quantitative project
TRANSCRIPT
1
How learning goal orientation leads to vitality, moderated by
workload and autonomy
A quantitative report
Pre-master program business administration
Team members: Sabina van Steenderen, 2567808, [email protected]
Daniël Veen, 2558970, [email protected]
Lisanne Vermeulen, 2565673, [email protected]
Team 1F
2
To get the best out of employees, the well-being of employees within an organization is
essential. With this paper we aim to gain insight into whether certain work conditions
positively or negatively influence the well-being of employees who have a different level of
learning goal orientation. The well-being of an employee can be influenced by many internal
and external factors. The relationship between the personality characteristic learning goal
orientation and the well -being, specifically vitality, is the topic of our research. An individual
who is learning goal oriented, continuously wants to gain knowledge and improve his abilities.
Prior research has shown that an individual who is more learning goal oriented has a more
positive well-being than others who are less or not learning goal oriented (Dweck, 1989;
Veiga & Turban, 2014; Tuominen-Soini, Salmela- Aro and Niemivirta, 2008). Button and
Mathieu (1996), researched the construct goal orientation and concluded that it is two-
dimensional and distinguished learning goal orientation from performance goal orientation.
Their research was primarily focused on developing the best measuring method for both
constructs. As this paper focuses on learning goal orientation, performance goal orientation
will not be researched. Well-being is a term that can include several specific components, in
this research the aim is towards one of them: vitality. Vitality can be defined as the mental
state of being full of energy, activity and vigour and is part of a person‟s well-being. Zacher,
Brailsford, & Parker (2014) imply that employees could achieve higher levels of vitality over
time when employees are educated about the general or long-term use of work strategies. In
other words, the more educated or trained employees are, the higher the level of vitality could
be. Their research also suggests another way to obtain higher levels of occupational well-
being, which is establishing an organizational
culture that prioritizes employees' daily and occupational well-being.
3
In our opinion the relationship between learning goal orientation of an employee and its
vitality can be weakened or strengthened by certain conditions. The moderating influence of
two of these conditions, workload and autonomy, have been researched individually in several
ways but not on the specific relationship between learning goal orientation and someone‟s
vitality. This theoretical calling is essential in order to better understand why learning goal
orientation of employees is related to the well-being of employees and why the moderating
conditions of workload and autonomy might individually influence this relationship.
This study has two primary objectives. The first is to establish and demonstrate the
relationship between learning goal oriented employees and their vitality. Second, is to
establish and demonstrate the moderating influence of autonomy and workload relative to the
vitality of learning goal oriented employees.
Learning goal orientation and vitality
Goal orientation is a wide concept that is described in multiple ways. Goal orientation is
defined by Brett and VandeWalle (1999) as „‟a mental framework to how individuals interpret
and respond to achievement situations‟‟ (p. 2). According to Veiga and Turban (2014) goal
orientation is „‟a broad term that reflects the reason why a person does a task or pursues a
goal‟‟ (p.3). Because the second definition by Veiga and Turban (2014) lays more emphasis
on the ability of an individual to influence his goal orientation, the second definition will be
used in this report.
The construct „goal orientation‟ is mostly seen as two-dimensional and distinguishes learning
goal orientation (LGO) from performance goal orientation (PGO). A learning goal oriented
person (sometimes referred to as a mastery oriented person) wants to continuously build his
4
knowledge and improve his capabilities. A person that is performance goal oriented focuses
on the performance of the task only in order to receive positive feedback and wants to avoid
negative feedback on their capabilities (Button, Mathieu & Zajac, 1996).
This distinction comes from the motivational theory of Dweck (1989) which explains the
difference between LGO and PGO with the use of two possibly held views on ability: the
incremental theory and the entity theory. Individuals who believe in the incremental theory
see intelligence as something malleable that is influenced by hard work, these individuals are
more likely to be supporters of the learning goal orientation. On the other hand, the entity
theory suggests that intelligence is fixed and hard work cannot contribute to becoming more
intelligent. The entity theory is more likely to be supported by performance goal oriented
individuals. This study will only consider the incremental theory thus learning goal
orientation and the possible relation it has with vitality.
Vitality can be described as a mental state of mind and part of a person‟s well-being. Ryan &
Frederich (1997) (in Zacher, Brailsford & Parker, 2014) refer to vitality as the state of being
full of energy, being active and feeling vigour. According to Ryan & Frederich in (Bourhis,
Giles & Rosenthal, 1981) vitality is also potentially related to autonomy. Because this
research tests the relationship between learning goal orientation and the moderating influence
of autonomy, the definition of Ryan & Frederich (1997) will be used to describe vitality.
The potential relationship between learning goal orientation and an individual his well-being
has not been a broad researched topic (Tuominen-Soini, Salmela-Aro & Niemivirta, 2008).
This could be interpreted as an irregular course of circumstances because earlier research on
goal orientation has found that different goal orientations lead to different ways of handling a
5
task and coping with emotions (Dweck, 1989). Dweck states that children who are mastery-
oriented are more likely to show adaptive patterns when dealing with difficult tasks, such as:
establishing and maintaining personally challenging and valued achievement goals. Children
who are not mastery-oriented and therefore are more PGO show more signs of maladaptive
patterns, which are related to a failure to establish, maintain and attain valuable goals.
Although this research focuses on the effect of LGO on employee vitality and not on children
their vitality, it can be assumed that the findings of Dweck (1989) also apply to individuals.
Dweck (1989) states that children who display a maladaptive pattern are more likely to show
signs of negative affect (e.g. anxiety) and negative self-esteem when they are confronted with
a difficult task. Dweck (1989) continuous his reasoning by stating that children with adaptive
patterns seem undismayed when confronted with a difficult task or even perform better during
the difficult task. However, the maladaptive children were seriously troubled with thinking up
and carrying out a potential solution. Considering the emotional reactions of these PGO
individuals and their cognitive strains it can be assumed from Dweck (1989) his article that a
difference in LGO and PGO could potentially contribute to a change in well-being and thus
on vitality.
A different research, of Veiga and Turban (2014), researched the role LGO played in the
effect stress had on job seekers. Veiga and Turban (2014) concluded that individuals who
were highly learning goal oriented regulated themselves differently during the process of job
seeking than persons with a low LGO; Individuals with a higher LGO experienced more
adaptive responses to perceived stress. The study of Veiga and Turban (2014) could indicate
that well-being or vitality is also related to LGO as the individuals who are LGO are less
prone to stress and could therefore be thought to be more vital.
6
In a different organizational research, the study of Janssen & Yperen (2004) showed that
LGO could also be thought of as related to an emotional reaction. The researchers found that
mastery oriented individuals experience more job satisfaction and enjoyment from their work
than PGO individuals. Being mastery oriented is often related to having a high level of LGO.
Although job satisfaction is a different concept that vitality, there can be argued that job
satisfaction and enjoyment might be having an influence on the well-being and vitality of an
individual.
Sonnentag, Kuttler & Fritz (2010) found that activities like mastery and relaxation increased
the energy level of an individual, which can directly be related to vitality. As noticed before,
an individual who is LGO shows high mastery-oriented responses (Button & Mathieu, 1996).
The most recent study that found an effect of LGO on emotions is the research of Tuominen-
Soini, Salmela-Aro and Niemivirta (2008). This research mostly resembles this study because
the relationship between goal orientation and the subjective well-being of an individual was
tested. The researchers found that there were important difference between students having a
LGO and PGO in terms of well-being. Tuominen-Soini, Salmela-Aro and Niemivirta (2008)
stated that for student who adopted a PGO approach, achievements were coupled with a lower
self-esteem, more depressive symptoms, a tendency to be subjected to burnout and could
experience stress concerning their future ambitions. It can be concluded from the article of
Tuominen-Soini, Salmela-Aro and Niemivirta (2008) that a different goal orientation is
related to well-being and therefore potentially related to the vitality of an individual.
It can be concluded from the previous part that a difference in goal orientation is likely to lead
to a different cognitive approach to a certain task. These cognitive approaches are according
to Dweck (1989) directly related to emotional states. The research of Veiga and Turban
7
(2014) and Janssen & Yperen (2004) showed that the differences in goal orientation can have
an effect on stress and job satisfaction and Sonnentag, Kuttler & Fritz (2010) found that
mastery-oriented activities directly relate to an increase in energy level. Tuominen-Soini,
Salmela-Aro and Niemivirta (2008) found a direct relation between goal orientation and well-
being, which could be potentially directly related to vitality. Because of these findings we
hypothesize that:
Hypothesis 1: Learning goal orientation of employees will have a positive relationship with
vitality.
Fig. 1: Visualization of hypothesis 1
The moderating role of autonomy
A work condition that is assumed to moderate the relationship between a learning goal
oriented employee and its well-being, specifically vitality, is job autonomy. Autonomy has
been defined in several ways. In early research by Hackman and Oldham (1975), autonomy
was conceptualized as the extent to which the job provided employees with freedom and
independence over their work schedules and work processes. One of the most recent
8
developments of the term autonomy distinguishes three complimentary perspectives on job
autonomy: work scheduling autonomy, work methods autonomy, and decision-making
autonomy (Morgeson & Humphrey, 2006). Karasek (1979) uses the term job-decision latitude
to describe autonomy. In his study, he describes job-decision latitude as an employee‟s
individual choice to determine the tasks he carries out and his behavior during the working
day. Ryff (1989) contributed with his study to a more complete model of antecedents of
psychological well-being because he found that, among other factors, autonomy plays an
important role in conceptualizing well-being. However, this evidence was lacking in prior
literature (Ryff, 1989). Finally, Ryan and Deci (1985) who developed the self-determination
theory, made a strong claim that autonomy is a need that must be satisfied in order for human
beings to function optimally. They stated it improves work motivation, productivity and well-
being. In another article by Ryan and Deci (2011) they stated that autonomous self-regulation
is important in allowing the individual to choose and develop his/her own ways of being, and
in doing so will satisfy basic psychological needs which in turn lead to vitality and happiness.
The previously mentioned Vitamin Model of Warr (1987) also included job autonomy. He
hypothesized that certain job attributes, like workload and autonomy, function like „vitamins‟.
In other words, they are commendable up to certain levels but can be harmful or ineffective at
extreme levels. According to his theory he hypothesized that job autonomy is assumed to
have a non-linear curve, this means that high levels of autonomy are potentially harmful for
the level of mental health of the employee, because it implies high responsibilities, difficulty
in decision-making and uncertainty. Many researchers tested Warr‟s Vitamin Model and the
outcomes are distinct.
9
De Jonge & Schaufeli (1998) tested Warr‟s
Vitamin Model and indeed found a non-linear
relationship between autonomy and occupational
well-being. They found that the curve is an
inverted U-shape. This outcome is blamed to
excluding personal characteristics like the
individual need for autonomy. The authors argue
that less autonomy often results in dissatisfaction,
Figure 2. Relationship Autonomy and Vitality whereas more autonomy results in satisfaction
and more activity. However, too much autonomy can exhaust someone and has a negative
influence on occupational well-being. Figure 2 visualizes the relationship of autonomy on
vitality based on the findings of De Jonge and Schaufeli (1998) and it shows that the level of
autonomy influences the level vitality non-linearly. In other words, a low level of autonomy
will result in low level of vitality (see letter A in fig. 2), a medium level of autonomy will
result in a high level of vitality (see letter B in fig. 2) and a high level of autonomy will result
in a low level of vitality (see letter C in fig. 2).
According to Gagne and Bhave (2011), there are three important outcomes of job autonomy
for employees and organizations: employee engagement, individual performance and
employee well-being. They refer to employee engagement in cognitive terms, such as vitality,
absorption, involvement, commitment and empowerment, and to behavioural terms, such as
extra-role behaviour, proactivity, initiative and adaptation. They assume that satisfaction of
the need for autonomy will create a more positive employee engagement. Based on this
argument, we can assume that a certain level of autonomy has a positive influence on vitality.
10
Sufficient literature can be found about the influence of autonomy on vitality, but there is no
clear literature about the influence of autonomy on the relationship between a learning goal
oriented employee and its vitality. Prior research that involved students showed that learning
goal activities were stimulated in an autonomous environment and if they engage in school
activities with a strong sense of autonomy and volition, they report feeling well and vital
(Reeve & Assor, 2011). We are interested in employees and not in students, but we can
assume that learning goal-oriented employees, who perceive a certain level of autonomy in
the workplace, will have influence on its vitality. Karasek (1979) suggests that a worker's
personality affects his/her perception of the level of autonomy. This means that a personal
characteristic could affect the extent to which an individual experiences autonomy as
favourable. Learning goal orientation is a personality characteristic, but no evidence in the
literature was found that this specific characteristic could affect the individual perception of
autonomy. In general, we can conclude that we have found sufficient evidence in the existing
literature that a certain level of autonomy should influence the extent to which an employee
feels vital. In addition, a person who is learning goal oriented is expected to be more
comfortable with autonomy and therefore to have a higher level of vitality, but in line with
Warr‟s Vitamin Model an extreme high or low level of autonomy is expected to make them
less comfortable and have a lower level of vitality. Based on the findings of Warr‟s Vitamin
Model and De Jonge and Schaufeli (1989) as visualized in figure 2 and previous arguments
about the influence of learning goal orientation on vitality, we assume that a low level of
autonomy will weaken the relationship between learning goal orientation and vitality. Also
we assume that a medium level of autonomy will strengthen the relationship and a high level
of autonomy will again weaken the relationship between learning goal orientation and vitality.
Therefore, the following can be hypothesized:
11
Hypothesis 2: The relationship between learning goal orientation and the vitality of an
employee is moderated by autonomy. Depending on the amount of autonomy, the
relationship between learning goal orientation and vitality will be strengthened or
weakened. Low autonomy will weaken the relationship, medium autonomy will strengthen
the relationship and high autonomy will weaken the relationship.
The moderating role of workload
Workload is also referred to as job demand, Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner and Schaufeli
(2001) describe a job demand as the physical, social and organizational parts of a job that
need physical or psychological effort and thus are related to physical and mental costs.
Although research has been carried out about the effect workload has on an individual, no
studies were found that studied the moderating effect workload possibly has on the
relationship between learning goal orientation and vitality. However, the articles that study
the effect workload has on individuals provide some indications about the possible effect of
workload on the hypothesized relationship between learning goal orientation and vitality.
In his job demand-control model, Karasek (1979) distinguishes four different kinds of jobs
according to occupational well-being moderated by job demands (i.e. workload) and job
decision latitude (i.e. autonomy). In all four the jobs; passive, active, high-strain and low-
strain, provided that the job decision latitude does not moderate, workload is always
negatively related to well-being.
Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner & Schaufeli (2001) indicated in their article that several
studies have shown that high job demands can cause exhaustion, depression and anxiety. The
12
later mentioned consequences could relate negatively to vitality. Although Demerouti et al.
(2001) do not distinguish between learning goal orientation and performance goal orientation,
it can be expected that every individual has a maximum output capacity and the level of
workload only needs to be heightened to a certain extent to create stress on an individual.
Taris and Feij (2004) indicated that prior research has found that a greater knowledge, skill
and efficacy enable the individual to cope more effectively with work demands. Low job
demands, in addition, are expected to lower the level of learning, work motivation and
productivity.
As a final, the study of Schaufeli, Bakker and Rhenen (2009) showed that changes in job
demands are able to predict if an individual will be subjected to a burnout. When a burnout is
interpreted as a situation with a low vitality and a high level of exhaustion, the findings of
Schaufeli et al. (2009) show a direct relation between workload and vitality. Thus, with
support of prior research, job demands (i.e. workload) is related to a person‟s well-being.
High job demands could therefore be assumed to relate negatively with vitality or, in other
words, if workload would moderate the relation between a person and its vitality it would
weaken this relationship.
Interestingly, Warr (1987) found an inverted u-shaped relationship with job demand and well-
being in his Vitamin Model. He uses affective well-being as a construct because that is an
indicator of job related health. This affective well-being construct has on vitality different
dimensions from which one is called “depressed – actively pleasure” based on job related
health (Jonge & Schaufeli, 1998). This means that Warr found that low job demands as well
as too much job demands do not improve someone‟s actively pleasure but a certain amount of
job demands do increases someone‟s activity, thus vitality referring back to Ryan and
13
Frederick‟s (1997) (in Zacher, Brailsford, & Parker, 2014) definition of vitality which states
that vitality is a state of being full of energy, activity and vigour. Yet, Jonge & Schaufeli, who
tested the Vitamin Model of Warr again because of inconclusive results, found a linear
relationship between job demand and well-being (Jonge & Schaufeli, 1998). The extent to
which one feels comfortable with workload might therefore be dependent on whether the
curve is either linear
or u-shaped.
The following section will take a step into the moderating role of workload on the
relationship between learning goal orientation and vitality. In this research it is expected that
primarily the model of Warr (1985) will determine the moderating effect of workload on the
relationship between LGO and vitality. It is expected that Warr (1985) his findings will be
valid because the reasoning of Warr (1985) seem more appropriate than the linear reasoning
and finding of Jonge & Schaufeli (1998).
It is expected that workload has a moderating effect on the relationship between LGO and
vitality depending on the amount of workload that an individual experiences. When a person
has a low level of workload it is expected that the relationship between LGO and vitality will
be weakened. It is expected that a low level of workload weakens the basic relationship
because Warr (1985) found that a low level of workload has a negative effect on vitality (see
letter A in fig. 3) and thus the same is expected to be seen when workload acts as a moderator.
When an individual has a medium level of workload it is expected that the relationship
between LGO and vitality will be strengthened. It is expected that a medium level of
workload has a positive effect on vitality (see letter B in fig. 3) and therefore the same effect
is expected to be seen when workload acts as a moderator. When workload is high for an
14
individual it is expected that the relationship
between LGO and vitality will be weakened.
Again, it is found by Warr (1985) that a high
level of workload leads to a low level of vitality
(see letter C in fig. 3) and therefore the same
effect is to be expected as workload acts as a
moderator.
Fig. 3 Relationship workload and vitality
Hypothesis 3: The relationship between learning goal orientation and the vitality of an
employee is moderated by workload. Depending on the amount of workload, the
relationship between learning goal orientation and vitality will be strengthened or
weakened. Low workload will weaken the relationship, medium workload will strengthen
the relationship and high workload will weaken the relationship.
Figure 4 below concludes the introductory section by stating the relations that are expected in
in this study.
15
Fig. 4 Conceptual model of the hypothesized relationships
Method
Procedures and Samples. The sample of our research consisted of carefully selected
participants by the researchers. All participants held a „steady‟ job position and worked at
least 32 hours a week. The participants were asked to fill in a baseline survey measuring
demographic variables, personality constructs and work-related variables. We used SPSS to
analyze our data. The data was cleaned from outliers and test cases. Outliers were not found
because the survey was electronically and no respondent could fill in a number that was not
corresponding with an answer. The test cases were removed and all cases that only included
„1‟ were also removed from the data. The final sample counted 293 (N=293) respondents after
the data cleaning process. To visualize the findings of the influence of the individual
moderators and their interaction effect we used Dawson‟s (2014) excel template to form the
graph.
Measures
Learning goal orientation. Learning goal orientation was only measured in the
baseline survey. In order to measure this variable a 7-item, 5-scale measure was used (Zajac,
1996). The used scale ranges from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). These items
indicate the extent to which participants have a desire to perform challenging work, learn new
skills, and develop alternative strategy when working on a difficult task. An example item
16
was: “The possibility to learn new things is important to me.” A factor analysis was
conducted and one factor with eigenvalue >1 was presented. Five of the seven items loaded
with. >.661 at least and 2 items loaded with .433 and 3.66. Nevertheless, the Cronbach‟s
alpha for the scale was .83 and would only increase by .01 when these last 2 items would be
removed from the scale. It is a valid scale and the reliability would not increase significantly,
therefore, the scale for learning goal orientation is used in the analyses as a 7-item, 5-scale
measure.
Vitality. Vitality was measured in the weekly surveys. Participants were asked
whether they felt vital and vigorous in their previous workweek. The 6-item subscale of
POMS; McNair, Lorr, & Droppleman (1971) was used on a 7-point scale ranging from 1
(never) – 7 (always). An example question was: “I feel vital”. A factor analyses was
conducted and all items loaded >.624 at least on 1 factor with eigenvalue >1. The Cronbach‟s
alpha for the scale was .92.
Autonomy. Autonomy was measured in both the baseline and the weekly study by
using a 3-item 5-scale instrument regarding freedom of activities, decision freedom and self-
regulation. Scale 1 „not at all‟ ranging to scale 5 „very much‟ (Karasek, 1979). An example
item in the baseline study was: “Can you take part in making decisions regarding work?” A
factor analyses was conducted and all items loaded >.484 at least on 1 factor with eigenvalue
>1. The Cronbach‟s alpha for the scale was .87. As the Cronbach‟s alpha would not increase
significantly, the valid autonomy scale will be used in this research as a 3-item.
Workload. Workload was measured in both the baseline and the weekly study. The
baseline study consisted 5-item 5-scale instrument measuring the pace, load of work and work
pressure. Scale 1 (never) ranging to scale 5 (always) (Karasek, 1979). An example item in
baseline survey was: “Do you work under pressure?” A factor analyses was conducted and all
17
items loaded >.622 at least on 1 factor with eigenvalue >1. The Cronbach‟s alpha for the scale
was .85.
Control measure. In order to control for the hypothesis about the moderation
variables, the linear relationship of learning goal orientation on vitality moderated by
workload and autonomy are going to be tested. As a u-shaped relation is expected, in order to
accept the hypotheses, the linear relationship must not be significant.
Results
This chapter is going to present the results that are gained through the analyses of the data that
was obtained. Table 1 sums up the means, standard deviations of the variables that are used in
this study and the correlations among them. The Cronbach‟s alphas are presented in brackets
in a diagonal. As can be seen in the table, almost all variables had a significant correlation,
except workload had no significant correlation to autonomy. The independent and dependent
variables, however, did have a certain relationship to each other and the moderating variables.
In order to test the hypotheses, the mean was used for the dependent variable vitality and
standardized z-scores were made for the independent variable learning goal orientation and
the moderating variables.
Variable Mean SD 1 2 3 4
1. Learning goal orientation 3,8294 0,57762 (.832)
2. Autonomy 3,6014 0,91277 0,251** (.868)
3. Workload 2,9846 0,84888 0,172** 0,1 (.849)
4. Vitality 4,7557 0,92216 0,442** 0,361** 0,128* (.917)
18
**. Correlation is significant at the 0,01 level (2-tailed)
*. Correlation is significant at the 0,05 level (2-tailed)
Note. Cronbach's Alpha appears along the diagonal in parentheses
Table 1. Means, standard deviations (SD), and correlations of the study variables, N = 293
Hypothesis 1 proposed that the personality characteristic learning goal orientation positively
relates to the vitality of an employee. As noted in table 1, there is a positive correlation
between learning goal orientation and vitality, r = .442, p < 0.01. This finding provides
support to accept hypothesis 1. The relation is graphed in Figure 5.
Figure 5: The linear positive relation between learning goal orientation and vitality.
Tables 2, 3, 4, and 5, present the results of the regression analyses. The process was executed
in two steps. In the first step, the main effects of the independent variable learning goal
orientation and the moderators on vitality were being tested using a regression analyses. In the
second step, the interaction effect between the independent variable and one of the moderators
was tested, also using a regression analyses. These analyses were done twice per each
moderator, the first time the linear main effects and linear moderating interactions were tested
and the second time the linear main effect and quadratic moderating effects were tested as
well as the interaction. As discussed in the method section, in order to control for the
19
hypotheses, linear interactions are going to be tested as well as quadratic interactions. Only
table 4 and 5 can reject or accept hypotheses 2 and 3.
Both autonomy and workload presented to have a positive main and significant main effect on
vitality, β = .361, p < 0.01 and β = .128, p < 0.05, consecutively. The graphs of these linear
main effects can be seen in figure 6 and 7.
F
Fig. 6. The linear positive relationship of autonomy Fig. 7. The linear positive relationship of workload
and vitality. and vitality.
Hypothesis 2 proposed that autonomy moderates the relationship between learning goal
orientation and vitality. This moderating effect is expected to be quadratic and strengthen or
weaken the main relationship based on the amount of autonomy. The results in table 4 provide
significant support for this hypothesis, ΔR² = 0,024, p < 0.01. The interaction graph can be
found in figure 8. Hypothesis 3 proposed that workload would moderate the relationship
between learning goal orientation and vitality. This moderating effect is expected to be
quadratic and strengthen or weaken the main relationship based on the amount of workload.
The results in table 5 provide significant support for this hypothesis, ΔR² = 0,019, p < 0.01.
The interaction graph can be found in figure 9.
20
Additional analyses showed that there is no significant linear moderating effect of workload
or autonomy on the linear main relation between learning goal orientation and vitality. These
findings are showed in table 2 and 3. These findings provide additional support for the
hypotheses 2 and 3.
Figure 8 displays the interaction effect of the quadratic moderator autonomy on the linear
main relationship between learning goal orientation and vitality. As can be seen in the graph,
there is slightly any difference between a low and medium level of autonomy. A high level of
autonomy results in a stronger effect on the relationship between learning goal orientation and
vitality.
21
Fig. 8. The quadratic effect of autonomy on the relationship between learning goal orientation and vitality
Figure 9 displays the interaction effect of the quadratic moderator workload on the linear
main relationship between learning goal orientation and vitality. Again there is slightly any
difference between a low and medium level of workload. A high level of workload shows a
stronger increasing effect on the relationship between learning goal orientation and vitality.
Fig. 9. The quadratic effect of workload on the relationship between learning goal orientation and vitality
Discussion
The relation between learning goal orientation and vitality has not been researched broadly in
the literature. However, different studies regarding the construct goal orientation of different
social groups (i.e. teachers, children) did find an either positive or negative relation with
emotional states. As part of the goal orientation construct, learning goal orientation was taken
as an object of research to find out whether this personal characteristic influences vitality.
This study‟s findings provide support for this relation and it was found that one who is more
learning goal orientated is more vital. These results provide support for previous findings.
In order to broaden the understanding of the relation between learning goal orientation and
vitality, the moderating influences of autonomy and workload individually were tested.
22
Although, much research is done regarding the influence of autonomy and workload
individually on an employees (occupational) well-being, the moderating influence of each of
these conditions specifically on the relationship between learning goal orientation and
someone‟s vitality was not researched yet. Studies that did focus on the role of autonomy and
workload on well-being, however, found that the role of autonomy is consistently non-linear
and the role of workload was found being both linear and non-linear.
Warr (1987) found and de Jonge & Schaufeli (1989) tested and accepted a non-linear
relationship between autonomy and occupational well-being. However, their research was not
exhaustive as they did not find a linear relation of autonomy to vitality, whereas, this study
used a linear and quadratic regression model and found a positive significant linear relation,
as well as a positive significant quadratic relation between autonomy and vitality. Learning
goal orientation is a personality characteristic, but no evidence in the literature was found that
this specific characteristic could affect the individual perception of autonomy. This paper
found a positive quadratic interaction effect of autonomy on the linear relationship between
learning goal orientation and vitality. Although it was hypothesized that a high level of
workload would negatively influence the main relation, the opposite occurred and the high
level of workload actually increased the vitality of an employee. A medium workload was
thought to increase the vitality of an employee, however, also these findings do not support
the second hypothesis.
De Jonge and Schaufeli (1989) found a negative linear relationship between workload and
well-being. Unexpectedly, this paper found a weak positive linear relationship between the
two constructs. The findings of de Jonge and Schaufeli (1989) could be interpreted by stating
that more workload leads to less vitality. On the contrary, our findings state that more
23
workload leads to more vitality, only the inclination of the line is small. An explanation for
this result could be that employees are protected at work from having too much workload, so
the effect of the workload creates a small positive effect on vitality. Warr (1987) found an
inverted u-shape for workload on occupational well-being but our study did not found a
significant quadratic relationship of workload on vitality. However, an inverted u-shape curve
was found when the moderating role of workload was tested on the relationship between
learning goal orientation and workload. This outcome supports the idea that learning goal
orientation, as a characteristic, determines the way in which a person can cope and even gets
vital with a certain amount of workload. Although it was hypothesized that a high level of
workload would weaken the main relationship, the contrary occurred and a high level of
workload led to a stronger main relationship. Further on it was also hypothesized that a
medium level workload would strengthen the main relationship, this however did not
occurred.
The moderating linear role of either autonomy or workload was not significant, however, the
moderating quadratic role of these moderators gave a positive significant outcome on vitality
when interacting with learning goal orientation. To conclude, the results suggest that learning
goal orientation might affect a person his or her vitality level positively and might also play a
possible role in the extent to which people can cope with job demands.
Limitations and suggestions for future research
This study is not without limitations. The method we used was a general questionnaire that
measured the respondents’ vitality and their experienced job demands and autonomy at one
point in time. As the measurements were carried out at only one moment, it was not possible
to determine whether or not there is causality between the variables. Secondly, the sample
24
does not consist of randomly chosen participants but were contacts from students of the
economic and business faculty. Therefore it could be implied that the sample selection might
exist mostly of highly educated participants.
Practical implications
The findings of this study could provide managers with some guidance concerning decision-
making about autonomy and workload, for learning goal oriented employees. By providing
the appropriate levels of both autonomy and workload, the highest levels of vitality can be
achieved. In the end, high levels of vitality among employees can ensure continuity within an
organization. When hiring personnel, managers could consider hiring learning goal oriented
personnel when autonomy and workload play important roles within an organization. Another
practical issue is that managers could aim to establish an organizational culture that motivates
employees to develop their skills and challenge themselves to learn new things.
Conclusions
Learning goal orientation of employees can improve the levels of vitality among employees,
but certain job demand conditions can alter this relationship. Two previously unexplored
conditions on this relationship are autonomy and workload. We foundd that people who are
learning goal oriented and who perceive a high level of workload or autonomy will have a
higher level of vitality.
25
References
Button, S. B., Mathieu, J. E., & Zajac, D. M. (1996). Goal orientation in organizational
research: A conceptual and empirical foundation. Organizational behavior and human
decision processes, 67(1), 26-48.
Bourhis, R. Y., Giles, H., & Rosenthal, D. (1981). Notes on the construction of a „subjective
vitality questionnaire‟for ethnolinguistic groups.
Brett, J. F., & VandeWalle, D. (1999). Goal orientation and goal content as predictors of
performance in a training program. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84(6), 863.
Dawson, J. (2014). Interpreting interaction effects. Accesed on 15 May 2015 via http://www.jeremydawson.co.uk/slopes.html.
Demerouti, E., Bakker, A. B., Nachreiner, F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2001). The job demands-
resources model of burnout. Journal of Applied psychology, 86(3), 499.
Dweck, C. S. (1989). Motivation. In, A. Lesgold & R. Glaser (Eds.). Foundations for a
psychology of education. Hillsdale, NJ: Law.
De Jonge, J., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1998). Job characteristics and employee well-being: A test
of Warr's Vitamin Model in health care workers using structural equation modelling.
Journal of Organizational Behavior, 19(4), 387-407.
Gagné, M., & Bhave, D. (2011). Autonomy in the workplace: An essential ingredient
to employee engagement and well-being in every culture. In Human autonomy in
cross-cultural context (pp. 163-187). Springer Netherlands.
Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1975). Development of the job diagnostic survey.
Journal of Applied psychology, 60(2), 159.
Janssen, O., & Van Yperen, N. W. (2004). Employees' goal orientations, the quality of
leader-member exchange, and the outcomes of job performance and job satisfaction.
Academy of management journal, 47(3), 368-384.
Karasek Jr, R. A. (1979). Job demands, job decision latitude, and mental strain:
Implications for job redesign. Administrative science quarterly, 285-308.
Karasek, R. T., & Theorell, T. T.(1990) Healthy work–stress, productivity and the
reconstruction of working life. US: Basic books.
Morgeson, F. P., & Humphrey, S. E. (2006). The Work Design Questionnaire (WDQ):
developing and validating a comprehensive measure for assessing job design and the
nature of work. Journal of applied psychology, 91(6), 1321.
Reeve, J., & Assor, A. (2011). Do social institutions necessarily suppress individuals‟ need
for autonomy? The possibility of schools as autonomy-promoting contexts across the
globe. In Human Autonomy in Cross-Cultural Context (pp. 111-132). Springer
Netherlands.
26
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2011). A self-determination theory perspective on social,
institutional, cultural, and economic supports for autonomy and their importance for
well-being. In Human autonomy in cross-cultural context (pp. 45-64). Springer
Netherlands.
Ryan, R. M., & Frederick, C. (1997). On energy, personality, and health: Subjective vitality
as a dynamic reflection of well-being. Journal of personality, 65(3), 529-565.
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of
psychological well-being. Journal of personality and social psychology, 57(6), 1069.
Schaufeli, W. B., Bakker, A. B., & Van Rhenen, W. (2009). How changes in job demands and
resources predict burnout, work engagement, and sickness absenteeism. Journal of
Organizational Behavior, 30(7), 893-917.
Sonnentag, S., Kuttler, I., & Fritz, C. (2010). Job stressors, emotional exhaustion, and need
for recovery: A multi-source study on the benefits of psychological detachment.
Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76(3), 355-365.
Taris, Toon W., Feij, Jan A. (2004). Learning and Strain Among Newcomers: A Three-Wave
Study on the Effects of Job Demands and Job Control. The Journal of Psychology, 138
(6), 543 – 563.
Tuominen-Soini, H., Salmela-Aro, K., & Niemivirta, M. (2008). Achievement goal
orientations and subjective well-being: A person-centred analysis. Learning and
Instruction, 18(3), 251-266.
Veiga, S. P., & Turban, D. B. (2014). Are affect and perceived stress detrimental or
beneficial to job seekers? The role of learning goal orientation in job search self-
regulation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 125(2), 193-203.
Warr, P. (1987). Work, unemployment, and mental health. Oxford University Press.
Zacher, H., Brailsford, H. A., & Parker, S. L. (2014). Micro-breaks matter: A diary study on
the effects of energy management strategies on occupational well-being. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 85(3), 287-297.