See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/260288949

ASPECTS OF JOB DESIGN

Article · February 2013

CITATIONS READS

23 72,614

2 authors, including:

Dimitrios Belias
University of Thessaly
274 PUBLICATIONS 2,149 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Dimitrios Belias on 22 February 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Human Resource
Management and Research (IJHRMR)
ISSN 2249-6874
Vol. 3, Issue 4, Oct 2013, 85-94
© TJPRC Pvt. Ltd.

ASPECTS OF JOB DESIGN

DIMITRIOS BELIAS1 & DIMITRIOS SKLIKAS2

1
University of Thessaly, Trikala, Greece
2
Technological Educational Institute of Thessaly, Larissa, Greece

ABSTRACT

Job design is an effective tool which is used in order on the one hand to meet the needs of the employees and on
the other to satisfy the interests of the organisation. Three of the main job design techniques that discussed in this paper are
job rotation, job enlargement and job enrichment. Job rotation enables the development of the employees’ skills, their
organizational retention, reduces job boredom, while at the same time it controls the work-related musculoskeletal
disorders and reduces the exposure of workers to work-related injuries. Job enlargement adds more tasks to the existing
tasks of the employee, thus increasing employee participation in the decision-making process. Job enrichment makes jobs
more challenging and interesting and also enables the participation of employees in the decision-making process. The main
conclusion of the literature review is that job design, if effective, manages to stimulate employees’ interest to work and to
increase their job satisfaction, leading to high levels of employee performance and productivity.

KEYWORDS: Job Design, Job Rotation, Job Enlargement, Job Enrichment, Job Satisfaction, Motivation

INTRODUCTION

Job design is in fact a combination of job content and the work method which has been adopted in the
performance of the job (Durai, 2010). There are various job-design techniques. The main techniques are (Armstrong,
2003): job rotation, job enlargement, job enrichment, self-managing teams (autonomous work groups) and high
performance work design. Other methods include (Durai, 2010): job reengineering, participative management and peer
performance review. The first job design theory was developed by Viteles in the early 1950s. In this theory, both job
rotation and job enlargement were used in order to address the problems stemming from the reduction of employee morale
and productivity, because of the job monotony and boredom from job specialization (Hsieh and Chao, 2004). Moreover,
job rotation and job enlargement were developed in order to be benefited from the job specialization stemming from the
job engineering approach (Ali and Aroosiya, 2012).

The aim of this paper is to examine some of job design’s aspects and more precisely to examine the following job
design techniques: primarily the job rotation technique and subsequent the job enlargement and job enrichment method.

The interest for this paper stems from two factors. The first is the fact that job design tries to find ways in which
the modification of job characteristics, such as workload, autonomy, variety, and workplace support (Tement and Korunka,
2013), will result in improved employees’ attitude towards the job and hence in their increased performance (Bartlett,
2007). The second is the benefits of job design, which are increased job satisfaction and motivation of employees
(Armstrong, 2003; Durai, 2010), as well as improvement of employees’ skills (Morrison et al., 2005). In fact, job design is
positively correlated with increased employees’ performance and productivity (Ali and Aroosiya, 2012). For this reason,
this paper discusses apart from job design techniques, some of the most prominent motivational theories and job
satisfaction theory.
86 Dimitrios Belias & Dimitrios Sklikas

TECHNIQUES OF JOB DESIGN

General for Job Design

Job design can be defined as “the specification of the contents, methods, and relationships of jobs in order to
satisfy technological and organizational requirements as well as the social and personal requirements of the job holder”
(Armstrong, 2003, p. 494). According to another definition, job design “is the functions of arranging task, duties and
responsibilities in to an organizational unit of work” (Ali and Aroosiya, 2012, p. 4). Job design should start with an
analysis of task requirements, namely what should be done, and then it should take into account the following motivating
characteristics: autonomy, responsibility, discretion, and finally self-control (Armstrong, 2003). Chaneta (2011, p. 2)
defines job design as “the specification of the content, methods and relationship of jobs in order to satisfy technological
and organizational requirements as well as the social and personal requirements of the job holder”.

Chaneta (2011) states the criteria that should be taken under consideration for job design, which are the following:
maximise the degree of specialising; minimise the time required to do the job; minimise the level of skill required;
minimise learning time/ training time; maximise the use of the machines; and minimise the degree of flexibility in the
performance of the job.

Job Rotation

Job rotation is a system, which allows employees to rotate from one job to another, in a predetermined way
(Durai, 2010). In order for the job rotation procedure to be effective and the employee not be rotated in an inappropriate
job position, four factors should be taken into account: a) the gender of the employee, b) the physical demands of the job
position, c) the knowledge, skills and capacities of the employee and d) the demands and the time needed for performing
other tasks (Carnahan et al., 2000). For example, in the field of sport management, the evaluation of management
competencies is of great importance and should be taken into account in the case of job rotation (Ko et al., 2011).

Job rotation has many advantages, such as improvement of productivity, provision of training possibilities,
increase of employees’ retention, enhancement of employees’ career (Jorgensen et al., 2005), while at the same time the
employee gains a better insight in the organisation’s operations (Ali and Aroosiya, 2012). Furthermore, job rotation seems
to foster employee learning, increase employee motivation and human capital accumulation, while at the same time it leads
to reduced employee boredom (Bhadury and Radovilsky, 2006), reduced employee absenteeism, and inclusion of workers
with disabilities in job positions suitable for their capacities and skills (Asensio-Cuesta et al., 2012), and finally increases
employees problem solving skills (Allwood and Lee, 2004). Additionally, two more factors that may drive the decision of
an organisation for job rotation are the restructuring of the organization and the periodic reshuffling of employee-job
assignments (Jaturanonda et al., 2006).

Apart from the above, job rotation is regarded as a method for control the work-related musculoskeletal disorders
(Frazer et al., 2003; Jorgensen et al., 2005; Asensio-Cuesta et al., 2012), to reduce the exposure to work-related injuries
(Jorgensen et al., 2005) and hazardous noise levels (Tharmmaphornphilas et al., 2003), as well as to reduce exposure to
strenuous materials handling (Carnahan et al., 2000). This is because “the premise of job rotation is that workers rotate
from job to job in a given time period, with the objective of minimizing the accumulated biomechanical loading on a
particular body part for all workers” (Jorgensen et al., 2005, p. 1721). In addition, “the general principle of job rotation is
to alleviate the physical fatigue and stress for a particular set of muscles by rotating employees among other jobs that use
primarily different muscle groups” (Frazer et al., 2003, p. 905).
Aspects of Job Design 87

Moreover, the study of Hsieh and Chao (2004) indicated that job rotation has a positive impact on job burnout,
whereas the first studies of the early 1950s argued that job rotation may be used in order to reduce employees’ monotony,
boredom and fatigue derived either from the mechanical and repetitious job characteristics or the job specialization and the
mass production of that decade (Hsieh and Chao, 2004). Nevertheless, the results of the benefits of job rotation from the
international literature are ambiguous, since some studies mention that job rotation may increase employee job satisfaction
but not employee performance, whereas other researches argue that job rotation does not any impact on employee
satisfaction (Bhadury and Radovilsky, 2006).

However, there are some obstacles in implementing an effective job rotation procedure, such as the negotiation
power of labour unions, the job rotation to another job position with similar risks, and lack of knowledge and skills on
behalf of the employees for a specific job (Jorgensen et al., 2005). One more factor that hinders job rotation is the gender
stereotypes in the working environment. More precisely, Sundin (2001) claims that some job positions are regarded as
masculine and other as feminine. The system of gender-determined jobs does not facilitate, but it rather makes job rotation
either harder or inappropriate.

Job Enlargement

Job enlargement “transforms the jobs to include more and/or different tasks” (Durai, 2010, p. 96). The basic aim
of job enlargement is to stimulate the interest of employee in the job, namely increasing job attraction, through the
differentiated and various tasks that the employee performs in his/her job. Consequently, the objective of job enlargement
is to design jobs where the needs of employees meet the interests of the organisation (Durai, 2010).

There are two approaches of job enlargement. The first is the horizontal enlargement, which ‘refers to the degree
to which a job contains many tasks” (Durai, 2010, p. 96). This is achieved through adding more tasks to the existing tasks
performed by an employee at the same skill level. The overall goal of horizontal enlargement is to reduce the level of
specialization and boredom of work, to reduce the number of difficult tasks, and finally to lead towards the development of
new employee skills. For these reasons, this approach is usually preferred in the case of complex and highly structured
tasks (Durai, 2010). The second type is vertical enlargement, which refers to “the degree to which the employees decide
how the task is to be done” (Durai, 2010, p. 96). The main goal of this technique is to enhance the status and the self-
fulfillment needs of the employees, while it gives the employees the opportunity to take part in the organisation, the
planning and the control of tasks (Durai, 2010).

Job Enrichment

Job enrichment refers to “the development of work practices that challenge and motivate employees to perform
better” (Durai, 2010, p. 92). More precisely, job enrichment “is the technique entails enriching job, which refers to the
inclusion of greater variety of work content, requiring a higher level of knowledge and skill, giving workers, autonomy and
responsibility in terms of planning, directing, and controlling their own performance, and providing the opportunity for
personal growth and meaningful work experience” (Ali and Aroosiya, 2012, p. 5).

The main characteristics that play a crucial role in job enrichment are (Armstrong, 2003): variety, the belief that
the task is important, the use of abilities, and feedback. Job enrichment includes a number of different workplace practices,
such as quality circles, self-directed teams, job rotation, and information sharing (Mohr and Zoghi, 2006). The goal of job
enrichment is to provide an enhanced autonomy for the employees of an organisation and increased operational efficiency
for the organisation itself (Durai, 2010).
88 Dimitrios Belias & Dimitrios Sklikas

Apart from employee motivation (Armstrong, 2003; Durai, 2010), job enrichment is positively correlated with
feedback-seeking behaviour, which in turns improve not only job performance, but also organizational effectiveness
(Cheng and Lu, 2012). Last but not least, it is supported that job enrichment is associated with the high involvement of
employees in the decision-making process and the decentralization of decision making (Wood and Wall, 2007). This can
be achieved through the design of jobs which are based on the autonomy, something that leads the discussion to the
importance of intrinsic motivation that will be discussed later. The figure below depicts the job enrichment model, as given
by Lunenburg (2011).

Figure 1: Job Enrichment Model

ADVANTAGES OF JOB DESIGN

Job Satisfaction

Job satisfaction is defined as the positive and negative attitudes that the individual has for his/her work
(Koustelios and Kousteliou, 2001, p. 31). Locke (1976, as cited in Zournatzi et al., 2006, p. 19) has identified job
satisfaction as a pleasurable or positive emotional state resulting from the appraisal of one's work or work experience. The
fact is that there is not a single and unique definition for job satisfaction, since it is a multidimensional concept, as
indicated by Zournatzi et al. (2006).

Job satisfaction is related to the productivity and efficiency of worker absenteeism and staff mobility, and depends
on factors such as the content of the work, and the context in which work is carried out (Koustelios and Kousteliou, 2001).
Additional factors associated with job satisfaction are the reduction of errors in the workplace, and the intention of
employees to leave their jobs (Zournatzi et al., 2006). Furthermore, according to the international literature, the factors that
contribute to the job satisfaction, is their involvement and participation in the decision – making process of the
organization (Shuck et al., 2011; Greasley et al., 2005; Joensson, 2008), the ability to perform one’s tasks effectively and
in accordance to ones perceptions of self – efficacy (Greasley et al., 2005), the workplace climate (Shuck et al., 2011), the
economic incentives (Stringer et al., 2011), achievement, interpersonal relationships, and general working conditions
(Halepota and Shah, 2011). Especially in the leisure services, such as sport, Young et al. (2013) argue that working
conditions, work environment and resources and employee benefits are related positively to job satisfaction.

In relation to the above analysis, job satisfaction is closely related to both role ambiguity and role conflict, which
are in turn related to job design. The role ambiguity is associated with the uncertainty experienced when the employee does
not know the requirements of his/her work, how to achieve them and how he/she expects others to behave in the same
work. The role conflict exists when different people or different groups of persons with whom the employee interacts (e.g.,
family, colleagues, friends, parents) have conflicting expectations for behavior (Amarantidou and Koustelios, 2009). The
study of Ayub and Rafif (2011) concluded that there is a positive correlation between job satisfaction and motivation.
Various factors, both tangible and intangible, affect the satisfaction that individuals derive from their work. For example,
Schultz and Schultz (1998, as cited in Ayub and Rafif, 2011) advocate that job satisfaction include the positive and
Aspects of Job Design 89

negative feelings of employees about their jobs, where motivation plays a crucial role. For this reason, the next section
discusses the various motivation theories, so as to better understand the important role of job enlargement and design on
employees’ motivation.

Motivation of Employees

The motive is described as a need which is so pressing that stimulates a person to act (Kotler and Keller, 2006). A
need becomes a motive when it has been increased to a satisfied level of intension. Motivation methods vary, from
monetary rewards, to the acquisition of higher levels of responsibility.

The most common theory of motivation is Abraham Maslow’s model of hierarchical needs. Maslow considered as
the main initiator of the theory of motivation based on a hierarchical model of needs, which consists of five main
categories ranging from lower to higher levels: a) biological and physiological needs; b) safety needs; c) belongingness and
love needs; d) esteem needs; e) self-actualisation. Maslow argued that the man throughout his life, acting in such a way as
to saturate as many of its requirements, in the most efficient and economical way. Once one satisfies a need from the lower
levels then the desire to satisfy new needs in a higher level arises. Maslow’s model of needs is too static. By ignoring the
dynamic nature of needs and the intertwined relationship with its cultural surroundings, as well as eliminating the
temporality, it created a rigid and not changeable model. The common experience guarantees that a person can also take
care in order to meet the needs of all levels of command (Kotler and Keller, 2006).

Alderfer altered Maslow’s model, introducing the ERG theory. More precisely, Alderfer suggested that individual
needs can be divided into three groups (Kotler and Keller, 2006): a) Existence needs, which include physiological and
security needs; b) Relationship needs, which include the social needs that are met through relationships with family,
friends, colleagues etc.; c) Growth needs, which reflect a desire for personal psychological developments and which fall
within the two higher categories of Maslow needs, namely self-esteem needs and self-realization.

Herzberg was the first researcher that indicated that both the satisfaction and the dissatisfaction that a worker feels
stem from various factors. Herzberg developed a theory of two factors: the disincentives, factors that cause dissatisfaction,
and motives, factors that cause satisfaction. The environmental factors are called hygienes (Herzberg et al., 2009). These
factors weaken the negative stimuli labor and the resulting frustration, while the motivation factors, namely the hierarchy
that someone has in the work, the work status etc, stimulate employees to work harder and more effective (Herzberg et al.,
2009).

Motivation theories are linked to job satisfaction. More precisely, according to the theory of cognitive
inconsistency, in order for an employee to feel satisfaction from his/her job and increase its productivity, his/her
perceptions regarding the contribution to work should be consistent with the expected reward. If this does not happen, then
the employee cannot justify his efforts in order to meet the job requirements and therefore he begins to doubt about the
value of his salary (Stiff and Mongeau, 2003). Some examples of cognitive motivation may include the following: the
resolve of complex rather than simple problems, the responsibility for situations that require a lot of thinking, the undertake
of tasks that tasks which implies finding new solutions to problems (Schei et al., 2002).

Apart from the motivation theories that are based primarily on economic incentives, there are also those which
focus on other types of rewards. For example, the outcome – based theory of work motivation identifies four types of
motivation (Cadona et al., 2003): a) Extrinsic motivation: this motivation is based on the rewards an employee expects to
receive from the company. For example, an employee may work more time, because he expects to receive the overtime
payment; b) Intrinsic motivation: this motivation is based on the implications that an action has on a person. For example,
90 Dimitrios Belias & Dimitrios Sklikas

an employee may work overtime, because he gains a satisfaction working on a specific project; c) Contributive motivation:
this motivation is based on the implications that an action is expected to have upon the reactor. For example, an employee
may work overtime or even harder, because he wants to contribute to a greater extent to the goals and aims of the company
or the organization; d) Relational motivation: this motivation is based on the impact that an action is expected to have on
the relationship between a person and the reactor. For example, an employee may work overtime, because on the opposite
case he/she would be fired.

CONCLUSIONS

The main purpose of job design is “to increase a firm’s ability to meet its objectives effectively and to provide job
satisfaction to the employees” (Durai, 2010, p. 92). Job design has two primary aims. The first is “to satisfy the
requirements of the organization for productivity, operational efficiency and quality of product or service”, whereas the
second is “to satisfy the needs of the individual for interest, challenge and accomplishment” (Armstrong, 2003, p. 494).
Finally, it should be noted one more aspect of job design, which makes a link between the job characteristics and the work-
life balance of the individual (Lingard et al., 2010).

Based on the aims of job design, it can be understood that the basic questions to which the job design theory
addresses are the following: a) which are those elements that motivate people to work, b) which are the most significant
characteristics of the job position, c) how will the alternatives to job design be identified and finally d) which and how job
design changes should be implemented.

In fact, job design is an effective tool for the enhancement of employees’ job satisfaction, motivation of workers,
and ultimately the increase of employees’ performance and productivity. Chen and Lu (2012) state that job design has a
positive impact on employee motivation and increased employee performance, while at the same time it is associated with
the psychological meaningfulness of employees and their feedback-seeking behaviour. Other researchers (Kaarboe and
Olsen, 2006; Fried et al., 2007) have found that job design is associated with career incentives. In any case, job design,
through its various methods, has positive implications for the employees’ motivation, their job satisfaction and thus their
job performance and productivity. The above means that through job design the organizations try to increase employees’
productivity through non-monetary rewards, such as through satisfaction from personal achievements, increased
responsibility, problem-solving, or accomplishment of targets. This coincides with what is supported for the intrinsic
motivation methods.

It is argued that, in comparison to other motivation methods, those which are based on intrinsic factors have
gained more attention, since they constitute a type of motivation that leads to highly valued outcomes such as creativity,
quality, spontaneity, and vitality. On the contrary, extrinsic motivation factors lead to desirable consequences which have
no relation to the activity itself, such as tangible rewards (Reinholt, 2006). The difference between these two categories of
motivation factors is being given by Reinholt (2006, p. 2), who points out that “whereas intrinsic motivation is often
associated with the involvement in complex tasks, extrinsic motivation is claimed to be important in relation to unattractive
and simple tasks”.

This impact is very important, given the fact that, positive job satisfaction is related to higher job performance and
increased productivity (Saari and Judge, 2004). In addition, higher levels of job satisfaction are associated with the overall
life satisfaction (Saari and Judge, 2004; Drakou et al., 2006). On the other hand, job dissatisfaction is related to
absenteeism, decreased productivity and performance, lateness and decision to retire (Saari and Judge, 2004).
Aspects of Job Design 91

In general, job design has advantages for both the organisation and the employees. The organizational benefits are
the increased productivity and efficiency, effective team work, skilled employees ready to meet the job position
requirements, targeted training of employees which increases the human capital accumulation, effective talent
management, and finally improved employee attraction, commitment and retention. From the perspective of employees,
job design offers clarity of the role and the responsibility of the employee, targeted training in order to meet the future
needs of the employee and the organisation, team cohesion, opportunity for personal and professional development, and
finally increased job satisfaction and commitment to the organisation.

However, this paper has examined only some of the job design techniques. Therefore, a future research would
examine the rest job design techniques, in order to compare their characteristics and their contribution to the employees’
productivity, performance, satisfaction and motivation.

REFERENCES

1. Ali, H., & Aroosiya, M. (2012). Impact of job design on employees’ performance. Retrieved from
http://www.kln.ac.lk/fcms/ICBI2012/images/ICBM/dccs/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20HRM013.pdf

2. Allwood, J.M., & Lee, W.L. (2004). The impact of job rotation on problem solving skills. International Journal of
Production Research, 42:5, 865-881

3. Amarantidou, S., & Koustelios, A. (2009). Differences in the levels of job burnout, role ambiguity and role
conflict in physical education teachers. Management of Sport and Leisure, 6:2, 20-33

4. Asensio-Cuesta, S., Diego-Mas, J.A., Cremades-Oliver, L.V., & Gonzlez-Cruz, M.C. (2012). A method to design
job rotation schedules to prevent work-related musculoskeletal disorders in repetitive work. International Journal
of Production Research, 50:24, 7467-7478

5. Ayub, N., & Rafif, S. (2011). The relationship between work motivation and job satisfaction. Pakistan Business
Review, July, 332-347

6. Bartlett, A.L. (2007). Job Characteristics and Job Design in Table-Service Restaurants. Journal of Human
Resources in Hospitality & Tourism, 6:1, 23-36

7. Bhadury, J., & Radovilsky, Z. (2006). Job rotation using the multi-period assignment model. International Journal
of Production Research, 44:20, 4431-4444

8. Cardona, P., Lawrence, B.S., & Espejo, A. (2003). Outcome – based theory of work motivation. University of
Navarra, IESE Working Paper No. D/495

9. Carnahan, B.J., Redfern, M.S., & Norman, B. (2000). Designing safe job rotation schedules using optimization
and heuristic search. Ergonomics, 43:4, 543-560

10. Chaneta, I. (2011). Supporting workers’ performance at work-place through job designing. Journal of
Comprehensive Research. Retrieved from http://jupapadoc.startlogic.com/compresearch/papers/JCR11-1.pdf

11. Chen, J.W., & Lu, K.M. (2012). The role of job design and mechanism in motivating feedback-seeking behaviour
in transportation service. The Service Industries Journal, 32:13, 2047-2057

12. Drakou, A., Kambitsis, C., Charachousou, Y., & Tzetzis, G. (2006). Exploring Life Satisfaction of Sport Coaches
in Greece. European Sport Management Quarterly, 6:3, 239-252
92 Dimitrios Belias & Dimitrios Sklikas

13. Frazer, M., Norman, R., Wells, R., & Neumann, P. (2003). The effects of job rotation on the risk of reporting low
back pain. Ergonomics, 46:9, 904-919

14. Fried, Y., Grant, A.M., Levi, A.S., Hadani, M., & Slowik L.H. (2007). Job Design in Temporal Context: A Career
Dynamics Perspective. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 28:7, 911-927

15. Greasley, K., Bryman, A., Dainty, A., Price, A., Soeanto, R., & King, N. (2005). Employee perceptions of
empowerment. Employee Relations, 27:4, 354 – 368

16. Halepota, J.A., & Shah, N. (2011). An empirical investigation of organizational antecedents on employee job
satisfaction in a developing country. Transforming government: People, Process and Policy, 5:3, 280 – 294

17. Herzberg, F., Mausner, B., & Snyderman, B.B. (2009). The motivation to work. New Jersey: Transaction
Publishers

18. Hsieh, A.T., & Chao, H.Y. (2004). A reassessment of the relationship between job specialization, job rotation and
job burnout: example of Taiwan's high-technology industry. The International Journal of Human Resource
Management, 15:6, 1108-1123

19. Jaturanonda, C., Nanthavanij, S., & Chongphaisal, P. (2006). A survey study on weights of decision criteria for
job rotation in Thailand: comparison between public and private sectors. The International Journal of Human
Resource Management, 17:10, 1834-1851

20. Joensson, T. (2008). A multidimensional approach to employee participation and the association with social
identification in organizations. Employee Relations, 306, 594 – 607

21. Jorgensen, M., Davis, K., Kotowski, S., Aedla, P., & Dunning, K. (2005). Characteristics of job rotation in the
Midwest US manufacturing sector. Ergonomics, 48:15, 1721-1733

22. Kaarboe, O.M., & Olsen, T.E. (2006). Career Concerns, Monetary Incentives and Job Design. The Scandinavian
Journal of Economics, 108:2, 299-316

23. Ko, L.M., Henry, I., & Kao, J.C.H. (2011). The perceived importance of sport management competencies by
academics and practitioners in the cultural/industrial context of Taiwan. Managing Leisure, 16:4, 302-317

24. Koustelios, A., & Kousteliou, I. (2001). Job satisfaction and job burnout in the education. Psychology, 8:1, 30-39

25. Lingard, H.C., Francis, V., & Turner, M. (2010). Work–family enrichment in the Australian construction industry:
implications for job design. Construction Management and Economics, 28:5, 467-480

26. Lunenburg, F.C. (2011). Motivating by Enriching Jobs to Make Them More Interesting and Challenging.
International Journal of Management, Business, and Administration, 15:1. Retrieved from
http://www.nationalforum.com/Electronic%20Journal%20Volumes/Lunenburg,%20Fred%20C%20Motivating%2
0by%20Enriching%20Jobs%20IJMBA%20V15%20N1%202011.pdf

27. Michael Armstrong (2003). A Handbook of Management Techniques. London: Kogan Page Limited

28. Mohr, R.D., & Zoghi, C. (2006). Is Job Enrichment Really Enriching?. Retrieved from
http://www.bls.gov/ore/pdf/ec060010.pdf

29. Morrison, D., Cordery, J., Girardi, A., & Payne, R. (2005). Job design, opportunities for skill utilization, and
intrinsic job satisfaction. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 14:1, 59-79
Aspects of Job Design 93

30. Pravin Durai (2010). Human Resource Management. New Delhi: Pearson Education

31. Reinholt, M. (2006). No More Polarization, Please! Towards a More Nuanced Perspective on Motivation in
Organizations. Copenhagen Business School - Center for Strategic Management and Globalization. SMG
Working Paper No. 9

32. Saari, L.M., & Judge, T.A. (2004). Employee attitudes and job satisfaction. Human Resource Management, 43:4,
395-407

33. Schei, V., Rognes, J.K., & Falkgård, S.M. (2002). Thinking Deep and Feeling Good: Cognitive Motivation and
Positive Affect in Negotiations. Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration. Paper prepared
for IACM June 2002, Utah, USA

34. Shuck, M.B., Rocco, T.S., & Albornoz, C.A. (2011). Exploring employee engagement from the employee
perspective: implications for HRD. Journal of European Industrial Training, 35:4, 300 – 325

35. Stringer, C., Didham, J., & Heivananthampillai, P. (2011). Motivation,pay satisfaction, and job satisfaction on
front – line employees. Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, 8:2, 161 – 179

36. Sundin, E. (2001). Gender-determined Jobs and Job-rotation - Problems and Possibilities. The Service Industries
Journal, 21:3, 87-112

37. Tement, S., & Korunka, C. (2013). Does Trait Affectivity Predict Work-to-Family Conflict and Enrichment
Beyond Job Characteristics?. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 147:2, 197-216

38. Tharmmaphornphilas, W., Green, B., Carnahan, B.J., & Norman, B.A. (2003). Applying Mathematical Modeling
to Create Job Rotation Schedules for Minimizing Occupational Noise Exposure. AIHA Journal, 64:3, 401-405

39. Young, S.J., Sturts, J.R., Ross, C.M., & Kim, K.T. (2013). Generational differences and job satisfaction in leisure
services. Managing Leisure, 18:2, 152-170

40. Wood, S.J., & Wall, T.D. (2007). Work enrichment and employee voice in human resource management-
performance studies. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 18:7, 1335-1372

41. Zournatzi, E., Tsiggilis, N., Koystelios, A., & Pintzopoulou, E. (2006). Job satisfaction of physical education
teachers of primary and secondary education. Management of Sport and Leisure, 3:2, 18-28
View publication stats