Advertisement

Development and validation of the meaning of work inventory among French workers

  • Caroline Arnoux-Nicolas
  • Laurent Sovet
  • Lin Lhotellier
  • Jean-Luc Bernaud
Article
First Online:

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to validate a psychometric instrument among French workers for assessing the meaning of work. Following an empirical framework, a two-step procedure consisted of exploring and then validating the scale among distinctive samples. The consequent Meaning of Work Inventory is a 15-item scale based on a four-factor model, and assesses the importance, understanding, direction, and purpose of work. The results indicate that this instrument is reliable for assessing the meaning of work in the French context. Implications for career counseling practices are discussed.

Keywords

Meaning of work questionnaire IST Meaning of work 

Résumé

Développement et Validation de l’Inventaire du Sens du Travail auprès de Travailleurs Français. L’objectif de cette étude est de valider un instrument psychométrique auprès de travailleurs français pour évaluer le sens du travail. Suivant une approche empirique, la procédure en deux étapes a consisté à explorer puis à valider l’échelle auprès d’échantillons distincts. L’Inventaire du Sens du Travail (IST) est une échelle de 15 items reposant sur quatre facteurs : l’importance, la compréhension, la direction et la finalité du travail. Les résultats indiquent que cet instrument est fiable pour évaluer le sens du travail dans le contexte français. Les implications pour les pratiques en orientation tout au long de la vie sont discutées.

Zusammenfassung

Entwicklung und Validierung des Inventars zur Bedeutung von Arbeit bei einer Gruppe von Französischen Erwerbstätigen. Das Ziel dieser Studie war es, ein Messinstrument zur Bedeutung der Arbeit in einer Stichprobe von Französischen Erwerbstätigen zu entwickeln. Einem empirischen Rahmenmodell folgend, wurde zuerst explorativ und dann konfirmativ an verschiedenen Stichproben validiert. Das abschließende Messinstrument basiert auf 15 Items, welche vier Faktoren repräsentieren: Wichtigkeit der Arbeit, Verständnis der Arbeit, Richtung der Arbeit und Sinn der Arbeit. Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass das Instrument die Bedeutung von Arbeit reliabel im Französischen Kontext messen kann. Implikationen für die Laufbahnberatung werden diskutiert.

Resumen

Desarrollo y Validación del Significado de Inventario de Trabajo entre los Trabajadores Franceses. El propósito de este estudio pretendía validar un instrumento psicométrico entre los trabajadores franceses, para evaluar el significado del trabajo. Tras un marco empírico, se realizó un procedimiento de dos fases consistente en la exploración y posteriormente, la validación de escalas entre muestras diferenciadas. Consecuentemente, el Significado del Inventario del Trabajo es una escala de 15 ítems basada en un modelo de 4 factores, que evalúa la importancia, la comprensión, la dirección y el propósito del trabajo. Los resultados indican que este instrumento es fiable para evaluar el significado del trabajo en el contexto francés. Se discuten implicaciones para las prácticas de orientación profesional.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Allan, B. A., Autin, K. L., & Duffy, R. D. (2014). Examining social class and work meaning within the psychology of working framework. Journal of Career Assessment, 22, 543–561. doi: 10.1177/10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnold, K. A., Turner, N., Barling, J., Kelloway, E. K., & McKee, M. C. (2007). Transformational leadership and psychological well-being: The mediating role of meaningful work. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 193–203. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.12.3.193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arthur, M. B. (1994). The boundaryless career: A new perspective for organizational inquiry. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 295–306. doi: 10.1002/job.4030150402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernaud, J.-L. (2013). Le “sens” de la vie comme paradigme pour le conseil en orientation [Meaning of life as a paradigm for career counseling]. Psychologie française, 61, 61–72. doi: 10.1016/j.psfr.2013.06.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernaud, J.-L., Lhotellier, L., Sovet, L., Arnoux-Nicolas, C., & Pelayo, F. (2015). Psychologie de l’accompagnement: Concepts et outils pour développer le “sens” de la vie et du travail [Psychology of coaching: Concepts and tools to develop meaning of life and of work]. Paris: Dunod.Google Scholar
  6. Blais, M. R., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Brière, N. M. (1989). The satisfaction scale: French-Canadian validation of the Satisfaction with Life Scale. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 21, 210–223. doi: 10.1037/h0079854.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Byrne, B. M. (2009). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Davoine, L., & Meda, D. (2008). Place et sens du travail en Europe: Une singularité française ? [The place and meaning of work in Europe: A French singularity?]. Noisy-le-Grand, France: Centre d’études de l’emploi.Google Scholar
  9. Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction with Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 71–75. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dik, B. J., Eldridge, B. M., Steger, M. F., & Duffy, R. D. (2012). Development and validation of the Calling and Vocation Questionnaire (CVQ) and a Brief Calling Scale (BCS). Journal of Career Assessment, 20, 242–263. doi: 10.1177/1069072711434410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. European Commission. (2007). European social reality (Special Eurobarometer). Brussels, Belgium: Directorate-General for Communication.Google Scholar
  12. Fairlie, P. (2011). Meaningful work, employee engagement, and other key employee outcomes: Implications for human resource development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 13, 508–525. doi: 10.1177/1523422311431679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fock, H., Yim, F., & Rodriguez, M. (2010). The effects of sales supervisor relationship on work meaning: The case of Canadian and Chinese salespersons. Industrial Marketing Management, 39, 1069–1077. doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2009.11.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fouquereau, É., & Rioux, L. (2002). Development of the French-language Professional Life Satisfaction Scale: An exploratory study. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 34, 210–215. doi: 10.1037/h0087173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Frankl, V. E. (1959). Man’s search for meaning. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  16. Geldenhuys, M., Laba, K., & Venter, C. M. (2014). Meaningful work, work engagement and organizational commitment. South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 40, 1–10. doi: 10.4102/sajip.v40i1.1098.Google Scholar
  17. Gomez-Gonzalez, L. A., Léger, D., Bourdages, L., & Dionne, H. (Eds.). (2013). Sens et projet de vie [Meaning and life project]. Québec: Presses de l’Université du Québec.Google Scholar
  18. Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organization Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 16, 250–279. doi: 10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Harpaz, I., & Fu, X. (2002). The structure of the meaning of work: A relative stability amidst change. Human Relations, 55, 639–667. doi: 10.1177/0018726702556002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Harpaz, I., Honig, B., & Coetsier, P. (2002). A cross-cultural longitudinal analysis of the meaning of work and the socialization process of career starters. Journal of World Business, 37, 230–244. doi: 10.1016/s1090-9516(02)00090-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harpaz, I., & Meshoulam, I. (2004). Differences in the meaning of work in Israel: Workers in high-tech versus traditional work industries. Journal of High Technology Management Research, 15, 163–182. doi: 10.1016/j.hitech.2004.003.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hooper, D., Coughlan, J., & Mullen, M. R. (2008). Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit. Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6, 53–60. http://arrow.dit.ie/buschmanart.
  23. Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55. doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. INSEE [French Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies] (2014, September). Emploi et salaires [Employment and salaries]. http://www.insee.fr/fr/publications-et-services/sommaire.asp?ref_id=EMPSAL14.
  25. International Wellbeing Study. (2009). http://www.wellbeingstudy.com/.
  26. Kirsh, B. (2000). Work, workers, and workplaces: A qualitative analysis of narratives of mental health consumers. Journal of Rehabilitation, 66(4), 24–30.Google Scholar
  27. Kline, R. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  28. Kristensen, T. S., Hannerz, H., Høgh, A., & Borg, V. (2005). The Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire—A tool for the assessment and improvement of the psychosocial work environment. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 31, 438–449. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.948.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Laschinger, H. K. S., Finegan, J. E., Shamian, J., & Wilk, P. (2004). A longitudinal analysis of the impact of workplace empowerment on work satisfaction. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 527–545. doi: 10.1002/job.256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Leong, F. T. L., & Pearce, M. (2011). Desiderata towards indigenous models of vocational psychology. International Journal for Educational and Vocational Guidance, 11, 65–77. doi: 10.1007/s10775-011-9198-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lips-Wiersma, M., & Wright, S. (2012). Measuring the meaning of meaningful work: Development and validation of the Comprehensive Meaningful Work Scale (CMWS). Group Organization Management, 37, 655–685. doi: 10.1177/1059601112461578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77, 11–37. doi: 10.1348/096317904322915892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Meda, D., & Vendranim, P. (2013). Réinventer le travail [Reinventing work]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  34. Morin, E. M. (2008). Sens du travail, santé mentale et engagement organisationnel [Meaning of work, mental health, and organizational involvement]. Montréal, Québec: IRSST.Google Scholar
  35. MOW-IRT. (1987). The meaning of work. London, UK: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  36. Nunnally, J., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  37. Pett, M., Lackey, N., & Sullivan, J. (2003). Making sense of factor analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Proulx, T., Markman, K. D., & Lindberg, M. J. (2013). Introduction: The new science of meaning. In K. D. Markman, T. Proulx, & J. Lindberg (Eds.), The psychology of meaning (pp. 3–14). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rosso, B. D., Dekas, K. H., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2010). On the meaning of work: A theoretical integration and review. Research in Organizational Behavior, 30, 91–127. doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2010.09.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Savickas, M. L., Nota, L., Rossier, J., Dauwalder, J.-P., Duarte, M. E., Guichard, J., … van Vianen, A. E. M. (2009). Life designing: A paradigm for career construction in the 21st century. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75, 239–250. doi: 10.1016/j.jvb.2009.04.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Steger, M. F. (2012). Making meaning in life. Psychological Inquiry, 23, 381–385. doi: 10.1080/1047840x.2012.720832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Steger, M. F., & Dik, B. J. (2009). If one is looking for meaning in life, does it help to find meaning in work? Applied Psychology: Health and Well-being, 1, 303–320. doi: 10.1111/j.1758-0854.2009.01018.x.Google Scholar
  43. Steger, M. F., & Dik, B. J. (2010). Work as meaning: Individual and organizational benefits of engaging in meaningful work. In P. A. Linley, S. Harrington, & N. Page (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology and work (pp. 131–142). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Steger, M. F., Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2012). Measuring meaningful work: The Work and Meaning Inventory (WAMI). Journal of Career Assessment, 20, 322–337. doi: 10.1177/1069072711436160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Steger, M. F., Dik, B. J., & Shim, Y. (in press). Measuring satisfaction and meaning of work. In S. J. Lopez (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of positive psychology assessment (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Steger, M. F., Frazier, P., Oishi, S., & Kaler, M. (2006). The Meaning in Life Questionnaire: Assessing the presence of and search for meaning in life. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 80–93. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.53.1.80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tavani, J.-L., Botella, M., & Collange, J. (2014). Quelle validité pour une mesure de la satisfaction au travail en un seul item ? [Validity of a single-item measure of job satisfaction?]. Pratiques Psychologiques, 20, 125–142. doi: 10.1016/j.prps.2014.03.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Wrzesniewski, A. (2002). “It’s not just a job”: Shifting meanings of work in the wake of 9/11. Journal of Management Inquiry, 11, 230–234. doi: 10.1177/1056492602113003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Wrzesniewski, A., Dutton, J. E., & Debebe, G. (2003). Interpersonal sensemaking and the meaning of work. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 93–135. doi: 10.1016/S0191-3085(03)25003-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wrzesniewski, A., McCauley, C., Rozin, P., & Schwartz, B. (1997). Jobs, careers, and callings: People’s relations to their work. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 21–33. doi: 10.1006/jrpe.1997.2162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhou, S., Leung, A. S., & Li, X. (2012). The meaning of work among Chinese university students: Findings from prototype research methodology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59, 408–423. doi: 10.1037/a0028374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Caroline Arnoux-Nicolas
    • 1
  • Laurent Sovet
    • 1
  • Lin Lhotellier
    • 1
  • Jean-Luc Bernaud
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre de Recherche sur le Travail et le Développement, EA 4132Conservatoire National des Arts et MétiersParisFrance

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options