends on the moderator variable age. If the magnitude of the overall treatment effect depends on an individual difference, such as age, then the mediated
included in the analysis as dependent variable. The regression analysis included four steps. The control variables were included in the first step. The three job characteristics and promotion focus were included in the second step of the regression analysis as independent variables. In the third step of the regression analysis the interaction effect of the job characteristic with age was included. The
interaction effect of the job characteristic with promotion focus was included in step 4 of each regression analysis.The results are presented in tables 3 and 4.
Table 3. Results regression analysis skill variety, promotion focus and work motivation. Predictors 1 2 3 4 Control variables: Gender .09 (.59) .02 (.14) .01 (.06) -.00 (-.01) Education -.05 (-.24) -.04 (-.19) -.04 (-.22) -.03 (-.15) Jobtitle 1 -.15 (-1.09) -.22 (-1.35) -.24 (-1.49) -.26 (-1.58) Jobtitle 2 .01 (.10) -.04 (-.28) -.03 (-.23) -.03 (-.22) Jobtitle 3 .03 (.13) .07 (.32) .07 (.33) .07 (.32) Age .03 (.24) -.01 (-.06) -.03 (-.24) -.03 (-.26) Independent variables: Skill variety .26 (2.12)* .26 (2.10)* .26 (2.10)* Task identity .27 (2.44)* .27 (2.42)* .30 (2.54)* Task significance .20 (1.80)+ .19 (1.77)+ .21 (1.90)+ Promotion focus .07 (.67) .06 (.54) .05 (.46) Interaction 1:
Skill variety x Age .09 (.91) .06 (.55)
Interaction 2:
Skill variety x Promotion focus -.09 (-.80)
R² .04 .26** .26** .27*
R² change .04 .21** .01 .01
Note. ** = p ≤ .01; * = p ≤ .05; + = p ≤ .10; beta coefficients are shown; t-values are shown in parentheses
Table 4. Results regression analysis task identity, promotion focus and motivation Predictors 1 2 3 4 Control variables: Gender .09 (.59) .02 (.14) .02 (.14) .01 (.10) Education -.05 (-.24) -.04 (-.19) -.03 (-.16) -.02 (-.09) Jobtitle 1 -.15 (-1.09) -.22 (-1.35) -.22 (-1.35) -.13 (-.77) Jobtitle 2 .01 (.10) -.04 (-.28) -.04 (-.31) -.03 (-.25) Jobtitle 3 .03 (.13) .07 (.32) .06 (.29) .07 (.34) Age .03 (.24) -.01 (-.06) .01 (-.05) -.03 (-.26) Independent variables: Skill variety .26 (2.12)* .26 (2.11)* .17 (1.20) Task identity .27 (2.44)* .27 (2.43)* .33 (2.83)** Task significance .20 (1.80)+ .20 (1.74)+ .23 (1.96)+ Promotion focus .07 (.67) .07 (.68) .02 (.15) Interaction 1:
Task identity x Age -.02 (-.16) .05 (.41)
Interaction 2:
Task identity x Promotion focus .21 (1.65)+
R² .04 .26** .26* .28**
R² change .04 .21** .00 .03+
Note. ** = p ≤ .01; * = p ≤ .05; + = p ≤ .10; beta coefficients are shown; t-values are shown in parentheses
3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5
Low task identity High task identity
W o rk m o ti v a ti o n Low promotion focus High promotion focus
Age, emotionally meaningful motives, work motivation. Finally, it was expected that emotionally meaningful motives mediated the moderating effect of age on the relationship between task significance and motivation. The mediating process responsible for the moderating effect of age on the relation between task significance and motivation was the increase in emotionally meaningful motives. A hierarchical multiple regression analysis was performed. Motivation was included in the analysis as dependent variable. Again, the regression analysis included four steps. The control variables were included in the first step. The three job characteristics and emotionally meaningful motives were included in the second step of the regression analysis as independent variables. In the third step of the regression analysis the interaction effect of task significance with age was included. The interaction effect of task significance with emotionally meaningful motives was included in step 4 of the regression analysis.
Table 5 presents the hierarchical multiple regression analysis for the moderating effect of age on the relationship between task significance and motivation. Step 2 showed that the two job
characteristics skill variety and task identity and emotionally meaningful motives had a predictive value for motivation (∆R2 = .26, p < .01). Task significance was not positively related to work motivation in this step of the regression analysis (β = .09, p > .10). However, when the interaction between task significance and age was included in step 3 of the regression analysis, it showed that task identity was positively related to work motivation and that there was a significant interaction effect of age with task significance (∆R2 = .07, p < .01). More task significance within a job, resulted in higher motivation, although marginally significant (β = .18, p < .10). Hypothesis 4a is accepted. Age
moderated the relationship between task significance and motivation (β = .31, p < .01). This moderation is presented in figure 3 and showed that age strengthens the relationship between task significance and work motivation. Therefore, hypotheses 4b is accepted. Step 4 showed there was no significant interaction effect of task significance with emotionally meaningful motives (∆R2 = .00, p > .10). The increase in emotionally meaningful motives with age was not the underlying process
Table 5. Results regression analysis task significance, emotionally meaningful motives and motivation Predictors 1 2 3 4 Control variables: Gender .08 (.57) -.03 (-.22) -.09 (-.68) -.09 (-.70) Education -.05 (-.25) -.09 (-.49) -.23 (-1.30) -.23 (-1.31) Jobtitle 1 -.11 (-.82) -.17 (-1.10) -.13 (-.83) -.13 (-.85) Jobtitle 2 .03 (.18) .03 (.20) .11 (.86) .11 (.87) Jobtitle 3 .05 (.25) .16 (.83) .31 (1.57) .31 (1.56) Age .02 (.17) -.09 (-.71) -.07 (-.59) -.07 (-.60) Independent variables: Skill variety .24 (1.97)* .21 (1.77)+ .21 (1.77)+ Task identity .24 (2.25)* .15 (1.42) .16 (1,44) Task significance .09 (.84) .18 (1.65)+ .17 (1,54) Emotionally meaningful motives .27 (2.74)** .31 (3.07)** .30 (2.70)**
Interaction 1:
Task significance x Age .31 (2.89)** .31 (2.88)**
Interaction 2:
Task significance x Em. meaningful
motives -.03 (-.22)
R² .03 .29** .36** .36**
R² change .03 .26** .07** .00
Note. ** = p ≤ .01; * = p ≤ .05; + = p ≤ .10; beta coefficients are shown; t-values are shown in parentheses
3 3,5 4 4,5 5 5,5
Low task significance High task significance
W o rk m o ti v a ti o n Low age High age
5. DISCUSSION
5.1 Main findings
Few studies have focused on the influence of aging on work motivation. In this thesis we examined how age-related differences in regulatory focus and emotionally meaningful motives influenced the relationship between job characteristics and motivation. As individuals age, they allocate less
resources to growth and more resources to maintenance and regulation of loss. In this thesis we took a closer look at these self-regulation processes by focusing on an individual’s regulatory focus. A promotion focus is concerned with advancement, growth and accomplishment and, therefore, was expected to decrease with age. In contrast, a prevention focus is associated with security, safety and avoidance of failure and was expected to increase with age. Second, perceived limitations of time lead to motivational shifts during the life span and direct attention to emotionally meaningful motives. This thesis also examined the influence of the fit between age-related differences in regulatory focus and emotionally meaningful motives and characteristics of the job on motivation. This research was conducted within the technical service department of an organization operating in the Fast Moving Consumer Goods industry. Data during this research were collected using written questionnaires.
The results of this research showed three important findings. First, age was negatively related to promotion focus, but no evidence was found for the influence of age on prevention focus. Second, evidence was found for a positive moderating effect of promotion focus on the relationship between task identity and work motivation. However, age appeared to have no moderating effect on this relationship. Third, evidence was found that age increases the positive impact of task significance on work motivation. However, no evidence was found that the process responsible for this moderation was the increase in emotionally meaningful motives.
It is remarkable that no evidence was found in this research for the prediction that older employees find emotionally meaningful motives more important in their work. A possible explanation for this may be that emotionally meaningful motives were not measured in an adequate way.
Questionnaire (Elizur et al., 2001). Employees were asked to answer to what extend they found these values important in their job. Although some of the items of the Work Values Questionnaire may possibly be related to emotionally meaningfulness, the questionnaire was originally not designed to measure emotionally meaningful motives and, therefore, may not have been an adequate measure in this research. This assumption is supported by the fact that reliability of the scale measuring
emotionally meaningful motives was slightly low (Cronbach’s alpha was .66).
Another possible explanation may be that the motivational shift during life span development, which directs more attention towards emotionally meaningful goals, takes place outside the conscious awareness. Recent evidence has shown that goal activation and the pursuit of goals can be achieved unconsciously (Dijksterhuis, 2004). This suggests that people are possibly not good at consciously assessing their own motives. Carstensen et al. (2003) also propose that the age-related motivational shift towards emotionally meaningful goals extends beyond conscious preferences. Older employees may not be consciously aware of their increased direction towards emotionally meaningful goals and this may have influenced the answers given to the items from the Work Values Questionnaire.
Finally, it is possible that chronological age is not an adequate way to conceptualize age when examining its relationship with emotionally meaningful motives. Socioemotional Selectivity Theory explains that perceived limitations of time lead to motivational shifts during the life span and directs more attention to emotionally meaningful motives (Carstensen, 1995). An individual’s time
perspective changes over the life time from ‘life lived from birth’ to ‘life left until death’ and goal selection depends on this perception of time (Carstensen, 1995). Therefore, it may be more appropriate to measure age in such a way that the degree of perceived limitations of time is included, for example by using future time perspective measures (Carstensen & Lang, 1996; Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999).
5.2 Theoretical and practical implications
results of this research can add significant meaning to the understanding of Selection Optimization and Compensation theory, which proposes that older individuals allocate less resources to growth and development and more resources to prevention and regulation of loss. The findings in this research support the assumption that older adults are less focused on growth and development. We examined the influence of age on the use of self-regulation processes by taking a closer look at regulatory focus and found that promotion focus decreases with age. Therefore, this research also contributes to the development of regulatory focus theory. Especially, the findings of this research have provided more insight into how regulatory focus processes relate to organizational variables. We examined the influence of regulatory focus processes on the effects of the job characteristics skill variety and task identity, and found that individuals higher in promotion focus, are more motivated by a job that is high on task identity.
The results of this research have important practical implications. Organizations should consider to adjust their HR policies and practices to fit the needs of workers with different ages. The findings of this research showed that task significance becomes more important with age. Therefore, older workers’ jobs should be redesigned in such a way that task significance within the job is high. When an older workers’ job has a greater impact on the well-being of other people, the worker will experience more meaningfulness and, therefore, be more motivated. Task significance of a job can be enhanced by increasing the impact of the job on the lives and well-being of others within the own organization (co-workers, internal customers) or outside the own organization (customers). For example, older workers may feel that their job has a greater impact on the well-being of others within the own organization, when they are given the role of mentor or coach for younger employees within the organization.
activities that put heavy demands on developing and challenging fluid intellectual abilities, such as working memory and the processing of novel information, might be less suitable for older workers. Future research on the design of training and development activities that take into account age-related differences is needed.
5.3 Limitations and future research directions
This research is conducted in a specific organizational context. Therefore, it is not possible to generalize the findings of this research to other contexts. There was no equal distribution of gender and education among the participants taking part in the research. A large majority of the participants were male and lower educated. Particularly, differences in education may lead to different findings, because education contributes to work motivation across the life span, through its influence on the individual’s development of skills, abilities and work beliefs (Kanfer & Ackerman, 2004). Future research should examine age-related differences and its influence on job characteristics and work motivation in different organizational contexts. Another limitation of this research is that differences in needs, goals and values were measured at only one point in time. This makes it more difficult to draw conclusions about intra-individual changes in needs, goals and motivation during the life span. In order to draw more valid conclusions about age-related changes during life-span development, more longitudinal studies should be done to measure age-related factors at different points in time.
In this research it was predicted that regulatory focus influences organizational variables, in particular the relationship between job characteristics and motivation. In contrast, according to Brockner and Higgins (2001) an individual’s regulatory focus may also be influenced by
organizational contextual variables. For example, elements of the organization’s culture may shape a worker’s regulatory focus (Brockner & Higgins, 2001). The goals and values that are present within an organization may be promotion or prevention focused and may influence its workers regulatory focus. Also, the perceived nature of the reward system within an organization may influence a worker’s regulatory focus (Brockner & Higgins, 2001). As organizational context variables possibly shape a worker’s regulatory focus, the nature of the job may also influence an individual’s regulatory focus. Therefore, this interaction should be taken into account in future research initiatives on regulatory focus and its relation with organizational variables.
5.4 Conclusions
We can conclude that factors influencing work motivation change during the life span. The results of this research showed that age is related to differences in self-regulation. Older individual allocate less resources to growth and development and, therefore, promotion focus decreases with age. The decrease in promotion focus with age may influence the design of training and development activities within organizations. Additionally, we found that older individuals find task significance more important in their job. This suggest that older workers’ jobs should be redesigned in such a way that task significance within the job is high. Future research initiatives should focus on extending research on age-related differences and work motivation to diverse organizational contexts and measuring emotionally meaningful motives by using future time perspective measures. Further, the interaction between regulatory focus and organizational variables should be studied more closely.
Summarized, this research contributed to the understanding of the influence of aging on work motivation. The findings presented in this thesis increased the understanding of how to keep
REFERENCES
Armstrong-Strassen, M. 2008. Organizational practices and the post-retirement employment experience of older workers. Human Resource Management Journal. 18: 36-53.
Atkinson, J.W. 1964. Introduction to motivation. Princeton, NJ: Van Nostrand.
Baltes, P.B., Staudinger, U.M., & Lindenberger, U. 1999. Lifespan psychology: theory and application to intellectual functioning. Annual Review of Psychology. 50: 471-507.
Brockner, J., & Higgins, E.T. 2001. Regulatory focus theory: implications for the study of emotions at work. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 86(1): 35-66.
Carstensen, L.L. 1995. Evidence for a life span theory of socioemotional selectivity. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 4: 151-156.
Carstensen, L.L., Fung, H.H., & Charles, S.T. 2003. Socioemotional selectivity theory and the regulation of emotion in the second half of life. Motivation and Emotion. 27(2): 103-119.
Carstensen, L.L., & Lang, F.R. 2002. Time counts: future time perspective, goals, and social relationships. Psychology and Aging. 17(1): 125-139.
Carstensen, L.L., Pasupathi, M., Mayr, U., & Nesselroade, J.R. 2000. Emotional experience in
everyday life across the adult life span. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 79(4): 644-655.
Dijksterhuis, A. 2004. Think different: the merits of unconscious thought in preference development and decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 87(5): 586-598.
Elizur, D., Borg, I., Hunt, R., & Beck, I.M. 1991. The structure of work values: a cross cultural comparison. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 12: 21-38.
Freund, A.M. 2006. Differential motivational consequences of goal focus in younger and older adults. Psychology and Aging 21: 240-252.
Hackman, J.R., & Lawler, E.E. 1971. Employee reactions to job characteristics. Journal of Applied Psychology. 55(3): 259-286.
Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. 1974. The job diagnostic survey: an instrument for the diagnosis of jobs and the evaluation of job redesign projects. Technical Report No. 4, Department of Administrative Sciences, Yale University.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. 1975. Development of the job diagnostic survey. Journal of Applied Psychology. 60(2): 159-170.
Hackman, J.R., & Oldham, G.R. 1976. Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 16: 250-279.
Higgins, E.T. 1998. Promotion and prevention: regulatory focus as a motivational principle. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 30: 1-46.
Higgins, E.T. 2000. Making a good decision: value from fit. The American Psychologist. 55: 1217-1230.
Jones, C.J., & Meredith, W. 1996. Patterns of personality change across the lifespan. Psychology and Aging. 11(1): 57-65.
Kanfer, R. & Ackerman, P.L. 2004. Aging, adult development and work motivation. Academy of Management Review. 29(3): 440-58.
Knippenberg, van, D. & Schie, van, E.C.M. 2000. Foci and correlates of organizational identification. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 73: 137-147.
Kooij, D. 2009. Motivating older workers: a lifespan perspective on the role of perceived HR practices.Unpublished doctoral dissertation. VU University of Amsterdam.
Kooij, D., Lange, de, A.H., Jansen, P., & Dikkers, J. 2008. Older workers’ motivation to continue to work: five meanings of age. A conceptual review. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 23(4): 364-394.
Kristof, A.L. 1996. Person-environment fit: an integrative review of its conceptualizations, measurement, and implications. Personnel Psychology. 49: 1–49.
Lange, de, A.H., Taris, T.W., Jansen, P.G.W., Smulder, P., Houtman, I.L.D. & Kompier, M.A.J. 2006. Age as a factor in the relation between work and mental health: results from the longitudinal TAS study. Occupational Health Psychology: European Perspectives on Research, Education and Practice. 1: 21-45.
Latham, G.P., & Pinder, C.C. 2005. Work motivation theory and research at the dawn of the twenty-first century. Annual Review of Psychology. 56: 485-516.
Lockwood, P., Jordan, C.H., & Kunda, Z. 2002. Motivation by positive or negative role models: regulatory focus determines who will best inspire us. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 83(5): 854-864.
Loretto, W., & White P., 2006. Employers' attitudes, practices and policies towards older workers. Human Resource Management Journal. 16(3): 313-330.
McAdams, D.P., de St. Aubin, E., & Logan, R.L. 1993. Generativity among young, midlife, and older adults. Psychology and Aging. 8(2): 221-230.
Maurer, T. J. 2001. Career-relevant learning and development, worker age, and beliefs about self-efficacy. Journal of management. 27: 123 -140.
Maurer, T.J., Barbeite, F.G., Weiss, E.M., & Lippstrue, M. 2008. New measures of stereotypical beliefs about older workers’ ability and desire for development. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 23(4): 395-418.
Muller, D., Judd, C.M., & Yzerbyt, V.Y. 2005. When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 89(6): 852-863.
Ng, T.W.H., & Feldman, D.C. 2008. The Relationship of age to ten dimensions of job performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 93: 392-423.
Nord, W.R., & Fox, S. 1996. The individual in organizational studies: the great disappearing
act?. In Clegg, S.T., Hardy, C. (Eds.), Handbook of Organization Studies: 148–74. London: Sage Publications.
Pinder, C.C. 1998. Work Motivation in Organizational Behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Posthuma, R.A. & Campion, M.A. 2009. Age stereotypes at the workplace: common stereotypes, moderators, and future research directions. Journal of Management. 35: 158-188.
Settersten, R.A. & Mayer, K.U. 1997. The measurement of age, age structuring, and the life course. Annual Review of Sociology. 23: 233-261.
Sterns, H.L. & Miklos, S.M. 1995. The aging worker in a changing environment: organizational and individual issues. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 47(3): 248-268.
United Nations 2007. World economic and social survey 2007. Development in an aging world. New York: United Nations Publication.
Vroom, V.H. 1964. Work and Motivation. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Warr, P., Miles, A., & Platts, C. 2001. Age and personality in the British population between 16 and 64 years. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. 74: 165-199.
