The Significance of Task Significance

Summary by: Ian B. Mondrow

Task significance is defined as the perception that one's job has a positive impact on other people. Research on task significance has been limited because many studies focuses on cross-sectional designs that were unsuccessful in proving task significance impacted job performance. Job performance is perceived effectiveness of one's behavior that work strive to achieve organization initiatives. In addition, there are limited studies that manipulate task significance with other job characteristics. Grant (2008) sets out to determine if relational mechanisms (specifically: perceived social impact & perceived social worth)  and boundary conditions (specifically: conscientiousness and pro-social values) mediates task significance using three experiments.

Grant (2008) utilized a university fundraising organization as his first sample. 33 callers were split into 3 conditions that include: (1)a task significant condition where participants read 2 stories on how their job can impact others, (2) a personal benefit condition where participants read 2 stories about how the job benefitted the individual and (3) a control group with no manipulation. The data that was collected was measured pre-intervention and post-intervention. The results were quite promising. Results found that callers in the task significant condition increased the amount of pledges earned significantly, t(11) = 4.60, p = .001. The control group and personal benefit group showed no significant improvement in the post-implementation. The  task significant group continued to shine as they showed an increase in the amount of money earned following the intervention, t(11) = 4.51, p =.001. Once again, no significant improvement was present for the control group and the personal benefit group. Grant's initial study was a success in proving that task significance may actually positively impact job performance.

The researcher and his assistants return to the same fundraising organization, which had already experienced a full turnover of all staff. Before the intervention, all participants completed a self-assessment measuring conscientiousness and prosocial values (one's value of protecting and promoting the welfare of others). In addition, data regarding job performance was collected.Participants were split into two groups: control and task significance. Upon intervention, participants in the control group were asked to read about the organization's policies, while the task significance group read two stories portraying how the job has helped other people. Results show that [once again] the task significance group obtained more pledges than the control group, t(32) = 2.03, p = .05.  A OLS regression indicated that individuals with high prosocial values had a strong effect when they encountered the task significance condition. Again, Grant (2008) has demonstrated that task significance can have a positive impact on job performance.

You may be thinking that this study is limited because it was conducted with the same organization. In fact, Grant (2008) conducted a similar study with lifeguards at public pools. In this study there was no control group, but a personal benefit group and task significance group. He found that lifeguards in the task significance group committed more hours to their job, were more likely to help, and experienced an increase in one's perceived social worth  and social impact. Therefore, this study can be applied to a diverse population.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HR PROFESSIONALS
This study can make valuable contributions to training managers for performance evaluations. HR professionals can coach managers on utilizing a task significant outlook when addressing areas for improvement (for an individual employee). According to this study, if a manager informs an employee how their improved performance could help others, the employee is likely to understand the value of the specific task. To be most effective, the manager must provide this logic for each individual task (instead of the overall position) that requires improvement.

As humans, we want to know that we are valuable. Therefore, by providing feedback based on task significance, one can see how their performance can positively impact the organization and its stakeholders.






Reference: Grant, A.M. (2008). The significance of task significance: Job performance effects, relational mechanisms and boundary conditions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 198-124.

Repealing of DADT can pave the way for equality

Over 13,500 men and women were dishonorably discharged from the US Military  as a result of President Clinton's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) legislation. What originally was intended to protect members of the GLBT community, ended up hurting them.  That all came to a change in the December of 2010. Members of the GLBT community were starting to lose hope in President Obama in fear that he will never fight for equality. He proved them all wrong on December 22nd, when the legislation of DADT was finally repealed.

With DADT no longer in effect, the country is moving one step closer to equality regardless of sexual orientation. Currently, there is no Federal law preventing employers from terminating employees due to their sexual orientation. Some states offer protection but it is not universal across the US. One hopes that DADT will pave the way for the inclusion of sexual orientation in EEOC as a protected class. DADT was a large obstacle to overcome but now comes the time to protect every U.S. citizen regardless of his/her sexual orientation.

A Diversity-Friendly Holiday Party

By: Ian B. Mondrow, M.A.

The holidays are a joyous time of view. From delicious foods to the anticipation of exchanging gifts. However, the holidays can be an offensive or neglected time for those that do not observe the holidays. Christmas has a tendency to obtain more attention than other holidays and thus Jews, Kwanzaa observers and Muslims are often overlooked. Just recently, my client held a holiday pot luck and my coworker decided to compose a Parody to "Twas the Night Before Christmas". Although the poem did not mention Christmas, the fact that it was based on a Christmas poem alarmed me, specifically since there were not other activities to cater to other religions. If employees feel excluded, it can have a negative effect on their commitment to the organization and their quality of work.

Given this incident, I felt it would be beneficial to compose a blog entry that emphasized how to coordinate a diversity-friendly holiday party. When planning holiday parties, I think the best mindset for any event coordinator should be "all or nothing." In other words, it is suggested that the party include all December holidays or not focus around any holidays.

Planning an inclusive holiday party is rather simple, it just takes extra thought. First off, decorations should include components from each holiday. Therefore, there can be Christmas lights/trees, Hanukkah dreidels, and a Kwanzaas Mishumaa Saba. In regards to activities, be sure that if one holiday is represented, that other activities are done to observe other holidays. The same rule applies to food. If holiday dishes are being made, be sure that the entrees of other cultures are included as well.

Hosting a non-denominational party is a simple alternative as well. Instead of holding a "holiday party", host an "employee appreciation party". This party does not focus on the holidays but rather the commitment and hard work on the employees. The decorations will not need to reflect the holiday season and employees will feel engaged by their employers.

Do not overlook the power of exclusion and inclusion. It is very easy to exclude other religions and cultures due to our own personal bias. It is important to understand that while Christmas or Hanukkah may be important to you, it may have no value to another employee. Religion is a sensitive topic for all and I imagine this post is likely offending someone. However, I want to emphasize that the purpose of any company party is not to celebrate the holiday but rather to enjoy the company of your coworkers and celebrate the hard work within the organization.

Effects of Retail Store Image Attractiveness and Self-Evaluated Job Performance on Employee Retention

Summary by: Ian B. Mondrow, M.A.

The costs of a single hourly employee turning over will cost an organization approximately $3,000 to $10,000 (Turnover costs sack retailers, 2000; Gustafson, 2002 as cited in Yurchisin & Park, 2010). Within the retail industry, a sales associate average length of employment is only 80 days (Masters, 2004 as cited in Yurchisin & Park, 2010). This turnover results in customer complaints pertaining to poor customer service and employees with little knowledge or expertise of product knowledge. Previous studies have discovered that organizational commitment is a key factor in employee turnover and turnover has been found to positively correlate with job satisfaction. It was hypothesized that the attractiveness of an organization may be linked to an employee's commitment to the organization.

Yurchisin & Park (2010) were successful in obtaining surveys from 211 sales associates.  Only 21.1% were identified as full-time employees. Unfriendly/Friendly , unorganized/organized, and unreliable/reliable from the semantic differential scales were used to obtain the perceived store image. Each of the items provided anchors to assist participants in selecting the correct adjective. Surveys also measured store image attractiveness, self-assessed job performance, internal job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and intention to leave.

Results from the survey revealed that positive store image had a relationship with job satisfaction (t =6.25, p<.001) and organizational commitment (t =8.29, p < .001). An individual that had high self-assessed performance was more likely to have high internal job satisfaction (t = 5.01, p < .001) and a negative relationship with intention to leave. Both organizational commitment and intention to leave were positively related with internal job satisfaction. Finally, organizational commitment was found to have a negative effect on one's intention to leave.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HR PROFESSIONALS
This study reveals that while store attractiveness does increase job satisfaction and organizational commitment, one's self-assessment is crucial to determine if an employee is likely to leave. Therefore, it is important that managers are encouraging of their employees and are dedicated to the development of their staff. Once an employee's self-perceived performance increases, so will his/her job satisfaction and commitment to an organization. In turn, this will have a positive effect on the store image. From this, we can see that all these factors are connected. Employee satisfaction is not cut and dry but driven by a collection of factors. As HR Managers, we need to ensure that employees feel appreciated and that they feel they are successful in their job. By doing so, it is likely to lower turnover.




Source: Yurchisin, J. & Park, J. (2010). Effects of Retail Store Image Attractiveness and Self-Evaluated Job Performance on Employee Retention. Journal of Business Psychology, 25, 441-450.

Comparing Victim Attributes and Outcomes for Workplace Aggression and Sexual Harassment (Part 2)

Summary by: Ian B. Mondrow, M.A.

Following their previous research, Hershcovis and Barling (2010) decide to conduct a meta-analysis using 112 studies and 134 independent samples. The authors of previous studies that used the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ) were contacted to reanalyze the data with merely a subcomponent of the SEQ. 82% of the samples were returned. Data was analyzed using Hunter Schmidt’s (1990 as cited by Hershcovis & Barling, 2010) for calculating weighted average reliabilities, adjusting for sample error, and measuring confidence intervals. Z tests were used to analyze independent correlations.

Results revealed that sexual harassment had a negative relationship with job satisfaction (r_c = -.29), coworker satisfaction (r_c = -.35), supervisor satisfaction (r_c = -.34), affective commitment (r_c = - .29), and psychological wellbeing (r_c = -.28). Studies continued to show that sexual harassment had positive relationships with turnover (r_c =.21), job stress (r_c =.21) and work withdrawal (r_c =.29). All of the correlations mentioned above were statistically significant with a probability less than .01. The author fails to mention that while the correlations are significant, they are low correlations and thus may have weak effects.

Workplace aggression was found to have stronger relationships than sexual harassment. It was found to have negative correlations with job satisfaction (r_c = -.46), coworker satisfaction (r_c = -.37), supervisor satisfaction (r_c = -.49), affective commitment (r_c = -.40) and psychological wellbeing (r_c = -.40). Positive correlations for workplace aggression were present for turnover (r_c =.39), job stress (r_c =.32) and work withdrawal (r_c =.19). All correlations had a probability less than .05.

As already demonstrated with the correlations, Z-tests comparisons revealed that workplace aggression had stronger negative outcomes than sexual harassment in job satisfaction, supervisor satisfaction, affective commitment, psychological wellbeing, and turnover and job stress. No significant difference was present for coworker satisfaction. Work withdrawal had a stronger effect with sexual harassment than workplace aggression.

 IMPLICATIONS FOR HR PROFESSIONALS

As previously mentioned in Part 1 of this summary, this research shows that workplace aggressive has effects that are far more influential than sexual harassment. This may be a result of the lack of action that is taken to address this issue. Sexual harassment is a sensitive topic and organizations attempt to correct the harassment quickly to avoid lawsuits. Workplace aggression,however, can not be easily proven and there is no legal implications of an employee that is rude or excludes other individuals. 

Organizations can prevent these negative affects of by implementing a policy stating no tolerance towards workplace aggression or sexual harassment. For this policy to be effective, the organization must investigate all claims of workplace aggression and avoid discrediting any accusations without proof. 

Regardless, sexual harassment and workplace aggression will continue to be part of our society. We do not live in an ideal world and some people have no guilt for their actions. As HR practioners, we should communicate disapproval of any of these actions and the consequences associated with these actions. We should also take immediate action once any complaint is received. These issues should not go unaddressed or else it could have negative effects on company culture and personnel.

Source: Herschcovis, M.S., Barling, J. (2010). Comparing victim attributions and outcomes for workplace aggression and sexual harassment. American Psychological Association, 95 (5), 874-888.

Comparing Victim Attributions and Outcomes for Workplace Aggression & Sexual Harassment (Part 1)

Summary by: Ian B. Mondrow, M.A.

Sexual harassment has had a large presence in male-dominated organizations. It is believed that it occurs in these organizations because women are holding positions that were traditionally filled by men. Surprisingly, if a woman had masculine traits, then she is more susceptible to sexual harassment. Hershcovis and Barling (2010) suggest that sexual harassment degrades an individuals gender and thus lowers his/her status/credibility. When this occurs, female victims view the incident as an attack on their gender instead of on themselves. Sexual harassment on men is far less threatening and may even reinforce their male gender role.

Unlike sexual harassment, workplace aggression does not focus on one's gender or classification. It is equally threatening to both men and women as it crushes one's status or need to feel a part of a group. Examples of workplace aggression include social exclusion, gossiping, yelling, and rude behaviors, which all suggest that the individual is of lower status. These behaviors often focus on individual characteristics instead of one's member to a social group (i.e. gender).

Hershcovis and Barling (2010) set out to research the attributable differences between sexual harassment and workplace aggression. An online survey was administered to 117 participants. Participants were provided a story that differed based on the following dimensions: gender dominant workplace vs. gender neutral workplace (equal distribution among men & women) and workplace aggression vs. sexual harassment.  Participants were asked to rate the scenario on how descriptive it was of sexual harassment and workplace aggression on a 1-5 scale. They were also asked to allocate the blame based on a hundred points between themselves and the perpetrator. In addition, survey respondents answered questions evaluating internal attribution, personal attribution, gender attribution, external attribution, aggression ambiguity, and severity. Gender was also collected as a controlled variable.

A multivariate analysis revealed a significance between workplace aggression and sexual harassment, F(6,98) = 14.80, p<.001. It was also found that participants in the gender-dominant scenario were more likely to make an internal attribution in the workplace aggression scenario (M = 2.72) than the sexual harassment scenario ( M = 1.67). Participants that were part of the workplace aggression scenario were more likely to take the encounter personally than those in the sexual harassment scenario. Those that partook in the sexual harassment scenario were more likely to blame their bully's attitudes, F (1,108) = 19.01, p < .01, on their gender and account them for the blame, F (1,108) = 8.92, p < .01.  Participants that were in the workplace aggression scenario were more likely to blame themselves instead of the bully than those in the sexual harassment scenario. Gender distribution within the organization had no effect on sexual harassment but participants in the workplace aggression sample were more likely to make a gender attribution than in the gender-neutral environment.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HR PROFESSIONALS

Based on the findings in this study, HR practitioners need to be conscious of the fact that victims of workplace aggression are likely to place the blame on themselves. Therefore, when counseling an individual, it is important to emphasize that it is not their fault and that bullying does exist in the organization. In addition, the findings show that bullying can be equally offensive as sexual harassment and should not be taken lightly. HR professionals should examine complaints thoroughly to ensure that bullying does not escalate. 

In regards to sexual harassment, victims are likely to blame the harasser. Which they should! It is vital to understand that no employee is responsible for being a victim of sexual harassment. Regardless of one's clothing, gender, or comments, sexual advances are not acceptable in the workplace and every complaint should be investigated immediately. 

Source: Herschcovis, M.S., Barling, J. (2010). Comparing victim attributions and outcomes for workplace aggression and sexual harassment. American Psychological Association, 95 (5), 874-888.

Why are women paid less than men, but given higher raises?

Summary by: Ian B. Mondrow, M.A. 

Gender differences in pay has been an ongoing issue for decades. Its saddening to think that these differences still exists but an abundance of previous research supports the notion. Regardless of industry, occupation or other variables, women only receive a wage 88% that of men (Blau et al., 1998).  Previous research offers a variety of reasons for this and they include: part-time vs. full-time, employment sector, industry and more. There are also arguments that woman receive reduced starting wage. Some researchers believe that women are less aggressive when it comes to negotiating salary but this is a controversial topic in itself.

Although it does not compensate for a slashed wages, past studies have found that women receive higher pay increases. Redyced stereotyping may be the result of these increases. Reduced stereotyping occurs when a manager does not have a sufficient amount of information to evaluate the individual and therefore base his/her decisions on stereotypes. When enough information is present, reduced stereotype is less likely to occur. Structural features may also be a factor in this gender difference. Many organization base pay increases on a performance rating and their level in their job grade. In this structure, employees that are paid less are eligible for higher pay increases than employees with higher salaries. Therefore, if women start off with lower salaries, they will be more likely to have higher pay increases.

Harris, Gilbreath and Sunday (2002) decided to put these theories to test. Using previous data from a government-owned, contractor-operated nuclear waste facility in the united states. 218 participants were randomly selected to participate; 174 were men and 44 were women.

In their analysis, it was found that seniority, education and performance ratings did not differ between men & women. However, compared to men, women had significantly lower salaries (on average about $1000 less per month) and were in lower grades. When including job grade, education level and seniority as variables in their analysis, it was found that salary differences decreased but did not put an end to the salary differences between genders. On an annual basis, women earned a range of between $1080 (in 1991) and $2004 (in 1993) less than men.

It was found that women received pay increases that were, on average, 5% greater than men. These differences diminished once job grade and base pay were added as variables. Furthermore, performance ratings did not impact the differences between gender.

There are several limitations that must be considered in this study:

• First and foremost, this study is about 8 years old. 
• The organization was new and employed individuals for only 4 years. 
• The organization work with government contracts and therefore may have strict anti-discrimination laws to abide by. 
• The time frame that was examined was only two years.

IMPLICATIONS FOR HR PROFESSIONALS

This picture does not reflect my personal opinion.
It is clearly a controversial image, but I like the
message at the bottom.

How can HR professionals avoid pay differences as a result of gender? This is a tough question and an issue that thousands have been fighting against for decades. First and foremost, ensure that both men and women are offered the initial starting wage. At that point, it is their responsibility to negotiate salary within the range. 

To avoid gender differences in pay increases, pay increases should be based on tenure or performance reviews. Having a structured pay increase guide that correlates with performance appraisal goals can assist in dismantling this difference. In addition, ensuring that managers are provided with sufficient information on their employees will ensure that they do not experience reduced discrimination. Most importantly, always base performance appraisals on a job analysis. For a performance appraisal to be effective, it must be based on the criteria that one needs to be successful in this job.

I am hoping that these pay increases and base salary differences diminish in time.

Source: Harris, M.M., Gilbreath, B., Sunday, J.A. (2002). Why are women paid less than men, but given higher raises. Journal of Business and Psychology, 16(4), 499-514.