Editing Work design (section)

===Job characteristics model===
{{see also|Job characteristic theory}}
[[File:Call Centre.jpg|thumb|[[Call centre]] work is often characterised by restricted working conditions such as low autonomy, low task variety, and short task cycles.<ref name=":18">{{Cite journal|last1=Wegge|first1=Jürgen|last2=Van Dick|first2=Rolf|last3=Fisher|first3=Gary K.|last4=Wecking|first4=Christiane|last5=Moltzen|first5=Kai|date=March 2006|title=Work motivation, organisational identification, and well-being in call centre work|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02678370600655553|journal=Work & Stress|volume=20|issue=1|pages=60–83|doi=10.1080/02678370600655553|s2cid=144408378|issn=0267-8373}}</ref> Consequently, [[Turnover (employment)|turnover]] rates in call centres tend to be very high.<ref name=":18" />]]
Hackman & Oldham's (1976)<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last1=Hackman|first1=J.Richard|last2=Oldham|first2=Greg R.|date=August 1976|title=Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7|journal=Organizational Behavior and Human Performance|volume=16|issue=2|pages=250–279|doi=10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7|s2cid=8618462 |issn=0030-5073}}</ref> ''job characteristics model'' is generally considered to be the dominant motivational theory of work design.<ref name=":4" />  The model identifies five core job characteristics that affect five work-related [[Outcome (probability)|outcomes]] (i.e. [[motivation]], [[Contentment|satisfaction]], [[performance]], and [[absenteeism]] and [[Turnover (employment)|turnover]]) through three psychological states (i.e. experienced meaningfulness, experienced responsibility, and knowledge of results):<ref>{{cite journal|last=Hackman|first=J.Richard|author2=Oldham, Greg R.|date=August 1976|title=Motivation through the design of work: test of a theory|journal=Organizational Behavior and Human Performance|volume=16|issue=2|pages=250–279|doi=10.1016/0030-5073(76)90016-7|s2cid=8618462 }}</ref>

# '''Skill variety''' – The degree to which a job involves a variety of activities,  requiring the worker to develop a variety of skills and talents. Workers are more likely to have a more positive experience in jobs that require several different skills and abilities than when the jobs are elementary and routine.
# '''Task identity''' – The degree to which the job requires completion of a whole and identifiable piece of work with a clear outcome. Workers are more likely have a more positive experience in a job when they are involved in the entire process rather than just being responsible for a part of the work.
# '''Task significance''' – The degree to which a job has a substantial impact on the lives or work of others. Workers are more likely have a more positive experience in a job that substantially improves either psychological or physical [[well-being]] of others than a job that has limited effect on anyone else.
# '''Autonomy''' – The degree to which the job provides the employee with significant freedom, independence, and discretion to plan out the work and determine the procedures in the job. For jobs with a high level of autonomy, the outcomes of the work depend on the workers' own efforts, [[Popular initiative|initiative]]s, and decisions; rather than on the instructions from a manager or a manual of job procedures. In such cases, the jobholders experience greater personal responsibility for their own successes and failures at work.
# '''Feedback''' – The degree to which a job incumbent has [[knowledge of results]]. When workers receive clear, actionable information about their work performance, they have better overall knowledge of the effect of their work activities, and what specific actions they need to take (if any) to improve their productivity.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Hackman|first1=J. Richard|last2=Oldham|first2=Greg R.|date=1975|title=Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey.|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0076546|journal=Journal of Applied Psychology|volume=60|issue=2|pages=159–170|doi=10.1037/h0076546|issn=0021-9010}}</ref>
The central proposition of job characteristics theory - that is, that work characteristics affect attitudinal outcomes - is well established by meta analysis.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Humphrey|first1=Stephen E.|last2=Nahrgang|first2=Jennifer D.|last3=Morgeson|first3=Frederick P.|date=2007|title=Integrating motivational, social, and contextual work design features: A meta-analytic summary and theoretical extension of the work design literature.|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1332|journal=Journal of Applied Psychology|volume=92|issue=5|pages=1332–1356|doi=10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1332|pmid=17845089|issn=1939-1854}}</ref> However, some have criticized the use of job incumbents' perceptions to assess job characteristics, arguing that individuals' perceptions are constructions arising from social influences, such as the attitudes of their peers.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Daniels|first=Kevin|date=March 2006|title=Rethinking job characteristics in work stress research|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0018726706064171|journal=Human Relations|volume=59|issue=3|pages=267–290|doi=10.1177/0018726706064171|s2cid=145626625|issn=0018-7267}}</ref>

Job characteristics theory has been described as the logical conclusion of efforts to understand how work can satisfy basic human needs.<ref name=":6" /> The development of the job characteristics model was largely stimulated by [[Frederick Herzberg|Frederick Herzberg's]] [[Two-factor theory|two factor theory]] (also known as ''motivator-hygiene theory'').<ref name=":6" /> Although Herzberg's theory was largely discredited,<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Locke|first1=E. A.|last2=Henne|first2=D.|date=1986|title=Work motivation theories|journal=International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology|volume=1|pages=1–35}}</ref> the idea that intrinsic job factors impact motivation sparked an interest in the ways in which jobs could be enriched which culminated in the job characteristics model.<ref name=":6" />