1

Core Self-Evaluations and Job Satisfaction: The Role of Self-

Concordance

2

Core Self-Evaluations (CSE)

Represents the fundamental assessments that people make about their worthiness and competence

Higher-order concept indicated by:1. self-esteem2. locus of control3. neuroticism (emotional stability)4. generalized self-efficacy

The first three of these traits are the most studied in psychology

3

Applications of CSE

CSE has been related to: motivation (Erez & Judge, 2001) job performance (Judge & Bono, 2001) stress (Best, 2003) leadership (Eisenberg, 2000)

The most commonly investigated criterion is job satisfaction

4

.11

.32

.12 .12

.26.32

.24

.40

.58

.52

.36

.45

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

SE GSF LOC ES

Notes: SE=self-esteem; GSF=generalized self-efficacy;LOC=locus of control; ES=emotional stability

End points indicatelimits of 80% CV

CSE – Job Satisfaction

5

CSE – Job SatisfactionExplaining the Relationship

Research indicates that CSE – job satisfaction relationship is mediated by intrinsic job characteristics: High CSE people both attain more complex jobs, and perceive more challenge in jobs of equal complexity

As Judge, Bono, Erez, Locke, and Thoresen (2002) commented, “Other theoretical mechanisms will need to be studied”

6

Self-Concordance

Research suggests that people who chose goals that are concordant with their ideals, interests, and values are happier than those who pursue goals for other (e.g., extrinsic or defensive) reasons (see Sheldon & Elliot, 1997)

Thus, one mechanism that may link CSE and job satisfaction is the motivation underlying goal pursuit

7

Self-Concordance Model

Argues that individuals may pursue a goal for four (NME) types of reasons (Sheldon & Elliot, JPSP, 1998): External—pursuing a goal due to others’ wishes, or to

attain “indirect” rewards Introjected—pursuing a goal to avoid feelings of shame,

guilt, or anxiety Identified—pursuing a goal out of a belief that it is an

important goal to have Intrinsic—pursuing a goal because of the fun and

enjoyment it provides

8

Self-concordantgoals

Job/lifesatisfaction

Goal attainment

Core self-evaluations + +

++

+

Self-esteem

Generalizedself-efficacy

Locus ofcontrol

Neuroticism

Hypothesized Model

9

Method

We conducted two studies Study 1: Examine the mediating role of self-

concordance and goal attainment with respect to the personal goals of a undergraduates

Study 2: Test a model parallel to that in Study 1, but focusing on work goals and job satisfaction (as opposed to personal goals and life satisfaction)

10

Study 1 MethodParticipants and Measures

240 undergraduates Personality and self-concordance were

measured at Time 1, and goal attainment and life satisfaction were measured at Time 2 (N=183)

Core self-evaluations was measured with four individual scales, which then were treated as indicators of a higher-order core self-evaluations concept

11

Study 1 MethodMeasure of Self-Concordance

Participants recorded six short-term goals (goals that could reasonably be attained in the next 60 days)

After identifying their goals, participants reported their reasons for goal pursuit, for each goal separately

Following Sheldon and Elliot (1998):SC = (intrinsic + identified) – (external + introjected)

12

Study 1 MethodOther Measures

Goal attainment. We used two items from prior self-concordance research (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999); participants responded to each of these items for each of their six goals, after two months (responses were averaged across items and goals)

Life satisfaction. Life satisfaction was measured with the five-item Satisfaction with Life Scale

13

Self-concordantgoals

Lifesatisfaction

Goal attainment

Core self-evaluations

.24** .18†

.20**.25**

.47**

Self-esteem

Generalizedself-efficacy

Locus ofcontrol

Neuroticism

Results: Study 1

.95**

.75**

.66**

-.61**

Notes: † p < .10. * p < .05; ** p < .01.2=14.69 (df=10). RMSEA = .05.RMSR = .04. CFI = .99. IFI = .99.

14

Study 2 MethodParticipants and Measures

Participants were employees of a large defense contractor (N=251)

Personality and self-concordance were measured at Time 1, and goal attainment and life satisfaction were measured at Time 2

Core self-evaluations was measured with the same scale as in Study 1

15

Study 2 MethodMeasures

Participants recorded six short-term work goals; otherwise the same measurement approach to self-concordance was followed

Goal attainment was measured in a manner comparable to Study 1

Job satisfaction was measured with the short form of the Brayfield and Rothe (1951) job satisfaction scale

16

Self-concordantgoals

Jobsatisfaction

Goal attainment

Core self-evaluations

.30** .22*

.10.17*

.36**

Self-esteem

Generalizedself-efficacy

Locus ofcontrol

Neuroticism

Results: Study 2

.95**

.76**

.49**

-.76**

Notes: * p < .05; ** p < .01.2=21.82 (df=10). RMSEA = .07.RMSR = .04. CFI = .98. IFI = .98.

17

Discussion

According to the hypothesized model, people with positive self-regard are more likely to have self-concordant goals. In turn, those with more self-concordant goals should be happier and more satisfied with their goals, themselves, and ultimately their lives

Results supported the model

18

Discussion

One of the more important contributions of this research was to illuminate the effect of core self- evaluations on self-concordance and its consequences In both studies, there were significant associations

between core self-evaluations and self-concordance Those with positive core self-evaluations were especially good in

demonstrating this adaptability to select “self-concordant” goals that represent their implicit interests

19

Discussion

Surprisingly, results involving goal attainment were relatively weak Goal attainment did not mediate self-concordance

– satisfaction relationship This relationship may be complex

Whereas setting difficult goals is dissatisfying because they lead to low expectations for goal attainment (Mento, Locke, & Klein, 1992), the attainment of those goals (which is facilitated by the setting of difficult goals) should lead to satisfaction (Locke & Latham, 1990)--i.e., the results may be offsetting

20

Implications

Results join increasing body of research that shows that individuals become more satisfied with job and life through one’s pursuits, if one picks the right goals and does well at them

People with positive core self-evaluations strive for the “right” reasons, and therefore get the “right” results, both of which in turn increase their levels of satisfaction

Moreover, such increases in satisfaction appear to last (both studies were longitudinal) and perhaps lead to even more positive changes in an “upward spiral” of positive outcomes