The Job Characteristics Model was verified when Hackman and Oldham tested it on 658 employees, who are working in 62 different jobs in 7 different businesses or organizations. The results were deemed to be reliable and conclusive, which is the reason why it still holds a lot of weight today, despite the number of other job design theories introduced.
Take a look at the diagram of the Job Characteristics Model, as presented by Hackman and Oldham.
Five Core Job Characteristics:
1. Skill variety
This refers to the “degree to which a job requires a variety of different activities in carrying out the work, involving the use of a number of different skills and talents of a person”. Therefore, it follows that the individual will be required to develop a variety of talents and skills.
This area asks the number of skills and talents that the job requires of the person that will be working on it. A quick giveaway would be to assess whether the job is monotonous and repetitive or if it asks the worker to do a number of different tasks or actions.
Compare two individuals working two different jobs. Job A is pretty much elementary, with the tasks being performed in a routine and repetitive manner. It does not demand much skill or ability. Job B, on the other hand, is quite complex, requiring that the worker be in possession of several skills or abilities. Who, between the two workers, will have greater chances of experiencing meaningfulness in their jobs?
That’s correct. It’s the one working on Job B, since it requires variety in skills.
2. Task identity
This is the “degree to which the job requires completion of a whole, identifiable piece of work; that is, doing a job from beginning to end with visible outcome”. This involves being able to work on an entire work process, rather than just on bits and pieces of it. Therefore, it is important to assess whether the job or task has a clearly defined beginning, middle and end.
Workers tend to find more meaning in their jobs when they can identify a complete and visible outcome at the end of the day, or of a work cycle. Let us say, for example, that two workers are involved in the same work process. Worker A is responsible for only a small part of the work, probably in the first phase. Worker B, on the other hand, is involved throughout the entire process.
Between the two, Worker B is more likely to find his job meaningful, because he can see a visible outcome, and he feels more involved in the completion of the process. For him, a job that he is able to complete, from beginning to end, seems more worthwhile, than simply working on Phase 1, then not having a hand on the rest of the process. In fact, he may not even be aware whether the process has been completed or not, because he is focused on his assigned phase of the process.
3. Task significance
Task significance is said to be the “degree to which the job has a substantial impact on the lives of other people, whether those people are in the immediate organization or in the world at large”. The task – and the job – is significant if it can affect other people’s lives. And it should not just be the people within the organization, but even those outside.
For many, a job holds more meaning if it can help improve the well-being of other people (not just himself), whether physically, psychologically, or emotionally. Knowing that their job, and their performance thereof, has the capacity to have a positive impact on others will motivate them further to do better.
Individuals who put great stock on task significance are very keen on finding out whether the job that they are doing actually matters to other people. For them, meaning comes in the form of recognition by other people.
4. Autonomy
This pertains to the “degree to which the job provides substantial freedom, independence, and discretion to the individual in scheduling the work and in determining the procedure to be used in carrying it out”.
Autonomy is often seen in positions with managerial, supervisorial and ministerial functions. Examples of jobs with high levels of autonomy are managers, team leaders, supervising officers, division and department heads, and senior management. These jobs tend to become more meaningful to the ones performing them because they feel greater personal responsibility for their own actions on the job.
But it’s not just limited to people in managerial positions. Even workers have a strong sense of personal responsibility if they are left to perform their tasks using their own efforts and initiatives, and they are allowed to make the decisions and call the shots.
They will definitely feel less of this autonomy if they are made to meekly follow the instructions of a supervisor, or adhere strictly to what a job procedures manual provides. This will not help them feel responsible for their actions at all.
5. Feedback
If all five characteristics are lumped or combined together, we will be able to come up with a single figure or index that will act as the indicator of the overall motivating potential of the job being evaluated or redesigned. This index will essentially show the possibility or likelihood of a job affecting the attitudes and behaviors of the employee or worker.
This figure or index is called the MPS, or the “motivating potential score”.
Using all five core job characteristics, the formula for the MPS is:
MPS = (Skill variety + Task identity + Task significance)/3 X Autonomy X Feedback
The following propositions can be gleaned from the formula:
- If all five core job characteristics are high, there is a high probability that the worker will experience the three psychological states. This will naturally result to positive outcomes.
- In order for a job to be considered to have high motivating potential, at least one among Skill Variety, Task Identity and Task Significance) should also be high. However, it is a given that the job should also be high on both Autonomy and Feedback. A low score on any of the two will pull the MPS down.
- A low score on any one of the three does not automatically mean that the job will have a low motivating potential, since it could be offset by a high score on any of the other two.
Unfortunately, job redesign is not something that can be done overnight. There are several approaches that may be used, and one of the more popular and most acknowledged approaches is that one developed by J. Richard Hackman and Greg Oldham, and which was aptly called the “Job Characteristics Model”.
© Shutterstock.com | baranq
In this guide, we explore 1) the job characteristics theory and model and 2) how the job characteristics model can help with job enrichment.
THE JOB CHARACTERISTICS THEORY
Hackman and Oldham, both organizational psychologists, developed the job characteristics theory (JCT) and first introduced it in 1976 in the book “Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, Vol. 16, Issue 2”.
According to this theory, “job design has an effect on motivation, work performance, and job satisfaction.” It has served as a framework for management to identify how certain job characteristics affect the outcomes of the jobs.
In a more personal vein, it studies the various factors that make a specific job satisfying for the organization, and for the person doing the job. Therefore, it describes the relationship between job characteristics and the responses of individuals to work or the job being performed.
The Job Characteristics Theory identified five core job dimensions that prompt three psychological states which, in turn, lead to or have an effect on five work-related outcomes or results. As we move forward with the discussion, we will expound on these further.
Out of this theory, the Job Characteristics Model, which is still in full use today, was also introduced. Basically, this model specifies the conditions under which workers or individuals will be internally motivate to perform their jobs effectively.
THE JOB CHARACTERISTICS MODEL
The Job Characteristics Model was verified when Hackman and Oldham tested it on 658 employees, who are working in 62 different jobs in 7 different businesses or organizations. The results were deemed to be reliable and conclusive, which is the reason why it still holds a lot of weight today, despite the number of other job design theories introduced.
Take a look at the diagram of the Job Characteristics Model, as presented by Hackman and Oldham.
The Job Characteristics Model Hackman and Oldham
In order to get a full picture of the Job Characteristics Model, we have to go break down its composition: the five core job characteristics or dimensions, the five work-related outcomes, and the three psychological states.
Five Core Job Characteristics
Hackman and Oldham provided clear definitions on the five job dimensions or characteristics.
#1. Skill variety
This refers to the “degree to which a job requires a variety of different activities in carrying out the work, involving the use of a number of different skills and talents of a person”. Therefore, it follows that the individual will be required to develop a variety of talents and skills.
This area asks the number of skills and talents that the job requires of the person that will be working on it. A quick giveaway would be to assess whether the job is monotonous and repetitive or if it asks the worker to do a number of different tasks or actions.
Compare two individuals working two different jobs. Job A is pretty much elementary, with the tasks being performed in a routine and repetitive manner. It does not demand much skill or ability. Job B, on the other hand, is quite complex, requiring that the worker be in possession of several skills or abilities. Who, between the two workers, will have greater chances of experiencing meaningfulness in their jobs?
That’s correct. It’s the one working on Job B, since it requires variety in skills.
#2. Task identity
This is the “degree to which the job requires completion of a whole, identifiable piece of work; that is, doing a job from beginning to end with visible outcome”. This involves being able to work on an entire work process, rather than just on bits and pieces of it. Therefore, it is important to assess whether the job or task has a clearly defined beginning, middle and end.
Workers tend to find more meaning in their jobs when they can identify a complete and visible outcome at the end of the day, or of a work cycle. Let us say, for example, that two workers are involved in the same work process. Worker A is responsible for only a small part of the work, probably in the first phase. Worker B, on the other hand, is involved throughout the entire process.
Between the two, Worker B is more likely to find his job meaningful, because he can see a visible outcome, and he feels more involved in the completion of the process. For him, a job that he is able to complete, from beginning to end, seems more worthwhile, than simply working on Phase 1, then not having a hand on the rest of the process. In fact, he may not even be aware whether the process has been completed or not, because he is focused on his assigned phase of the process.
#3. Task significance
Task significance is said to be the “degree to which the job has a substantial impact on the lives of other people, whether those people are in the immediate organization or in the world at large”. The task – and the job – is significant if it can affect other people’s lives. And it should not just be the people within the organization, but even those outside.
For many, a job holds more meaning if it can help improve the well-being of other people (not just himself), whether physically, psychologically, or emotionally. Knowing that their job, and their performance thereof, has the capacity to have a positive impact on others will motivate them further to do better.
Individuals who put great stock on task significance are very keen on finding out whether the job that they are doing actually matters to other people. For them, meaning comes in the form of recognition by other people.
#4. Autonomy
This pertains to the “degree to which the job provides substantial freedom, independence, and discretion to the individual in scheduling the work and in determining the procedure to be used in carrying it out”.
Autonomy is often seen in positions with managerial, supervisorial and ministerial functions. Examples of jobs with high levels of autonomy are managers, team leaders, supervising officers, division and department heads, and senior management. These jobs tend to become more meaningful to the ones performing them because they feel greater personal responsibility for their own actions on the job.
But it’s not just limited to people in managerial positions. Even workers have a strong sense of personal responsibility if they are left to perform their tasks using their own efforts and initiatives, and they are allowed to make the decisions and call the shots.
They will definitely feel less of this autonomy if they are made to meekly follow the instructions of a supervisor, or adhere strictly to what a job procedures manual provides. This will not help them feel responsible for their actions at all.
#5. Feedback
Job feedback refers to the
“degree to which carrying out the work activities required by the job provides the individual with direct and clear information about the effectiveness of his or her performance”.
As much as possible, workers would like to be kept in the loop on their performance of the job. Not only will this keep them apprised of their progress as workers, it is also one way for them to boost their self-esteem. If they are told by their supervisors or managers that they are going a good job, they are likely to feel motivated to continue with how they are doing so far. In contrast, if they are told that they are not performing as expected, then they will respond accordingly and improve their performance.
If all five characteristics are lumped or combined together, we will be able to come up with a single figure or index that will act as the indicator of the overall motivating potential of the job being evaluated or redesigned. This index will essentially show the possibility or likelihood of a job affecting the attitudes and behaviors of the employee or worker.
This figure or index is called the MPS, or the “motivating potential score”.
Using all five core job characteristics, the formula for the MPS is:
MPS = (Skill variety + Task identity + Task significance)/3 X Autonomy X Feedback
The following propositions can be gleaned from the formula:
- If all five core job characteristics are high, there is a high probability that the worker will experience the three psychological states. This will naturally result to positive outcomes.
- In order for a job to be considered to have high motivating potential, at least one among Skill Variety, Task Identity and Task Significance) should also be high. However, it is a given that the job should also be high on both Autonomy and Feedback. A low score on any of the two will pull the MPS down.
- A low score on any one of the three does not automatically mean that the job will have a low motivating potential, since it could be offset by a high score on any of the other two.
