Extrinsic Motives as Moderators in the Relationship Between Fairness and Work-Related Outcomes Among Temporary Workers
- 502 Downloads
This study assessed how motives for having a temporary job influence the effects of experienced fairness on work-related attitudes.
We examined the moderating effect of three motives for being in temporary employment (the autonomous or voluntary motive, the stepping-stone motive, and the controlled or involuntary motive) on the relationship between experienced fairness and outcomes. Hierarchical multiple regressions were performed on questionnaire data of a sample of 299 Dutch temporary workers.
For temporary employees who accepted temporary employment voluntarily, low fairness is related to lower self-reported performance. For employees who use their temporary job as a way to obtain permanent employment, fairness is not related to work-related attitudes and behavioral intentions. Those who are involuntarily in a temporary job react stronger on fairness and have a higher intention to quit.
Fairness is weakly related to work-related attitudes and behavioral intentions under two conditions: when perceived goal attainment is high, and when the worker is dependent on the temporary job to reach that goal. This study provides support for the assumption that motives may override automatic responses to fairness.
This article is one of the first studies that provide evidence for the influence of motives on reactions to fairness. Additionally, this study considers reactions to fairness in a growing contingent of the workforce, that is temporary workers. It provides evidence that the dynamics in fairness perceptions may be different for temporary workers in comparison to their counterparts with permanent contracts.
KeywordsTemporary employment Motives Job expectations Fairness Goal attainment Goal dependency Moderators
- Bargh, J. A. (1984). Automatic and conscious processing of social information. In J. Robert, S. Wyer, & T. K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (Vol. 3, pp. 1–44). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Bendapudi, V., Mangum, S. L., & Tansky, J. W. (2003). Nonstandard employment arrangements: A proposed typology and policy planning framework. Human Resource Planning, 26(1), 24–40.Google Scholar
- Bernasek, A., & Kinnear, D. (1999). Workers’ willingness to accept contingent employment. Journal of Economic Issues, 33(2), 461–469.Google Scholar
- Cohany, S. R. (1998). Workers in alternative employment arrangements: A second look. Monthly Labor Review, 121(11), 3–21.Google Scholar
- Connelly, C. E., & Gallagher, D. G. (2004). Emerging trends in contingent work research. Journal of Management, 30(6), 959–983.Google Scholar
- Cook, J., & Wall, T. (1980). New work attitude measures of trust, organisational commitment and personal need non-fulfilment. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 53, 39–52.Google Scholar
- De Jong, J., & Schalk, R. (2005). Temporary employment in the Netherlands: Between flexibility and security. In N. De Cuyper, K. Isaksson, & H. De Witte (Eds.), Employment contracts and well-being among European workers (pp. 119–152). Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
- Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
- DiNatale, M. (2001). Characteristics of and preference for alternative work arrangements. Monthly Labor Review, 124(3), 28–49.Google Scholar
- Folger, R., & Cropanzano, R. (Eds.). (1998). Organizational justice and human resource management. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
- Guest, D., & Conway, N. (1998). Fairness at work and the psychological contract. London: CIPD.Google Scholar
- Hoffman, C. C., Nathan, B. R., & Holden, L. M. (1991). A comparison of validation criteria: Objective versus subjective performance measures and self- versus supervisor ratings. Personnel Psychology, 44(3), 601–619.Google Scholar
- Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (1988). The social psychology of procedural justice. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
- Millward, L. J., & Brewerton, P. M. (2000). Psychological contracts: Employee relations for the twenty-first century? In C. Cooper & I. T. Robertson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 1–61). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- OECD. (1999). Classifying educational programmes: Manual for isced-97 implementation in OECD countries (1999th ed.). Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
- OECD. (2002). OECD employment outlook. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
- Olson-Buchanan, J. B., & Boswell, W. R. (2008). An integrative model of experiencing and responding to mistreatment at work. Academy of Management Review, 33(1), 76–96.Google Scholar
- Polivka, A. E. (1996). Contingent and alternative work arrangements, defined. Monthly Labor Review, 119(10), 3–9.Google Scholar
- Price, J. R. (1997). Handbook of organizational measurement. International Journal of Manpower, 18(4–6), 301–558.Google Scholar
- PSYCONES. (2005). Psychological contracts across employment situations. Sweden: National Institute for Working Life.Google Scholar
- Roth, S. G., & Shanock, L. R. (2006). Organizational justice in an exchange framework: Clarifying organizational justice distinctions. Journal of Management, 32(2), 299–322.Google Scholar
- Ryan, R. M., Sheldon, K. M., Kasser, T., & Deci, E. L. (1996). All goals are not created equal. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action. Linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 7–26). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural justice: A psychological analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Van den Bos, K., & Lind, E. A. (2002). Uncertainty management by means of fairness judgements. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 1–60). New York: Academy Press.Google Scholar
- Von Hippel, C. D., Greenberger, D. B., Heneman, R. L., Mangum, S. L., & Skoglind, J. D. (2000). Voluntary and involuntary temporary employees: Predicting satisfaction, commitment, and personal control. Research in the Sociology of Work, 9, 291–309.Google Scholar
- Vroom, V. H. (1964). Work and motivation. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Williams, S. (1999). The effects of distributive and procedural justice on performance. The Journal of Psychology, 133(2), 183–193.Google Scholar