The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Causal inferences between participation in decision making, task attributes, work effort, rewards, job satisfaction and commitment
Abstract
Purpose: Regulatory frameworks in Australia encourage employee participation in decision making (PDM) on the basis that participation benefits work effort, job satisfaction and commitment. Although the literature supports this premise, there is little evidence that patterns of causal inference in the relationship are clearly understood. This study aims to examine for structural and causal inference between PDM and the work environment over time. Design/methodology/approach: Structural equation modeling was used to examine longitudinal, matched sample data for causal inferences. Findings: The paper finds that participation in decision making appears to promote job satisfaction and commitment, whereas task variety and work effort foster participation. Research limitations/implications: The use of quantitative, self report data, small samples and cross industry data as well as possible overlap between commitment foci may limit the transferability of the findings. It is also important to note causality is merely inferred. Practical implications: Although participation in decision making positively influences work effort, autonomy and commitment, practitioners need to be mindful of keeping a balance between employee and employer needs. Job satisfaction and commitment are at risk in the long term if participation is viewed merely as a survival strategy for coping with work effort and task variety. Originality/value: The paper examines inferred causality within a participative decision‐making framework and addresses the previously neglected need for multi‐site and longitudinal studies.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Brown, S. P., & Leigh, T. W. (1996) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.81.4.358 · Cited by 1,460
Structural equation modelling in perspective
Kelloway, E. K. (1995) · Journal of Organizational Behavior · doi:10.1002/job.4030160304 · Cited by 495
Ashmos, D. P., Duchon, D., & McDaniel, R. R. (1998) · Decision Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1998.tb01343.x · Cited by 112
Cited by
Job satisfaction and organizational commitment: An empirical investigation among ICT-SMEs
Valaei, N., & Rezaei, S. (2016) · Management Research Review · doi:10.1108/mrr-09-2015-0216 · Cited by 659
Employees’ prosocial behavioral intentions through empowerment in CSR decision-making
Tao, W., Song, B., Ferguson, M. A., & Kochhar, S. (2018) · Public Relations Review · doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2018.07.002 · Cited by 89
Metadata
- Authors
- Scott‐Ladd, B., Travaglione, A., & Marshall, V.
- Venue
- Leadership & Organization Development Journal
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2006-07-01
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 399-414
- ISSN
- 0143-7739 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2039424655
- Cited by
- 204
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 7.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.