Being an organizational ‘lynchpin’: Development and validation of the core‐versus‐peripheral position scale

Abstract

This article explores whether holding a core organizational position – being a ‘lynchpin’ – provides employees with psychological benefits, such as higher experienced meaningfulness and affective commitment, as well as lower job insecurity and burnout. Understanding whether being in a core position leads to psychological benefits could help workers make better career choices. To this end, the purposes of this study were to provide a unified definition of core‐versus‐peripheral positions (CPP; i.e., core position is high in criticality, non‐substitutability, pervasiveness, and immediacy), as well as develop and validate a new measurement to assess CPP. In Study 1 and Study 2, we examined the factor structure and reliabilities of the CPP scale. In Study 3, we examined its convergent and discriminant validity. In Study 4, two samples were used to explore its predictive validity. Specifically, we found that criticality, non‐substitutability, pervasiveness, and immediacy predicted experienced meaningfulness, affective commitment, job insecurity, and burnout measured at a different time point. In Study 5, we demonstrated the consistency between self‐reported and other‐reported CPP. By demonstrating the benefits of being an organizational ‘lynchpin’, individual employees may consider the core‐versus‐peripheral nature of their job position before entering an organization.Practitioner points Using the position of landscape maintenance worker as an example, the same job position might be core in one organization (a landscaping business) and peripheral in another (e.g., working as a gardener at a university). Holding all else constant, the gardener in a landscaping company might have more positive outcomes (e.g., higher experienced meaningfulness and affective commitment, and lower job insecurity and burnout) than a gardener at a university. From the organization's perspective, managerial efforts to enhance employee well‐being and satisfaction should be focused more on those in the peripheral positions than on core positions because employees in peripheral positions are likely to experience low psychological well‐being compared to those in core positions. In an attempt to maximize their effective operation and competitive advantages, organizations may benefit most from hiring employees with high knowledge, skills, and abilities to take on core positions.