Validation of the Job Crafting Scale in Latin American Workers

En este estudio, se analizaron las propiedades psicométricas de la versión en español (Bakker et al., 2018) de la escala Job Crafting de Tims et al. (2012) en población latinoamericana. Aplicamos la escala a una muestra de 903 empleados (42.6% mujeres y 57.4% hombres) de Colombia y Ecuador. Se examinaron la fiabilidad y la validez. Los resultados del análisis factorial confirmatorio mostraron un ajuste adecuado tanto en Colombia (CFI = .916, TLI = .900, IFI = .917, RMSEA = .060) como en Ecuador (CFI = .918, TLI = .903, IFI = .919, RMSEA = .064), en la estructura de cuatro factores de la escala original. Se encontró evidencia de validación, relacionada con el criterio de bienestar psicológico, para las dimensiones de recursos estructurales crecientes y demandas desafiantes crecientes. La versión en español de la escala demuestra su utilidad para la investigación en el contexto latinoamericano.(AU)

In this study, the psychometric properties of the Spanish version (Bakker et al., 2018) of the Job Crafting scale of Tims et al. (2012), was an-alyzed in a Latin American population. We applied the scale to a sample of 903 employees (42.6% women & 57.4% men) from Colombia and Ecua-dor. Reliability and validity were examined. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis showed an adequate fit both in Colombia (CFI = .916, TLI = .900, IFI = .917, RMSEA = .060) and in Ecuador (CFI = .918, TLI = .903, IFI = .919, RMSEA = .064), in the four-factor structure of the origi-nal scale. Evidence of validation, related to criterion for psychological well-being for the dimensions of increasing structural resources and increasing challenging demands, was found. The Spanish version of the scale demon-strates its usefulness for research in the Latin American context.(AU)

Meta-analysis and Scientific Mapping of Well-being and Job Performance.

In this article, we present a meta-analysis and a scientific mapping about the relationship between different types of well-being and job performance. We followed The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses (Moher et al., 2009), and conduct the search in Web of Science, SCOPUS, Ebscohost, Proquest, and Jstor databases. We identified 43 studies from 1994 to early 2020 that represent 45 independent samples, 34,221 participants, and 77 correlations between four types of well-being and six of job performance. Meta-analysis results show that are different forms of relations between types and there is not only one form to explain the happy-productive worker hypothesis. The scientific mapping shows that there are seven clusters of topics about well-being and job performance in the Web of Science base articles: (I) Burnout and axiety, (II) Stress and depression, (III) Individual resources, (IV) Work context, (V) Work engagement and commitment, (VI) Justice, and (VII) Human resources practices. We organize the topics from each cluster in the different groups of variables of the contextual model of individual work, well-being and performance (van Veldhoven & Peccei, 2015) to explain their impact in well-being and job performance. We included the observations of our analysis and identified the future key directions for the field.

Meta-analysis and scientific mapping of well-beingand job performance

In this article, we present a meta-analysis and a scientific mapping about the relationship between different types of well-being and job performance. We followed The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses (Moher et al., 2009), and conduct the search in Web of Science, SCOPUS, Ebscohost, Proquest, and Jstor databases. We identified 43 studies from 1994 to early 2020 that represent 45 independent samples, 34,221 participants, and 77 correlations between four types of well-being and six of job performance. Meta-analysis results show that are different forms of relations between types and there is not only one form to explain the happy-productive worker hypothesis. The scientific mapping shows that there are seven clusters of topics about well-being and job performance in the Web of Science base articles: (I) Burnout and axiety, (II) Stress and depression, (III) Individual resources, (IV) Work context, (V) Work engagement and commitment, (VI) Justice, and (VII) Human resources practices. We organize the topics from each cluster in the different groups of variables of the contextual model of individual work, well-being and performance (van Veldhoven & Peccei, 2015) to explain their impact in well-being and job performance. We included the observations of our analysis and identified the future key directions for the field

No disponible