Download - De Cuper i in. 2008-1
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
1/22
APPLIED PSYCHOLOGY: AN INTERNATIONAL REVIEW, 2008, 57
(3), 488509
doi: 10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00332.x
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology. Published by Blackwell Publishing, 9600 Garsington Road, Oxford OX4 2DQ,UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA.
Blackwell Publishing LtdOxford, UKAPPSApplied Psychology0269-994X0269-994X International Association for Applied Psychology, 2008XXXOriginal ArticlesEMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITYDE CUYPER ET AL.
Employability and Employees Well-Being:
Mediation by Job Insecurity
1
Nele De Cuyper*
Research Group Work, Organisational and Personnel Psychology,
K.U. Leuven, Belgium
Claudia Bernhard-Oettel and Erik Berntson
Stockholm University, Sweden
Hans De Witte and Barbara Alarco
Research Group Work, Organisational and Personnel Psychology,
K.U. Leuven, Belgium
The current studys aims are twofold: first, we investigate the relationship
between employability and both work-related (engagement) and general (lifesatisfaction) well-being. Second, we study how employability may be relevant intimes of high job insecurity. Specifically, we hypothesise (1) a positive relationshipbetween employability and employees well-being, (2) a negative relationshipbetween employability and job insecurity, and (3) a negative relationship between
job insecurity and employees well-being, so that (4) job insecurity mediatesthe relationship between employability and employees well-being. Results basedon a sample of 559 respondents from divisions of seven Belgian organisationssupport our hypotheses. We conclude that employability may be a means tosecure ones labour market position, rather than a means to cope with jobinsecurity.
Les objectifs de cette tude sont doubles: nous tudions dabord la relationentre lemployabilit et la fois le bien-tre relatif au travail (implication) etle bien-tre global (la satisfaction provenant de lexistence). Ensuite, nousnous interrogeons sur la pertinence de lemployabilit en priode de grande
* Address for correspondence: Nele De Cuyper, Research Group Work, Organisational and
Personnel Psychology, K.U. Leuven, Tiensestraat 102, 3000 Leuven, Belgium. Email: nele.decuyper
@psy.kuleuven.be
1
This research is part of the Psycones-project (PSYchological CONtracts across
Employment Situations) supported by a grant from the EU, 5th framework programme
(HPSE-CT-2002-00121). Further information about the project is available on the web-page
www.uv.es/~psycon. The first authors contribution was supported by a grant from the FWO
(Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek Vlaanderen), G.039505.
http://www.uv.es/~psyconhttp://www.uv.es/~psycon -
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
2/22
EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY
489
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
inscurit professionnelle. Plus prcisment, nous posons les hypothses 1)dune relation positive entre lemployabilit et le bien-tre des employs, 2)dune relation ngative entre lemployabilit et linscurit professionnelle
et 3) dune relation ngative entre linscurit professionnelle et le bien-tre dessalaris, si bien que 4) linscurit professionnelle rgule la relation entrelemployabilit et le bien-tre des salaris. Les rsultats issus dun chantillonde 559 rpondants provenant de dpartements de sept organisations belgesconfortent nos hypothses. On conclut que lemployabilit peut tre une faonde scuriser sa situation sur le march du travail plutt quun moyen pouraffronter linscurit professionnelle.
INTRODUCTION
Policy interventions in the realm of employability have concerned various
ways to strengthen the employees labour market position. Specifically, the
interest in employability dates back to the 1950s, when employability
interventions aimed at realising full employment by stimulating entry into
the labour market. Much effort was directed towards vulnerable groups like
youngsters, the long-term unemployed, or the disabled who experienced
difficulties in finding employment (Forrier & Sels, 2003a; McQuaid & Lindsay,
2005). More recently, employability policies have targeted the total working
population rather than disadvantaged minorities or the unemployed,
and they have addressed the problem of securing rather than finding
employment (European Commission, 1997; Kluytmans & Ott, 1999). This
was inspired by fundamental changes in the labour market, namely the rise in
feelings of job insecurity among the workers owing to mergers, downsizing,
and tight labour markets in general (Sparks, Faragher, & Cooper, 2001).
Two beliefs have inspired the revived interest in employability; namely (1)
that employability is beneficial for the workers (de Vries, Grndemann, &
Van Vuuren, 2001), and (2) that employability is relevant in the context of
the evolution towards more job insecurity (Brown, Hesketh, & Williams,
2003). However, to date, potential consequences of employability are mostly
evaluated in terms of labour market indicators, for example wages, employment
history, or voluntary turnover (De Grip, Van Loo, & Sanders, 2004). By
way of contrast, little research has concerned the association between
employability and employees well-being. Furthermore, no satisfactory
account has been provided for the potential importance of employability in
job insecurity research, except for speculation that employable workers are
less likely to perceive job insecurity.
In response to these shortcomings, it is the intent of this study to investigate
(1) the association between employability and employees well-being, and
(2) job insecurity as a potentially important mediator of this relationship.
As regards employees well-being, we select engagement (i.e. a positive,
work-related state of mind that is typically characterised by vigour, dedication,
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
3/22
490
DE CUYPER ET AL.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
and absorption; Schaufeli & Bakker, 2001, 2004) and life satisfaction to
reflect work-related and general well-being, respectively.
EMPLOYABILITY AND WELL-BEING
All employability definitions refer to the individuals ability to make labour
market transitions (Brown et al., 2003; Forrier & Sels, 2003a; Hillage &
Pollard, 1998; McQuaid & Lindsay, 2005). This ability results from the
individuals know-how, skills, knowledge of the labour market, and
adaptability (Defillipi & Arthur, 1994; De Grip et al., 2004; de Vries et al.,
2001; Van Dam, 2004). It has traditionally been assessed using objective
indicators of an individuals labour market position, such as education,
training, or occupational position (Elman & ORand, 2002; Forrier & Sels,
2003a, 2003b; Van Dam, 2004; Virtanen, Kivimki, Virtanen, Elovainio, &
Vahtera, 2003; Worth, 2002). Recently, however, authors have developed
subjective indicators of employability with roots in research on perceived
ease of movement, as originally proposed by March and Simon (1958);
namely the individuals perception of the available alternatives in the
internal and/or external labour market. Along these lines, Berntson and
colleagues (Berntson & Marklund, 2007; Berntson, Sverke, & Marklund,
2006) define employability as the individuals perception of his or her
possibilities to achieve a new job. For the present study, we adopt this
definition of employability based upon arguments that, particularly when
aiming at investigating employees well-being, subjective indicators may
more accurately capture the interplay between contextual and individual
factors, which are key components in all employability models (e.g. Forrier
& Sels, 2003a; Trevor, 2001).
Employability is likely to relate favourably to employees job-related and
general well-being. First, employability may promote feelings of being in
control of ones career, which, in turn, relate to well-being (Fugate, Kinicki,
& Ashforth, 2004; Marler, Barringer, & Milkovich, 2002). For example,
Berntson and colleagues (Berntson, Bernhard-Oettel, & De Cuyper, 2007;
Berntson & Marklund, 2007) speculate that employability may reduce the
fear of becoming unemployed with likely favourable results. In this interpre-
tation, employability provides workers with choices and alternatives that
may make them less vulnerable in times of economic recession.
Second, Trevor (2001) and Pfeffer (1998) theorise that employable
persons are likely to quit jobs that are not rewarding or not satisfying; rather
than feeling locked in jobs they do not like (Aronsson & Gransson, 1999),
employable workers may act upon their perception that there are other and
potentially better alternatives to engage in job search behaviour. This could
imply that they eventually end up in jobs of good quality, which are known
to promote well-being.
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
4/22
EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY
491
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
Third, employability has been portrayed as a key indicator of the new
psychological contract that exists between employers and employees; in
particular, under the new psychological contract, employees commit to high
performance and flexibility in exchange for organisational support in
promoting employability and facilities to exploit employability (Atkinson,
2002; De Vries et al., 2001; Forrier & Sels, 2003b; Hiltrop, 1995; Kluytmans
& Ott, 1999; Sullivan, 1999; Van Buren, 2003). Leading scholars suggest
that this type of psychological contract will become increasingly important
(Anderson & Schalk, 1998; Coyle-Shapiro & Kessler, 2002; Kluytmans &
Ott, 1999; Koh & Yer, 2000; Millward & Brewerton, 2000; Rousseau, 1995),
and that it parallels the evolution from paternalistic employment relationships
to partnerships in which employability is a shared responsibility of employer
and employee, and in which both parties aim at a balanced exchange. This,
in turn, has been related to well-being (De Cuyper, Rigotti, De Witte, &
Mohr, 2008; Koh & Yer, 2000; Shore & Barksdale, 1998; Tsui, Pearce,
Porter, & Tripoli, 1997).
A related issue concerns the importance of employability in the post-
industrial knowledge society (Szab & Ngyesi, 2005), where the continuous
updating of knowledge is a critical asset to remain competitive in the
globalised market. Plausibly, employees just as employers may be aware
of this development (Griffeth, Steel, Allen, & Bryan, 2005). Employees who
are familiar with the newest technology, the so-called intellectual
capital (Butler & Waldroop, 1999, p. 152), may evaluate themselves as
being highly employable, and they may feel capable of dealing with
contemporary and future developments, including the shift towards the
new psychological contract, which is likely to promote well-being. By way
of contrast, individuals who do not have a unique mix of relevant experiences,
updated skills and knowledge, and large social networks may feel low
employability (Griffeth et al., 2005), and they may depend heavily on their
present employer while at the same time realising that the era of lifelong
employment in one company has come to an end. This, in turn, may stimulate
feelings of job insecurity, and thus, poor well-being (De Witte, 1999, 2005,
2006).
However, to date, there has been little analysis of the relationship
between employability and well-being, with the exception of the longitudinal
study by Berntson and Marklund (2007) among a representative sample of
Swedish employees. The authors establish that employability is associated with
general health and mental well-being when controlled for health status or
mental well-being at time 1. In keeping with this evidence, our first hypo-
thesis reads as follows:
Hypothesis 1
: Employability relates positively to engagement (H1a) and life
satisfaction (H1b).
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
5/22
492
DE CUYPER ET AL.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY
Employability is often mentioned in association with job insecurity (Gallie,
White, Cheng, & Tomlinson, 1998; Sverke & Hellgren, 2002). Like employability,
job insecurity has been measured with objective and subjective indicators
(Bssing, 1999). However, unlike in employability research, the subjective
job insecurity interpretation has clearly dominated many of the earlier and
recent writings. In line with this literature, we define job insecurity as the
employees perceptions about potential involuntary job loss (see e.g. De
Witte, 1999, 2005, 2006; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 1984; Heany, Israel, &
House, 1994; Sverke, Hellgren, & Nswall, 2002; Van Vuuren, 1990).
Employability has been portrayed as a potential antecedent of job
insecurity (Berntson et al., 2007; Forrier & Sels, 2003b; Sverke et al., 2002):
high-employable compared with low-employable workers may be less likely
to perceive job insecurity. This can be understood alongside assumptions
formulated in theories on labour market use, such as the Flexible Firm
Model (Atkinson, 1984) or Dual Labour Market Theory (Doeringer &
Piore, 1971): employers may offer the most secure jobs to attract and retain
highly valuable workers, who would easily find alternative employment in
the case of undesirable working conditions. For example, Schaufeli (1992)
establishes that less educated workers are more likely to be employed in
insecure jobs than highly educated workers, and thus, they may be more
likely to perceive job insecurity. In this case, educational level might be a
proxy of employability (Elman & ORand, 2002; Forrier & Sels, 2003a; Van
Dam, 2004; Virtanen et al., 2003; Worth, 2002). Arguments expressed in
Human Capital Theory (Becker, 1993) may lead to similar predictions:
those with a strong labour market position, such as high-employable workers,
expect a return on their earlier investments. These revenues are mostly
described in terms of wage increases. However, employees decisions may be
monitored by non-financial motives as well (Brown et al., 2003; Marler
et al., 2002), for example by motives related to reduced job insecurity. This
aligns with the study by Worth (2002), who concludes that employees are
committed to the ideal of long-term secure employment as a return for
human capital investments. In sum, these theories suggest that perceptions of
reduced job insecurity in high-employable workers result from employment
in objectively secure jobs.
Another potentially useful theoretical framework to explain the relationship
between employability and reduced job insecurity is the Appraisal Theory
as advanced by Lazarus and Folkman (1984; Berntson & Marklund,
2007). Employable workers may interpret the contemporary labour market
and turbulent economic times favourably as a challenge rather than as a
threat, which, in turn, could imply that they are less likely to perceive job
insecurity. By way of contrast, low-employable workers cannot rely upon
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
6/22
EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY
493
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
such coping mechanisms: for them, labour market changes or organisational
turbulence present a threat with likely higher job insecurity as a conse-
quence. This aligns with the study by Berntson et al. (2007), who show that
organisational changes predict job insecurity, particularly in workers who
do not feel employable. Thus, we hypothesise the following:
Hypothesis 2
: Employability relates negatively to job insecurity.
As regards potential consequences, job insecurity has been highlighted as
perhaps one of the most important stressors in contemporary working life: job
insecurity may cause stress reactions owing to feelings of uncontrollability
and unpredictability (Dekker & Schaufeli, 1995; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt,
1984; Van Vuuren, 1990), potential frustration of needs related to socialparticipation and recognition, and the potential loss of financial resources
(Jahoda, 1982). More recently, job insecurity has been described as a severe
breach of the old psychological contract that still dominates an important
contingent of workers, and that fosters employees loyalty through the
employers provision of job security (De Cuyper & De Witte, 2006, 2007;
De Witte & Nswall, 2003). Such breaches predict poor well-being
(Lambert, Edwards, & Cable, 2003; Rousseau, 1995).
A wealth of literature has provided support for the relationship between
job insecurity and poor well-being (for review studies, see e.g. De Witte,1999, 2005, 2006; Sverke et al., 2002). For example, job insecurity predicts
job dissatisfaction (Ashford, Lee, & Bobko, 1989; Heany et al., 1994; Lim,
1997). Likewise, job insecurity has been related to poor psychological
well-being (Burchell, 1992; Van Vuuren, Klandermans, Jacobson, & Hartley,
1991). Furthermore, longitudinal studies suggest that job insecurity is more
likely to cause poor well-being than vice versa (Ferrie, Shipley, Marmot,
Stansfeld, & Smith, 1998; Hellgren & Sverke, 2003; Nelson, Cooper, &
Jackson, 1995). In keeping with this evidence, we hypothesise the following:
Hypothesis 3
: Job insecurity relates negatively to engagement (H3a) and life
satisfaction (H3b).
Hypotheses 1 to 3 are summarised in Figure 1. Obviously, this pattern of
assumptions encourages thinking within a mediation framework.
Specifically, the relationship between employability and well-being (H1)
might be mediated by job insecurity. Other conditions for mediation are
that employability relates to job insecurity (H2), and that job insecurity
relates to well-being (H3).This assumption of mediation will be investigatedin Hypothesis 4, as follows:
Hypothesis 4
: The relationship between employability and engagement (H4a)
and life satisfaction (H4b) is mediated by job insecurity.
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
7/22
494
DE CUYPER ET AL.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
A potential criticism may concern the possibility of reversed causation.
In this respect, Berntson and Marklund (2007) have established that
employability is related to subsequent health (Hypothesis 1). Also, firm
causal evidence has been reported for the relationship between job insecurity
and well-being (Ferrie et al., 1998; Hellgren & Sverke, 2003; Nelson et al.,
1995, hypothesis 3), thus making reversed causation unlikely. However, causality
still needs to be demonstrated for the relationship between employability
and job insecurity: instead of our assumption that employability is an
antecedent of job insecurity, it could be argued that job insecurity predicts low
employability, which, in turn, associates with unfavourable outcomes. For
example, employers may be inclined to offer training opportunities only to
workers in the most secure jobs, which may increase these workers employ-
ability (Virtanen et al., 2003; Wiens-Tuers & Hill, 2002). The employers motives
in this case may concern guarantees that training costs are recovered in
terms of future and long-term productivity. However, research shows that
employers tend to finance company-specific rather than general training
(Forrier & Sels, 2003b), which may relate to the employers wish to reduce
turnover among trained workers (Groot & Maassen-Van der Brink, 2000).
Accordingly, while employers training investments may increase mobility
and promotion chances within the company, it may in fact limit external
mobility for those in secure jobs. This suggests that job security may not
lead to employability, at least not when employability is defined as in the
context of this study, namely as the perceived chance of achieving a new job.
METHOD
Data Collection and Respondents
In the spring of 2004, divisions from seven Belgian companies agreed to
participate in a survey on the quality of working life, yielding a total sample
FIGURE 1. Summary of hypotheses: Mediation of the relationship between
employability and well-being by job insecurity.
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
8/22
EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY
495
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
size of 559: one industrial setting (
N
=
257; 46.0%) with a response rate of
87.6 per cent, and six smaller retail organisations (
N
=
302; 54.0%) with
response rates varying between 33 per cent and 58 per cent in five out of six
organisations. The response rate was somewhat lower in one retail organisation
(20.8%), probably because this organisation did not have a Human Resources
department to actively support the research goals. Organisations as well as
sectors were recruited based on possibilities for generalising findings, and
on expected variation in levels of employability and job insecurity. The
participants completed confidential questionnaires during working time,
either during group sessions facilitated by the researchers or individually,
or, if preferred, at home. The questionnaire was accompanied by a letter
from the Human Resources manager or the general manager, stressing
confidentiality, voluntary participation, as well as the importance of the study
for all parties involved. Feedback on the research results was provided to all
companies, mostly in group sessions in which respondents could participate.
A total of 27.5 per cent (N= 154) of the respondents were employed on
a fixed-term employment contract, while 72.5 per cent (N = 405) were
permanently employed. About one respondent in three (34.4%; N = 185)
reported being employed as a white-collar worker. The remaining of 353
respondents (65.6%) were blue-collar workers. On average, respondents had
been employed for 10 years (SD= 9.42) in their current company, and they
worked 31 hours per week (SD= 9.7). Mean age was 34 years (SD= 10.22).
More women (64.7%; N= 355) than men (35.3%; N= 194) participated. A
minority reported being single (32.7%; N= 178). The others were married
or cohabiting (67.3%; N= 367), and 22.3 per cent (N= 119) of the sample
continued education beyond high school level.
Measures
All scales reported in this section were used and validated in earlier research
in many employment settings and with various types of workers (for
more information, see Clinton, Guest, Budjanovcanin, Stainvarts, Krausz,
Bernhard, Bellaagh, Isaksson, Rigotti, Mohr, De Cuyper, De Witte, Claes,
De Jong, Schalk, Silla, Cabbaler, Gracia, Ramos, & Peir, 2005; Isaksson,
Bernhard, Claes, De Witte, Guest, Krausz, Peir, Mohr, & Schalk, 2003;
Rigotti, Mohr, De Cuyper, De Witte, Bernhard, Isaksson, de Jong, Schalk,
Caballer, Gracia, Peir, Ramos, Clinton, Guest, Krausz, & Staynvarts,
2003). Confirmatory Factor Analysis supported single-factor structures with
good fit for all scales. Information about means, standard deviations, and
correlations between scales is reported in Table 1.
Employability was measured with four items which were developed by De
Witte (2000). Respondents had to indicate their agreement with items such
as I am confident that I could quickly get a similar job or I am optimistic
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
9/22
2008The
Authors.Journalcompilation
2008InternationalAssociation
ofApplied
Psychology.
TABLE 1
Means, Standard Deviations, and Correlations between Scales (listwise
M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Employability 2.81 .97 1
2. Job insecurity 2.44 .88 .14** 1
3. Engagement 3.79 1.11 .08 .18** 1
4. Life satisfaction 5.48 1.04 .13** .20** .30** 1
5. Industry .44 .50 .05 .33** .13** .04 16. Tenure 10.43 9.46 .31** .25** .04 .08 .10* 1
7. Working hours 31.19 9.84 .02 .15** .02 .01 .52** .11* 1
8. Training 13.94 33.64 .09 .03 .03 .01 .07 .04
9. Permanent .72 .45 .09 .42** .14** .06 .04 .56**
10. Male .35 .48 .17** .05 .03 .06 .15** .07
11. Academic .22 .42 .05 .11* .01 .06 .33** .14**
12. Married .67 .47 .13** .27** .03 .09* .03 .37**
* p< .05; **p< .01.
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
10/22
EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY 497
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
that I would find another job if I looked for one (1 = strongly disagree;
5 = strongly agree). Reliability equalled .90 (N= 532, 2= 7.17, df= 2,
p< .05; GFI = .99; AGFI = .97; RMSEA = .09).
Perceived job insecurity was measured using four items (De Witte, 2000).
Sample items were I feel insecure about the future of my job and I think
I might lose my job in the near future. Respondents had to indicate their
agreement on a scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Reliability
equalled .86 (N= 531, 2= 9.30, df= 2, p< .01; GFI = .99; AGFI = .95;
RMSEA = .07). As job insecurity and employability were potentially
overlapping, we calculated their discriminant validity. The CFA showed a
better fit for the two-factor model as compared with the single-factor model
(N= 523, 2= 60.74, df= 19,p< .001; GFI = .97; AGFI = .95; RMSEA = .07).
Well-Being. Engagement was measured using the dimensions vigour
and dedication of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (Schaufeli & Bakker,
2003). These dimensions have been found to represent the core aspects of
engagement (Schaufeli & Bakker, 2001, 2004; Storm & Rothman, 2003).
The scale included 10 items (e.g. I am enthusiastic about my job) with
responses varying from 1 (never) to 6 (always). Reliability was high (= .95;
N= 542, 2= 155.72, df= 30,p< .001; GFI = .95; AGFI = .90; RMSEA =
.092). Life satisfaction was measured with six items (Isaksson et al., 2003).
A sample item was How satisfied do you currently feel about your leisure
time? Responses varied from 1 (very dissatisfied) to 7 (very satisfied).
Reliability equalled .87 (N= 542, 2= 47.20, df= 9, p< .001; GFI = .97;
AGFI = .93; RMSEA = .09).
Control Variables. In order to rule out alternative explanations,
important work-related variables as well as demographics were controlled
for. These variables were identified in earlier research as potentially impor-
tant confounders when employability and/or job insecurity are concerned
(for employability, see e.g. Berntson et al., 2006; Forrier & Sels, 2003a; for
job insecurity, see e.g. Kinnunen & Ntti, 1994; Mauno & Kinnunen, 2002;
Nswall & De Witte, 2003). As respects work-related variables, we controlled
for sector (0 = retail; 1 = industry), tenure (years), weekly working hours
(average hours per week), training (hours per year), and contract type
(temporary, fixed term contract = 0; permanent, open-ended contract = 1).
As respects demographics, the following controls were included: gender (0
2 Unlike with the other scales, this model included five error variance between items for
which the wording was similar.
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
11/22
498 DE CUYPER ET AL.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
= female; 1 = male), education (0 = no academic degree; 1 = academic degree),
and family status (0 = single; 1 = married or cohabiting). We did not control
for occupational position (blue-collar versus white-collar) because of its
high association with sector (r=.65, p< .001). Similarly, we did not con-
trol for age, because of its high correlation with tenure (r = .74, p< .001).
However, we ran analyses using age and occupational position instead of
tenure and sector. As the results did not change significantly, we decided to
use one variable from each pair.
Analyses
The hypotheses were tested using hierarchical regression analyses, following
recommendations by Baron and Kenny (1986) for testing mediation. List-
wise deletion was applied in all analyses, which resulted in slightly smaller
samples. Conditional for mediation was (1) that employability was related
to engagement and life satisfaction (Hypothesis 1); (2) that employability
was related to job insecurity (Hypothesis 2), and (3) that job insecurity was
related to engagement and life satisfaction (Hypothesis 3). To investigate
conditions 1 and 3, the control variables were entered in the first step,
employability in the second step, and job insecurity in the third step. To
investigate condition 2 on the relationship between employability and job
insecurity, we regressed the control variables (step 1) and employability
(step 2) on job insecurity. Evidence for mediation was found when employ-
ability had a smaller or non-significant relationship with the outcomes when
introducing job insecurity (regression equation described in condition 3)
as compared to the regression equation in which job insecurity was not
introduced (regression equation described in condition 1). When the regression
was indicative for a mediator effect, the Sobel test (Sobel, 1982) was used
to assess the extent to which job insecurity carried the effect of employability
on the outcome variables.
RESULTS
To test Hypothesis 1 on the association between employability and well-
being, we inspected the second step of the regression analyses shown in
Table 2. Employability added in explaining variance in both engagement
(H1a) and life satisfaction (H1b): specifically, employability was positively
related to engagement and life satisfaction, in keeping with Hypothesis 1.
However, the variance that could be explained by employability was rather
small, namely .01 for engagement and .04 for life satisfaction.
Hypothesis 2 concerned the relationship between employability and job
insecurity. Table 3 summarises the corresponding regression analyses.
Employability was negatively associated with job insecurity, meaning that
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
12/22
EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY 499
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
high-employable compared with low-employable workers were less likely to
feel insecure. This supported Hypothesis 2.
In Hypothesis 3, we predicted that job insecurity would relate to poor
well-being. This was supported for engagement (H3a) and life satisfaction
TABLE 2
Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analyses: Predicting Engagement and Life
Satisfaction
Engagement (N= 484) Life satisfaction (N= 484)
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 1 Step 2 Step 3
Industry .23*** .23*** .15** .09 .10 .18**
Tenure .08 .12* .09 .10 .05 .08
Working hours .16** .17** .20*** .03 .02 .02
Training .02 .01 .00 .01 .02 .03
Permanent .26*** .27*** .37*** .05 .06 .17**
Male .01 .03 .04 .05 .08 .09
Academic .05 .05 .07 .08 .09 .06Married .10 .10 .06 .16** .16** .12*
Employability .10* .05 .14** .08
Job insecurity .28*** .31***
R2 .07 .08 .13 .04 .05 .11
R2 .07*** .01* .05*** .04* .02** .06***
* p< .05; ** p< .01; *** p< .001.
TABLE 3Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analyses: Predicting Job Insecurity
Job insecurity (N= 484)
Step 1 Step 2
Industry .28*** .28***
Tenure .03 .10
Working hours .12* .11
Training .05 .04Permanent .39*** .36***
Male .07 .04
Academic .06 .07
Married .14* .14**
Employability .19***
R2 .33 .36
R2 .33*** .03***
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
13/22
500 DE CUYPER ET AL.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
(H3b), as shown in the third step of the regression analyses shown in Table 2;
specifically, job insecurity was related to reduced engagement and life
dissatisfaction.
Finally, we investigated possible mediation of the relationship between
employability and well-being by job insecurity (H4). Support for Hypotheses 1
to 3 was conditional for mediation. In addition, we established that the
relationship between employability and engagement was no longer significant
when introducing job insecurity in the regression analyses. Similarly,
employability did not contribute to explaining life satisfaction when adding
job insecurity. Moreover, the Sobel test suggested that the drop in regression
weights was substantial for both engagement (z= 3.31, p< .001) and life
satisfaction (z= 3.44,p< .001). This suggested that the relationship between
employability and well-being is mediated by job insecurity, as predicted
in Hypothesis 4.
The control variables added significantly in predicting engagement, life
satisfaction, and job insecurity. In particular, employment in the industrial
compared with in the retail sector, and permanent compared with temporary
employment, were negatively related to engagement. Weekly working hours
were positively related to engagement. Being married or cohabiting was
positively related to life satisfaction. Job insecurity was associated with
working in the industrial versus in the retail sector, weekly working hours,
temporary compared with permanent employment, and being married or
cohabiting versus being single.
DISCUSSION
The present study aimed to advance understanding about the psychological
correlates of employability. Recent literature has focused upon potential
consequences of employability in terms of labour market positioning and
organisational productivity. In contrast, this study examined the relationship
between employability and employees work-related (engagement) and
general (life satisfaction) well-being under control of a range of work-related
variables (e.g. sector, training) and demographics (e.g. education) that have
been assigned a critical role in studies in the realm of employability
research. In keeping with results reported by Berntson and Marklund
(2007), we established that employability was associated with well-being:
employability was positively related to engagement (H1a) and life satisfaction
(H1b). The latter may represent an ultimate outcome (Sverke et al., 2002),
that is, an outcome outside the workplace, which suggests that employability
may be a powerful predictor. Still, not much variance could be attributed
to employability, possibly because well-being is a fairly broad concept that
is predicted by many other variables, or because employability prevents the
development of negative experiences, such as unemployment or feelings of
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
14/22
EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY 501
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
being locked-in. This idea of employability as a prevention tool does not
imply strong favourable correlates; employability may have the potential to
reduce negative feelings rather than to induce positive feelings.
Another aim of this study was to situate employability within the context
of increased levels of job insecurity. We argued that employability may
relate negatively to job insecurity (H2): high-employable workers may feel
more secure, possibly because they choose the most secure jobs out of many
alternatives (Human Capital Theory), because they are offered such jobs
(Dual Labour Market Theory; Flexible Firm Model), or because they interpret
turbulent times as challenging rather than as threatening (Appraisal
Theory). Evidence for this assumption was provided in our data. This
observation underlined our earlier speculation that employability may
prevent the development of undesirable experiences: general favourable
beliefs about future employment prospects may positively affect employees
perception about the future of their current job.
Taking this one step further, we draw upon job insecurity literature to
predict an association between job insecurity and poor well-being (H3; see e.g.
De Witte, 1999, 2005, 2006; Sverke et al., 2002). As expected, job insecurity
was negatively related to engagement (H3a) and life satisfaction (H3b), even
to the extent that employability was no longer a significant predictor. This
implied that the relationship between employability and well-being was
mediated by job insecurity (H4), so that highly employable workers feel less
job insecure, which, in turn, associates with well-being. Conversely, low-
employable workers are likely to feel insecure about the future of their jobs,
which, in turn, relates to poor well-being. Altogether, this suggests that
employability relates to well-being because it is a means to secure jobs, in
line with earlier speculations by Worth (2002).
Support for this mediation framework is most innovative in the realm of
employability research: it provides an alternative to earlier studies that have
considered employability as a potential moderator of the relationship
between job insecurity and the outcomes. The idea of employability as a
moderator was originally proposed by Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt (1984),
and it was further developed by scholars such as Fugate et al. (2004),
Nswall (2004, 2005), and Sverke and Hellgren (2002). These authors think
of employability as an appropriate coping resource when confronted with
job insecurity, or otherwise, employability may buffer likely unfavourable
outcomes of job insecurity. This has been demonstrated in some studies,
where the interaction term between employability and job insecurity adds in
explaining variance in psychosomatic complaints (Bssing, 1999; Mohr,
2000), distress (Bssing, 1999), and depression (Kuhnert & Vance, 1992).
However, other studies did not establish the hypothesised interaction effects
on well-being indicators such as anxiety (Kuhnert & Vance, 1992; Mohr,
2000) and job satisfaction (Bssing, 1999). This study provides a potential
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
15/22
502 DE CUYPER ET AL.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
explanation for the absence of interaction effects between employability and
job insecurity: specifically, employability and job insecurity may relate
differently to well-being; namely through mediation rather than moderation
mechanisms. An important question to be addressed in future research then
is how and under which conditions mediation or moderation mechanisms
operate. In either case, however, employability is important for the workers
well-being, either because it represents a means to secure jobs in the case of
mediation, or because it buffers potential negative consequences of job
insecurity in the case of moderation.
Finally, our results could be important for practitioners, and they may
have implications beyond employees well-being. The observation that
employable workers are less likely to perceive job insecurity may provide
employers with ample opportunities to create a loyal workforce, given the
firm association between job security and organisational commitment and
reduced turnover intention (De Witte, 1999, 2005, 2006; Sverke et al., 2002).
Specifically, employers may engage in promoting employability through
company-provided training as a strategy to reduce concerns about potential
job loss, and as a signal of excellent entrepreneurship (Kluytmans & Ott,
1999; de Vries et al., 2001). This may associate with favourable attitudes
towards the organisation; unlike earlier speculations that turnover among
valued employees is perhaps the most important drawback of employability
(De Grip et al., 2004; Elman & ORand, 2002). Accordingly, the association
between employability and organisational outcomes could be a potentially
fruitful avenue for future research.
Limitations
There were some limitations inherent to this study. First, the cross-sectional
design did not allow for causal interpretations. In particular, feeling
employable may be conditional upon employees health and well-being.
However, the longitudinal study by Berntson and Marklund (2007) dem-
onstrates that employability relates to subsequent health. Similarly, research
in the realm of job insecurity has convincingly shown that job insecurity is
more likely to cause poor well-being than vice versa. Also, based on theoretical
arguments, we are inclined to hypothesise that employability reduces job
insecurity. Still, a longitudinal design could further strengthen our conclusions
(see e.g. Chen, Matthews, Spector, & Barnes-Farrell, 2006).
A second limitation concerned sample restrictions: for example, our sample
included a fairly large share of blue-collar workers and temporary workers,
and only a minority of respondents followed academic education. This may
suggest that our sample was not highly employable, given earlier studies on
potential antecedents of employability. Still, we sampled organisations in
different sectors, namely industry and retail, which are known to differ in
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
16/22
EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY 503
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
job insecurity and employability. They may imply good possibilities for
generalising findings. However, future research may want to replicate our
results using other samples.
Third, we relied on employees perceptions to assess employability, job
insecurity, as well as well-being. Hence, common method variance may have
influenced the correlations. A related issue may concern the idea that
relationships between variables such as employability, job insecurity, and
well-being are influenced by personality factors, most notably positive or
negative affectivity or self-efficacy. To date, there is considerable debate on
the magnitude of possible inflation of relationships owing to common method
variance (Crampton & Wagner, 1994; Spector, 1987) or personality (for a
review of studies on this issue, see Podsakoff, Mackenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff,
2003). With respect to self-efficacy, recent evidence suggests that employability
and self-efficacy are clearly distinct constructs (Berntson, Sverke, Nswall,
& Hellgren, 2006). However, to reduce potential risks on common method
variance, we followed many of the suggestions on questionnaire design
formulated by Podsakoff et al. (2003; e.g. changes in the response format,
anonymity, instructing the participants that there are no right or wrong
answers). Furthermore, with respect to statistical techniques to inspect the
possibility of common method variance, we performed the so-called
Harmans single-factor test (in Podsakoff et al., 2003): we loaded all
variables into an exploratory factor analyses. The factor solution suggested
four factors, which reflected the key constructs in this paper, namely,
employability, job insecurity, engagement, and life satisfaction. The fact that
there was no single factor or a general factor accounting for the majority of
the variance may indicate that common method variance may not explain
the pattern of results in this study.3
Concluding Remarks
The current study addressed two topical themes of the contemporary labour
market, namely employability and job insecurity. Furthermore, it added to
earlier research in at least two ways. First, we investigated the relationship
between employability and employees well-being, where earlier studies are
concerned with the association between employability and labour market
outcomes. In this respect, we demonstrated that employability relates to
employees well-being. This implies that employability may not only be a
labour market instrument to increase wages or to promote organisational
3 We were unable to perform more advanced techniques to control for common method
variance such as partial correlation procedures (Podsakoff et al., 2003) owing to the limited
sample size.
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
17/22
504 DE CUYPER ET AL.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
functioning, but that it can also be used as a human resource instrument to
advance well-being at work as well as outside work.
Second, we advanced a framework in which job insecurity mediates the
relationship between employability and employees well-being, where other
authors interpreted employability as a moderator of the relationship
between job insecurity and employees well-being. In this respect, our results
suggested that highly employable workers are more likely to perceive their
jobs as secure, which, in turn, relates positively to well-being. We would like
to invite researchers to further explore possible consequences of employability
for employees as well as their organisations, and to investigate the conditions
under which mediation or moderation mechanisms occur.
REFERENCES
Anderson, N., & Schalk, R. (1998). The psychological contract in retrospect and
prospect. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19, 637647.
Aronsson, G., & Gransson, S. (1999). Permanent employment but not in a preferred
occupation: Psychological and medical aspects, research implications. Journal of
Occupational Health Psychology, 4(2), 152163.
Ashford, S.J., Lee, C., & Bobko, P. (1989). Content, causes and consequences of job
insecurity: A theory-based measure and substantive test. Academy of Manage-
ment Journal, 32, 803829.
Atkinson, C. (2002). Career management and the changing psychological contract.
Career Development International, 7(1), 1423.
Atkinson, J. (1984). Manpower strategies for flexible organizations. Personnel
Management, August, 2831.
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderatormediator variable distinction
in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 11731182.
Becker, G.S. (1993). Human capital: A theoretical and empirical analysis with special
reference to education. Chicago, IL: National Bureau of Economic Research, TheUniversity of Chicago Press.
Berntson, E., Bernhard-Oettel, C., & De Cuyper, N. (2007). The moderating role of
employability in the relationship between organizational changes and job insecurity.
Paper presented at the 13th European Congress of Work and Organizational
Psychology, 912 May, Stockholm.
Berntson, E., & Marklund, S. (2007). The relationship between employability and
subsequent health. Work & Stress,21(3), 279292.
Berntson, E., Sverke, M., & Marklund, S. (2006). Predicting perceived employability:
Human capital or labour market opportunities? Economic and Industrial
Democracy,27, 223244.Berntson, E., Sverke, M., Nswall, K., & Hellgren, J. (2006). The relationship
between self-efficacy and employability. Poster presented at the 7th Conference
of the European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology, 810 November,
Dublin, Ireland.
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
18/22
EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY 505
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
Brown, P., Hesketh, A., & Williams, S. (2003). Employability in a knowledge-driven
society. Journal of Education and Work, 16(2), 107126.
Burchell, B. (1992). Towards a social psychology of the labour market: Or why we
need to understand the labour market before we can understand unemployment.Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 65(4), 345354.
Bssing, A. (1999). Can control at work and social support moderate psychological
consequences of job insecurity? Results from a quasi-experimental study in the
steel industry. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8, 219
242.
Butler, T., & Waldroop, J. (1999). Job sculpting: The art of retaining your best
people. Harvard Business Review, SeptemberOctober.
Chen, P., Matthews, R.A., Spector, P.E., & Barnes-Farrell, J.L. (2006). Statistical
control: Challenges and suggestions for future research in occupational health
psychology. Paper presented at the 7th Conference of the European Academy of
Occupational Health Psychology.
Clinton, M., Guest, D., Budjanovcanin, A., Stainvarts, N., Krausz, M., Bernhard, C.,
Bellaagh, K., Isaksson, K., Rigotti, T., Mohr, G., De Cuyper, N., De Witte, H.,
Claes, R., De Jong, J., Schalk, R., Silla, I., Cabbaler, A., Gracia, F., Ramos, J., &
Peir, J.M. (2005). Investigating individual and organizational determinants of
the psychological contract: Data collection and analysis. Unpublished working
document, Kings College, London.
Coyle-Shapiro, J.A.M., & Kessler, I. (2002). Contingent and non-contingent working
in local government: Contrasting psychological contracts. Public Administration,
80(1), 77101.
Crampton, S.M., & Wagner, J.A. (1994). Percept-percept inflation in micro-
organizational research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79, 6776.
De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2006). The impact of job insecurity and contract
type on attitudes, well-being and behavioural reports: A psychological contract
perspective. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 79, 395
409.
De Cuyper, N., & De Witte, H. (2007). Job insecurity among temporary versus
permanent workers: Effects on job satisfaction, organizational commitment, life
satisfaction and self-rated performance. Work & Stress,21(1), 120.De Cuyper, N., Rigotti, T., De Witte, H., & Mohr, G. (2008). Balancing psycholog-
ical contracts: Validation of a typology. International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 19(4), 543561.
Defillipi, R.J., & Arthur, M.B. (1994). The boundaryless career: A competency
based perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 15, 307324.
De Grip, A., Van Loo, J., & Sanders, J. (2004). The industry employability index:
Taking account of supply and demand characteristics. International Labour
Review, 14(3), 211233.
Dekker, S., & Schaufeli, W. (1995). The effects of job insecurity on psychological
health and withdrawal: A longitudinal study. Australian Psychologist, 30(1), 5763.
de Vries, S., Grndemann, R., & Van Vuuren, T. (2001). Employability policy in
Dutch organizations. The International Journal of Human Resource Management,
12(7), 11931202.
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
19/22
506 DE CUYPER ET AL.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
De Witte, H. (1999). Job insecurity and psychological well-being: Review of the
literature and exploration of some unresolved issues. European Journal of Work
and Organizational Psychology, 8(2), 155177.
De Witte, H. (2000). Arbeidsethos en jobonzekerheid: Meting en gevolgen voorwelzijn, tevredenheid en inzet op het werk [Work ethic and job insecurity:
Measurement and consequences for well-being, satisfaction and productivity]. In
R. Bouwen, K. De Witte, H. De Witte, & T. Taillieu (Eds.), Van groep naar
gemeenschap. Liber amicorum Prof. Dr Leo Lagrou (pp. 325350). Leuven:
Garant.
De Witte, H. (2005). Job insecurity: Review of the international literature on
definitions, prevalence, antecedents and consequences. South African Journal of
Industrial Psychology, 31(4), 16.
De Witte, H. (2006). Onzeker over de toekomst van je baan: Een groeiend
maatschappelijk fenomeen. Peilen naar oorzaken, gevolgen en oplossingen
[Job insecurity: A growing phenomenon. Causes, consequences and solutions]. In
B. Raymaekers & G. Van Riel (Eds.), Weten in woorden en daden. Lessen voor de
eenentwintigste eeuw (pp. 251277). Leuven: Universitaire Pers Leuven.
De Witte, H., & Nswall, K. (2003). Objective versus subjective job insecurity: Con-
sequences of temporary work for job satisfaction and organizational commitment
in four European countries. Economic and Industrial Democracy,24(2), 149188.
Doeringer, P.B., & Piore, M.J. (1971). Internal labour market and manpower analysis.
Lexington, MA: Heath Lexington Books.
Elman, C., & ORand, A.M. (2002). Perceived job insecurity and entry into
work-related education and training among adult workers. Social Science
Research, 31, 4976.
European Commission (1997). Proposal for guidelines for member states employment
policies in 1998. Brussels: European Commission.
Ferrie, J., Shipley, M., Marmot, M., Stansfeld, S., & Smith, D. (1998). The health
effects of major organisational change and job insecurity. Social Science and
Medicine, 46(2), 243254.
Forrier, A., & Sels, L. (2003a). The concept employability: A complex mosaic. Inter-
national Journal of Human Resource Development and Management, 3(2), 103124.
Forrier, A., & Sels, L. (2003b). Temporary employment and employability: Trainingopportunities and efforts of temporary and permanent employees in Belgium.
Work, Employment and Society, 17(4), 641666.
Fugate, M., Kinicki, A.J., & Ashforth, B.E. (2004). Employability: A psycho-social
construct, its dimensions and applications. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65,
1438.
Gallie, D., White, M., Cheng, Y., & Tomlinson, M. (1998). Restructuring the
employment relationship. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Greenhalgh, L., & Rosenblatt, Z. (1984). Job insecurity: Towards conceptual clarity.
Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 438448.
Griffeth, R.W., Steel, R.P., Allen, D.G., & Bryan, N. (2005). The development of amultidimensional measure of job market cognitions: The Employment Opportunity
Index (EOI). Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(2), 335349.
Groot, W., & Maassen-Van der Brink, H. (2000). Education, training and employability.
Applied Economics, 32, 573581.
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
20/22
EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY 507
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
Heany, C., Israel, B., & House, J. (1994). Chronic job insecurity among automobile
workers: Effects on job satisfaction and health. Social Science and Medicine,
38(10), 14311437.
Hellgren, J., & Sverke, M. (2003). Does job insecurity lead to impaired well-beingor vice versa? Estimation of cross-lagged effects using latent variable modelling.
Journal of Organizational Behavior,24(2), 215236.
Hillage, J., & Pollard, E. (1998). Employability: Developing a framework for policy
analysis. Research Brief 85, DFEE, London.
Hiltrop, J.M. (1995). The changing psychological contract: The human resource
challenge of the 1990s. European Management Journal, 13(3), 286294.
Isaksson, K., Bernhard, C., Claes, R., De Witte, H., Guest, D., Krausz, M., Peir,
J.M., Mohr, G., & Schalk, R. (2003). Employment contracts and psychological
contracts in Europe. Results from a Pilotstudy. SALTSA Report, 1.
Jahoda, M. (1982). Employment and unemployment: A social-psychological analysis.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kinnunen, U., & Ntti, J. (1994). Job insecurity in Finland: Antecedents and
consequences. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 4(3),
297321.
Kluytmans, F., & Ott, M. (1999). Management of employability in the Netherlands.
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 8(2), 261272.
Koh, W.L., & Yer, L.K. (2000). The impact of employeeorganization relationship
on temporary employees performance and attitudes: Testing a Signaporean
sample. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 11(2), 366387.
Kuhnert, K.W., & Vance, R.J. (1992). Job insecurity and moderators of the relation
between job insecurity and employee adjustment. In J.C. Quick, L.R. Murphy,
& J.J. Hurrell (Eds.), Stress and well-being at work. Washington, DC: APA.
Lambert, L., Edwards, J.R., & Cable, D.M. (2003). Breach and fulfillment of the
psychological contract: A comparison of traditional and expanded views. Personnel
Psychology, 56, 895934.
Lazarus, R.S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal and coping. New York:
Springer Publishing Company.
Lim, V. (1997). Moderating effects of work-base support on the relationship
between job insecurity and its consequences. Work & Stress, 11(3), 251266.McQuaid, R.W., & Lindsay, C. (2005). The concept of employability. Urban Studies,
42(2), 197219.
March, J.G., & Simon, H.A. (1958). Organizations. New York: John Wiley.
Marler, J.H., Barringer, M.W., & Milkovich, G.T. (2002). Boundaryless and
traditional contingent employees: Worlds apart. Journal of Organizational Behavior,
23, 425453.
Mauno, S., & Kinnunen, U. (2002). Perceived job insecurity among dual earner
couples: Do its antecedents vary according to gender, economic sector and the
measure used? Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 75, 295
314.Millward, L.J., & Brewerton, P.M. (2000). Psychological contracts: Employee
relations for the twenty-first century? In C.L. Cooper & I.T. Robertson (Eds.),
International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 15, pp. 161).
New York: John Wiley & Sons.
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
21/22
508 DE CUYPER ET AL.
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of AppliedPsychology.
Mohr, G.B. (2000). The changing significance of different stressors after the
announcement of bankruptcy: A longitudinal investigation with special emphasis
on job insecurity. Journal of Organizational Behaviour,21, 337 359.
Nswall, K. (2004). The buffering effect of employability on job insecurityoutcomes. Poster presented at the XXVIII International Congress of Psychology,
813 August, Beijing, China.
Nswall, K. (2005). Job insecurity and well-being: Moderating factors of a negative
relationship. Paper presented at the 12th European Congress on Work and
Organizational Psychology, 1215 May, Istanbul.
Nswall, K., & De Witte, H. (2003). Who feels insecure in Europe? Predicting job
insecurity from background variables. Economic and Industrial Democracy,24(2),
189215.
Nelson, A., Cooper, C., & Jackson, P. (1995). Uncertainty amidst change: The
impact of privatization on employee job satisfaction and well-being. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 68, 5771.
Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Podsakoff, P.M., Mackenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y., & Podsakoff, N.P. (2003). Common
method bias in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recom-
mended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879903.
Rigotti, T., Mohr, G., De Cuyper, N., De Witte, H., Bernhard, C., Isaksson, K., de
Jong, J., Schalk, R., Caballer, A., Gracia, F., Peir, J.M., Ramos, J., Clinton,
M., Guest, D., Krausz, M., & Staynvarts, N. (2003). Instruction work and blue
print for methodology. Unpublished research report. Leipzig, Germany.
Rousseau, D.M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding
written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Schaufeli, W. (1992). Unemployment and mental health in well and poorly educated
schoolleavers. In C. Verhaar & L. Jansma (Eds.), On the mysteries of unemployment:
Causes, consequences and policies (pp. 253271). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Schaufeli, W., & Bakker, A. (2001). Werk en welbevinden: Naar een positieve benadering
in de arbeids-en gezondheidspsychologie [Work and well-being: Towards a positive
approach within work and health psychology]. Gedrag en Organisatie, 17, 229252.
Schaufeli, W., & Bakker, A. (2003). UWES: Utrecht Work Engagement Scale.Occupational Health Psychology Unit, Universiteit Utrecht.
Schaufeli, W., & Bakker, A. (2004). Bevlogenheid: Een begrip gemeten [Engagement:
measurement]. Gedrag & Organisatie, 17, 89112.
Shore, L.M., & Barksdale, K. (1998). Examinig degree of balance and level of obli-
gation in the employment relationship: A social exchange approach. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 19(SI), 731744.
Sobel, M.E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equation
models. Sociological Methodology, 13, 290312.
Sparks, K., Faragher, B., & Cooper, C.L. (2001). Well-being and occupational
health in the 21st century workplace. Journal of Occupational and OrganizationalPsychology, 74, 489509.
Spector, P.E. (1987). Method variance as an artifact in self-reported affect and
perceptions at work: Myth or significant problem? Journal of Applied Psychology,
82, 434443.
-
7/31/2019 De Cuper i in. 2008-1
22/22
EMPLOYABILITY AND JOB INSECURITY 509
2008 The Authors. Journal compilation 2008 International Association of Applied
Storm, K., & Rothman, S. (2003). The validation of the Utrecht Work Engagement
Scale in the South African police services. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology,
29, 6270.
Sullivan, S.E. (1999). The changing nature of careers: A review and research agenda.Journal of Management,25(3), 457484.
Sverke, M., & Hellgren, J. (2002). The nature of job insecurity: Understanding
employment uncertainty on the brink of a new millennium. Applied Psychology:
An International Review, 51(1), 2342.
Sverke, M., Hellgren, J., & Nswall, K. (2002). No security: A meta-analysis and
review of job insecurity and its consequences. Journal of Occupational Health
Psychology, 7(3), 242264.
Szab, K., & Ngyesi, A. (2005). The spread of contingent work in the knowledge-
based economy. Human Resource Development Review, 4(1), 6385.
Trevor, C.O. (2001). Interactions among actual ease-of-movement determinants and
job satisfaction in the prediction of voluntary turnover. Academy of Management
Journal, 44(4), 621638.
Tsui, A.S., Pearce, J.L., Porter, L.W., & Tripoli, A.M. (1997). Alternative
approaches to the employeeorganization relationship: Does investment in
employees pay off ? Academy of Management Journal, 40(5), 10891121.
Van Buren, H. (2003). Boundaryless careers and employability obligations. Business
Ethics Quarterly, 13(2), 131149.
Van Dam, K. (2004). Antecedents and consequences of the employability orientation.
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 13(1), 2951.
Van Vuuren, T. (1990). Met ontslag bedreigd. Werknemers in onzekerheid over hun
arbeidsplaats bij veranderingen in de organisatie [Threat of dismissal: Job insecu-
rity during organizational changes]. Amsterdam: VU Uitgeverij.
Van Vuuren, T., Klandermans, B., Jacobson, D., & Hartley, J. (1991). Employees
reactions to job insecurity. In J. Hartley, D. Jacobson, B. Klandermans, & T. van
Vuuren (Eds.), Job insecurity: Coping with jobs at risk(pp. 6578). London: Sage.
Virtanen, M., Kivimki, M., Virtanen, P., Elovainio, M., & Vahtera, J. (2003).
Disparity in occupational training and career planning between contingent and
permanent employees. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology,
12(1), 1936.Wiens-Tuers, B., & Hill, E.T. (2002). Do they bother? Employer training of temporary
workers. Review of Social Economy, 60(4), 543566.
Worth, S. (2002). Education and employability: School leavers attitudes to the prospect
of non-standard work. Journal of Education and Work, 15(2), 163179.