SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 39 Sayı: 3

Meaningful Work Scale for Educational Organizations

Eğitim Örgütleri İçin Anlamlı İş Ölçeği

Ahmet GÖÇEN
Ragıp TERZİ
Pages
1487–1512
Publication Date
2019-12-24
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The scale can be applied not only for employees of educational institutions but also for all business organizations due to its structure and general framework.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Meaningful work, in line with one’s life goals, involves answers for “why I am doing this work and why I am in this workplace.” Meaning at work refers to the harmony between one's work and his/her purpose of life.
📊
Key Findings & Data:After the pilot study, the participants (N=454) were selected according to the convenience sampling among the teachers from Şanlıurfa.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The scale can be applied not only for employees of educational institutions but also for all business organizations due to its structure and general framework.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Anlamlı İş · Ölçek Geliştirme · Öğretmenler

Abstract

Meaningful work, in line with one’s life goals, involves answers for “why I am doing this work and why I am in this workplace.” Meaning at work refers to the harmony between one's work and his/her purpose of life. The purpose of this study is to develop a scale that focuses on meaningful work perceptions of employees. In order to develop a meaningful work scale according to the teachers' perceptions, the literature was scanned and a six-dimensional scale was formed. After the pilot study, the participants (N=454) were selected according to the convenience sampling among the teachers from Şanlıurfa. Exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis were used to analyze the data. The internal consistency value of the 21-item and 6-dimensional scale is .84 and the scale provides perfect fit. The dimensions of the Meaningful Work Scale are listed as “Meaning at Work, Search for Meaning at Work, Work Relationships, Transcendence at Work, Humility at Work, and Meaning Leadership at Work. The scale can be applied not only for employees of educational institutions but also for all business organizations due to its structure and general framework.

Özet

Anlamlı iş, kişinin hayat amaçları doğrultusunda “sahip olduğum işi neden yapıyorum, neden bu işyerindeyim” sorularının cevaplarını içerir. İşte anlam kişinin işiyle hayat amacı arasındaki uyumu ifade eder. Bu çalışmanın amacı, çalışanların anlamlı iş algılarına odaklanan bir ölçek geliştirmektir. Çalışmada öğretmen algılarına göre bir anlamlı iş ölçeği geliştirilmesi amacıyla ilgili alanyazın taranmış ve altı boyutlu bir ölçek oluşturulmuştur. Çalışma katılımcıları, pilot uygulama sonrası Şanlıurfa ilinde görev yapan öğretmenler arasından uygun örnekleme göre seçilmiştir (N=454). Verilerin analizinde açımlayıcı faktör analizi ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizine başvurulmuştur. 21 maddeli ve 6 boyutlu ölçeğin güvenirlik iç tutarlılık değeri .84 olup ölçek mükemmel uyum göstermektedir. Anlamlı İş Ölçeği’nin boyutları “İşte Anlam, İşte Anlam Arayışı, İş İlişkileri, İşte Aşkınlık, İşte Tevazu ve İşte Anlam Liderliği” şeklinde sıralanmaktadır. Ölçek, yapısı ve genel çerçevesi dâhilinde sadece eğitim kurumları çalışanları için değil tüm iş örgütleri için de uygulanabilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÖÇEN, A., TERZİ, R. (2019). Meaningful Work Scale for Educational Organizations. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 39 Sayı: 3, 1487–1512. https://ajindex.com/articles/905970

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (8)

  1. Allan, B. A., Duffy, R. D., & Collisson, B. (2018). Helping others increases meaningful work: Evidence from three experiments. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 65(2), 155. Ashmos, D. P., & Duchon, D. (2000). Spirituality at work: A conceptualization and measure. Journal of Management Inquiry, 9(2), 134-145.
  2. Bailey, C., & Madden, A. (2016). What makes work meaningful-or meaningless? MIT Sloan Management Review, 57(4). Bendassolli, P. F., Borges-Andrade, J. E., Alves, J. S. C., & Torres, T. D. L. (2015). Meaningful Work Scale in creative industries: a confirmatory factor analysis. Psico-USF, 20(1), 1-12.
  3. Bentler, P. M., & Hu, P. (1995). EQS: Structural Equations Program Manual. Los Angeles, CA: BMPD Statistical Software. Both-Nwabuwe, J., Dijkstra, M., & Beersma, B. (2017). Sweeping the floor or putting a man on the moon: How to define and measure meaningful work. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1658. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In K. A. Bollen ve J. S. Long (Eds.). Testing Structural Equation Models (pp. 136–162).
  4. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Cai, W., Lysova, E. I., Khapova, S. N., & Bossink, B. A. (2018). The effects of servant leadership, meaningful work and job autonomy on innovative work behavior in chinese high-tech firms: A Moderated Mediation Model. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1767. Fairlie, P., & Flett, G. (2004). The existential meaning of work inventory: Development and initial validation. Paper presented at the 112th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Hawaii. Ghadi, M. Y., Fernando, M., & Caputi, P. (2015). Describing work as meaningful: towards a conceptual clarification. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance, 2(3), 202-223.
  5. Göçen, A., (2019). Öğretmenlerin yaşam anlamı, psikolojik sermaye ve cinsiyetinin psikolojik iyi oluşlarına etkisi. Cumhuriyet International Journal of Education, 8(1), 135-153.
  6. Gül, İ., & Türkmen, F. (2016). Öğretmen görüşlerine göre okul yöneticilerinin hizmetkâr liderlik davranışlarının incelenmesi. Journal of Human Sciences, 13(3), 5515-5529.
  7. IBM Corp. (2013). IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows (Version 22.0). Armonk, NY: IBM Corp. Kessler, R. (2000). The soul of education: Helping students find connection, compassion, and character at school. Alexandria: ASCD. Kinjerski, V. M., & Skrypnek, B. J. (2004). Defining spirit at work: Finding common ground. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 17(1), 26-42.
  8. Kline, R. B. (2011). P