Abstract
Research into the changing nature of work requires comprehensive models of work design. One such model is the interdisciplinary framework (M. A. Campion, 1988), which integrates 4 work-design approaches (motivational, mechanistic, biological, perceptual-motor) and links each approach to specific outcomes. Unfortunately, studies of this framework have used methods that disregard measurement error, overlook dimensions within each work-design approach, and treat each approach and outcome separately. This study reanalyzes data from M. A. Campion (1988), using structural equation models that incorporate measurement error, specify multiple dimensions for each work-design approach, and examine the work-design approaches and outcomes jointly. Results show that previous studies underestimate relationships between work-design approaches and outcomes and that dimensions within each approach exhibit relationships with outcomes that differ in magnitude and direction.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
