Individual Competitiveness and Spontaneous Changes in Jobs

ABSTRACT This study is about the concept of spontaneous changes in jobs, in general, and the relationship of the changes to one's predisposition to competitiveness, in particular. The study adds to the research base of what is called job crafting as examined in the seminal work of Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2001). Frequency and types of job crafting activity are examined. INTRODUCTION Changes in work that are the subject of this paper are spontaneous changes made by individuals to satisfy their own needs. The changes may or may not benefit the organization in which they are employed and management has not initiated any of the changes. This study adds to the research base of what is called job crafting as represented in the seminal work of Wrzesniewski & Dutton (2001). They define job crafting as " the physical and cognitive changes individuals make in the task or relational boundaries of their work" (p. 179). In this work, the term job shaping is used in place of job crafting as the defining term. The term, job crafting, may suggest that a job is being radically changed, or re-invented. The term job shaping offers the meaning that people may have some opportunity to alter or modify parts of the job and changes are usually on a small scale. There is considerable evidence to demonstrate that job shaping does occur (Amabile, et al.,1994; Ilgen & Hollenbeck, 1992; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). While the general domains of job shaping are defined, there are few known particulars regarding frequency, type, and motivation regarding the activity. There is little evidence to support the idea that competitiveness, on an individual level, is a moderator of job shaping behavior. Intuitively, one may suppose that individuals who are moderately to highly competitive would seek opportunities to shape their work environments to enable success and achievement. We do not know with what frequency job shaping occurs. We have very little information about its bounds and limits, although we know it occurs because it has been observed and noted. Job shaping could result in improved performance that aligns with organizational objectives thus having a positive outcome for the organization. While Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2001) repeatedly state that job craning (shaping) is not necessarily performed in the service of the goals of the organization, all of the examples they cite make it clear that positive changes in performance and benefits to the organization accrue. They cite studies of several different occupational groups (hospital cleaners, hairdressers, design engineers, nurses, information technicians, and professional restaurant cooks) whose changed jobs benefited not only the employee by way of job satisfaction, work identity, or relationshipbuilding, and so on, but the organization as well through the provision of better services, processes, and/or products. In practical terms, there has been very little research directed at the shaping of jobs or work by employees, on their own. There has been no empirical research that explores the relationship of job changes with competitiveness. Of the research that does exist, much of it is of the observational variety where individuals in different organizations in various jobs were observed as they went about their various duties. Other research relied on interviews of employees where specific questions were asked about job duties, changes in duties, and special initiatives to change work practices. Research of these types is represented in the work of Benner, et al. (1996); Cohen & Sutton (1998); Fine (1996); Fletcher (1996); Jacques (1993); Krishnan, et al. (2002); and Morrison and Phelps (1999). There is research on job design and work design and that research is focused on the actions of managers and supervisors who initiate task and job changes to meet some particular need or deficiency (see, for example, Hackman & Oldham, 1980; Lyons, 2004). …