essay on job crafting

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

What Job Crafting Looks Like

• Jane E. Dutton
• Amy Wrzesniewski

Stories of three people who changed their jobs to find more meaning.

Twenty years ago, the authors started studying job crafting — the act of altering your job to make it more meaningful. Since then, they’ve identified different forms this concept can take. They include: task crafting , which involves changing the type, scope, sequence, and number of tasks that make up your job; relational crafting, where you alter who you interact with in your work; and cognitive crafting , where you modify the way you interpret the tasks and/or work you’re doing. The authors share stories of three individuals that illustrate what each of these types look like and how employees were able to make their jobs more meaningful and engaging.

Job crafting — changing your job to make it more engaging and meaningful — can take many forms. We’ve been studying job crafting for 20 years and our research among hospital cleaners , employees in a manufacturing firm, a women’s advocacy nonprofit , and tech workers identified three main forms these changes can take.

• JD Jane E. Dutton is the Robert L. Kahn Distinguished University Professor of Business Administration and Psychology at the University of Michigan’s Ross School of Business. She is co-founder of the Center for Positive Organizations at Ross.
• AW Amy Wrzesniewski ( [email protected] ) is a professor of organizational behavior at the Yale School of Management.

Partner Center

What is Job Crafting? (Incl. 5 Examples and Exercises)

If it’s one of the first two, you’re not alone. Stress and burnout are super popular topics in wellbeing literature, especially as the pace of competition creates new challenges for us at work.

Meetings, commutes, emails, and so forth arguably take their toll and can leave us wondering whether we’re paid enough to warrant it all. Living to work isn’t ideal, but working just to live is not an attractive concept, either.

So, the idea that we can find and create more meaning and happiness through our work is an appealing one. But how do we go about it? In this article, we’ll look at the how and the what of job crafting, which all stems inextricably from the ‘why’ of our working lives.

Before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Work & Career Coaching Exercises for free . These detailed, science-based exercises will help you or your clients identify opportunities for professional growth and create a more meaningful career.

This Article Contains:

What is job crafting (incl. definition), a look at the job crafting model, 5 examples of job crafting, positive psychology and job crafting: meaningful work, 5 benefits of the approach, are there drawbacks, the job crafting questionnaire (pdf), the job crafting intervention, the job crafting exercise, the fatima job crafting case study, job crafting workshops, books on the topic.

• 5 Recommended Videos

A Take-Home Message

During the week, most of us spend half our waking hours at work. And a lot of us see it as a struggle, or at least a bore, looking forward to the weekend when we can do more worthwhile things. But what if your job itself was worthwhile? What if it was meaningful, left you satisfied, and through it, you could be part of something bigger?

The ‘Why’ of Job Crafting

Job crafting is about taking proactive steps and actions to redesign what we do at work, essentially changing tasks, relationships, and perceptions of our jobs (Berg et al., 2007). The main premise is that we can stay in the same role, getting more meaning out of our jobs simply by changing what we do and the ‘whole point’ behind it.

So through the techniques and approaches that we’ll look at in this article, we ‘craft’ ourselves a job that we love. One where we still can satisfy and excel in our functions, but which is simultaneously more aligned with our strengths, motives, and passions (Wrzesniewski et al., 2010). Unsurprisingly, it has been linked to better performance (Caldwell & O’Reilly, 1990), intrinsic motivation, and employee engagement (Halbesleben, 2010; Dubbelt et al., 2019).

Job Crafting Definitions

In one sense, then, job crafting is:

“an employee-initiated approach which enables employees to shape their own work environment such that it fits their individual needs by adjusting the prevailing job demands and resources”

(Tims & Bakker, 2010)

However, really great organizational development always starts with the ‘Why’, so here is another definition:

[Job crafting] is proactive behavior that employees use when they feel that changes in their job are necessary.

(Petrou et al., 2012)

3 Key Types of Job Crafting

So how do we go about it? In three possible ways, says Professor Amy Wrzesniewski, who first introduced the concept with Jane Dutton in 2001. These are task crafting, relationship crafting, and/or cognitive crafting, and they describe the ‘behaviors’ that employees can use to become ‘crafters’. Through one or more of these activities, we can aim to create the job-person fit that might be lacking in our current roles (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001; Tims & Bakker, 2010).

Task Crafting: Changing up responsibilities

Task crafting may be the most discussed aspect of the approach, perhaps because job crafting is commonly seen as active ‘shaping’ or ‘molding’ of one’s role. It can involve adding or dropping the responsibilities set out in your official job description (Berg et al., 2013).

For instance, a chef may take it upon themselves to not just serve food but to create beautifully designed plates that enhance a customer’s dining experience. As another example, a bus driver might decide to give helpful sightseeing advice to tourists along his route.

This type of crafting might also (or alternatively) involve changing the nature of certain responsibilities, or dedicating different amounts of time to what you currently do. As we’ll see in some of the examples below, this doesn’t necessarily affect the quality or impact of what you’re hired to do.

Relationship Crafting: Changing up interactions

This is how people reshape the type and nature of the interactions they have with others. In other words, relationship crafting can involve changing up who we work with on different tasks, who we communicate and engage with on a regular basis (Berg et al., 2013). A marketing manager might brainstorm with the firm’s app designer to talk and learn about the user interface, unlocking creativity benefits while crafting relationships.

Cognitive Crafting: Changing up your mindset

The third type of crafting, cognitive crafting, is how people change their mindsets about the tasks they do (Tims & Bakker, 2010). By changing perspectives on what we’re doing, we can find or create more meaning about what might otherwise be seen as ‘busy work’. Changing hotel bedsheets in this sense might be less about cleaning and more about making travelers’ journeys more comfortable and memorable.

Through one, two, or all of the above, job crafting proponents argue that we can redefine, reimagine, and get more meaning out of what we spend so much time doing.

Job Design vs Job Crafting

If you’re interested in organizational psychology, you might be wondering what the differences are between the job design and job crafting. There are indeed similarities between the former and ‘task crafting’, as job design involves systematic organization of work-related processes, functions, and tasks (Garg & Rastogi, 2006).

Both task crafting and job design can involve task revision, where responsibilities are added or dropped to change the nature of your role. Both also stem from the premise that job dimensions can impact our experienced meaningfulness, growth, intrinsic motivation, and job satisfaction (Hackman & Oldham, 1976; 1980).

Even job sharing under the job characteristics model can be seen as a type of relationship crafting in some respects, but in most cases, job design is seen as a ‘top-down’ organizational approach in which the worker is mostly passive (Makul et al., 2013; Miller, 2015).

In contrast, job crafting puts the responsibility for change in employees’ hands. Workers are proactive and the approach is first and foremost about enhancing their wellbeing (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001; Tims et al., 2013). Arguably, this gives rise to potential drawbacks for the organization—even for the employee in question—and we’ll cover these limitations in this article, too.

To be fair, there is more than one job crafting model. In fact, there are at least two important frameworks that are being developed and further developed as we learn more about the discipline as a whole. These are the Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model, and the Job Crafting Model.

First, we know that a proactive approach is an important precursor for job crafting. But what else do we need to boost our chances of success? From a theoretical perspective, we need to know a bit about job demands and resources, and the Job Demands-Resources Model is very useful.

The Job Demands-Resources (JD-R) Model

Bakker and Demerouti’s (2007) JD-R Model is about job characteristics. In short, it views all the characteristics of our jobs—psychological, physical, organizational, and social aspects—as either demands or resources.

• Job demands require that we put in physical or psychological effort or skills; they ‘cost’ us something. Emotional strain and similar are popular examples of job demands, which can lead to costs like stress, burnout, and related stressors when they become extreme (Bakker et al., 2003; Bakker & Demerouti, 2008).
• Job resources help us accomplish our work goals and we can draw on these facilitators to counter the potentially negative impacts of job demands. They can be made available by organizations or they can be personal, respectively these are workplace resources or personal resources. The first would entail aspects like career prospects, training, and autonomy, and examples of the second include optimism and self-efficacy (Bakker & Demerouti, 2008).

When we think about job crafting from a positive psychology perspective, we’re looking at how we can foster or facilitate positive emotions . According to the JD-R model, we can do this in at least two ways:

• First, by upping our job resources – We might use relationship crafting, for instance, to increase our social resources. Another example is to add to our structural resources (training, autonomy, etc) through task crafting.
• Second, by increasing our job demands – to a pleasantly challenging extent. Think eustress or ‘stretch zone’ challenges rather than vanilla stress.

The ultimate goal of the JD-R model is to allow for an understanding of how demands and resources interact to impact our motivation, as shown below.

Source: Mindtools.com

The Job Crafting Model

It’s when we consider job crafting that proactivity comes into the equation, and in Bakker et al.’s (2012) study, we first see The Job Crafting Model as a framework. In their research, they found that proactive personalities were positively related to job performance, through work engagement and job crafting. The exact relationships they found are shown in the Job Crafting Model below (Bakker et al., 2012).

Source: Bakker et al. (2012)

Their study also found that:

• Employees with proactive personalities were more likely to be involved in job crafting;
• This promoted greater engagement at work, by facilitating alignment between job resources, job demands, personal needs, and their own capabilities; and
• Employees who increased their structural resources, social resources and specific aspects of their job demands received higher performance ratings, according to their co-workers.

There is one key limitation of this study for those interested in cognitive crafting; this particular aspect of the three key types wasn’t examined (Berg et al., 2013).

2 Job Crafting Coaching Manuals [PDF]

Help others redesign their work. This manual and the accompanying client workbook outline a seven-session coaching trajectory for you, the practitioner, to expertly guide others through their own unique job crafting journey.

It’s in Berg and colleagues’ (2010) article that we’re given some super insight into job crafting—in action.

This paper is worth a read if you’re keen to get more of a feel for the approach.

1. Task Crafting

“ I really enjoy online tools and Internet things…So I’ve really tailored that aspect of the written job description, and really ‘‘upped’’ it, because I enjoy it…it gives me an opportunity to play around…explore tools and web applications, and I get to learn, which is one of my favorite things… ” (Berg et al., 2010: 166)

Just to recap, task crafting can be adding resources through extra tasks, while some might [also] choose to change what they’re currently doing. One interviewee, an associate who worked for a non-profit, stepped up the amount of time she spent working with online applications. In this way, she was engaging her passion for learning, allocating the proportion of time she spends on a specific aspect, and making it all the more meaningful.

2. Relationship Crafting

“ I have taken the initiative to form relationships with some of the folks who fulfill orders…That’s not my area, but I was really interested in how that worked and wanted to learn…I have learned a lot from them, and that’s helped me in my job. ” (Berg et al., 2010: 166)

Above, a customer service rep describes creating additional relationships with co-workers. While building up the way he interacts with others, he’s expanding his social job resources and gaining knowledge. As he later describes, this helps him explain the fulfillment process to customers directly.

3. Cognitive Crafting

“ Technically, [my job is] putting in orders, entering orders, but really I see it as providing our customers with an enjoyable experience, a positive experience, which is a lot more meaningful to me than entering numbers. ” (Berg et al., 2010: 167)

Here, a different customer service representative recounts going above and beyond to enhance the client experience. This perspective shift sees the employee reframing their job as part of ‘something bigger’, both within the organizational context and for society in general. We can see a holistic perspective that has been shaped; this individual is no longer viewing their job as separate, unconnected tasks, but as a ‘meaningful whole’ (Berg et al., 2010).

4. From Cook to Creative Artist

Putting it all together, here’s one nice example of job crafting given by Berg and colleagues (2007). Before crafting, this cook’s job consists of—or at least, is perceived by the cook as—separate tasks, very much segmented as they would be in a formal job description. Job resources here are not inherently meaningful other than as facilitators for accomplishing the tasks, and one could argue that the role in question is almost defined by its boundaries.

Source: Berg et al. (2007: 6)

After job crafting, we can see evidence of all three approaches at work:

• The chef’s perspectives are altered fundamentally—food has become culinary artwork, bringing her a whole new sense of purpose. In other words, it’s not hard to guess where this chef’s passions lie; she has cognitively crafted himself a new role as a culinary artisan.
• In this newly reframed context, tasks are meaningfully linked—both to one another and to the larger context. We see job resources taking on new meaning: food is not just that, but a means of personal creative expression. New tasks are added, expanding the boundaries of her role.
• Customers also take on new meaning as feedback providers, so the chef can potentially grow and improve her skills. At the same time, relationship crafting sees her interactions with co-workers becoming more collaborative. Perhaps through this, there’s knowledge transfer as well as increased use of her social resources.

5. The Pink Glove Dance

Last but not least, here’s another lovely example of job crafting in (musical) action—The Pink Glove Dance is essentially personal meaning being created by hospital employees. In this video, you’ll see cleaners, janitors, clerks, and other hospital staff linking ‘what they do’ on the job with who they are and their commitment to raising awareness of breast cancer (Harquail, 2009). What do you think?

Throughout this whole article, we’ve been looking at job crafting as a way to create meaning in our roles. Succinctly, ‘meaningfulness’ describes how much significance we attribute to our work (Rosso et al., 2010). It’s one of five key concepts in Seligman’s PERMA model , and he defines it as,

“using your signature strengths and virtues in the service of something much larger than you are”

(Seligman, 2004: 294)

By creating or finding more meaning in our work, positive psychology would say that we’re increasing our happiness. And in the empirical literature, there is ample evidence that meaningfulness does play out well in the workplace—as enhanced job satisfaction, performance, and motivation (Hackman & Oldman, 1980; Rosso et al., 2010).

Job crafting presents lots of potential benefits for organizational and positive psychology practitioners. While still relatively young, the approach has been examined empirically. Among the findings, and in addition to more meaningful work as mentioned above, there is evidence for at least five main benefits.

• Enhanced organizational performance – The very act of shaping one’s own job is beneficial, according to Frese and Fay (2001). Proactive crafting is inherently innovative and creative, and at an organizational level, it’s conducive to flexibility and adaptability. In increasingly dynamic and global business environments, it can contribute to a firm-level competitive advantage.
• Greater engagement – Altering the way we see and engage with our jobs can give us a sense of control over what the tasks do, as well as more fulfillment from the connections we make (Lyon, 2008; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). Basically, we have more resources at our disposal, which is intrinsically motivating—it facilitates personal growth and helps us accomplish our goals (Halbesleben, 2010 ).
• Adding more challenge promotes mastery – When we stretched ourselves a healthy amount through task crafting, we encourage mastery experiences; these, in turn, are conducive to our wellbeing (Gorgievski & Hobfoll, 2008). In job crafting, too, we may seek out feedback and support, potentially boosting our individual job performance (Goodman & Svyantek, 1999)
• It may help us achieve our ‘ideal’ career status – By analyzing our tasks and identifying our goals , we can move toward them in a more effective way through crafting (Strauss et al., 2012). When we add or alter tasks in alignment with our strengths and motives, we experience better person-job fit (Oldham & Hackman, 2010)
• Evidence suggests that it makes us happier – In a study by Slemp and Vella-Broderick (2013), the degree of job crafting that employees got involved with was linked to how well their psychological and subjective wellbeing needs were satisfied.

There are, of course, some limitations to job crafting. Organizations are systems, so changing how we view and do things can impact both the firm and the individual—let’s look at some potential downsides.

Drawbacks For Organizations

Misaligned goals.

Essentially, job crafting aims to benefit the employee—it’s neither advantageous nor a pitfall for the company when an employees’ goals are consistent with those of their organization (Wrzesniewski and Dutton, 2001). That alignment is critical in understanding how it plays out in practice, meaning when individual goals and organizational goals are misaligned, we can see negative impacts of job crafting.

In other words, if someone is employed to carry out a certain task, job crafting shouldn’t be a means of changing up the job beyond recognition. It is clearly a pitfall for the organization if a chef creates beautiful cuisine that’s essentially inedible or unsafe. So as Wrzesniewski and Dutton premise, more meaning in one’s role shouldn’t jeopardize organizational effectiveness (2001).

Unequal Access

Another potential disadvantage is more about how we view our jobs in the first instance. In order to job craft, we first need to see our jobs as alterable (Berg, 2013). That is, we may feel certain factors are limiting how free we are to add tasks or alter relationships, for instance, and these can vary based on our roles.

Studies show that senior employees felt they were limited time-wise when it came to crafting, and lower-level employees cited not enough autonomy as an equivalent challenge (Berg et al., 2010). Some workers whose tasks were closely interdependent also felt a similar way, after all, how could they change their roles without disrupting others’ work?

In one respect, this can be seen as a ‘perspective’ or ‘adaptability’ problem, or even suggest more support for the ‘proactive personality’ argument. However, it also raises another issue. That is, some jobs may simply be more ‘craftable’ than others, making some more able to enjoy its benefits. Others, if special steps aren’t taken, may see this as inequity (Schoberova, 2015).

Drawbacks For Individuals

Taking on too much.

For individuals, it may be tempting to take task crafting a little far. Understandably, if we add on tasks that are overly demanding, or give ourselves excessive tasks while crafting our roles, we risk taking on too much.

If employees aren’t sufficiently informed about the risks of doing so, job crafting can bring with it all the increased dangers of overwork—stress, exhaustion, burnout, and unhappiness (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). In light of this, some authors argue that managers should get more involved in their employees’ job crafting initiatives (Schoberova, 2015).

Exploitation

A final argument against the approach suggests that job crafting leaves some workers open to exploitation. This potentially can occur in the sense that employees might be going ‘above and beyond’ the call of duty without being fairly reimbursed by the organization.

A study of zoo workers by Bunderson and Thompson (2009), for instance, showed some crafters were paid less than their co-workers. This was despite their investing extra time and effort into their newly crafted jobs, in pursuit of deeper meaning at work.

So, can we measure the extent to which we’re actively job crafting? The Job Crafting Questionnaire ( JCQ ) has been developed to assess how much we engage in the three different behaviors at work. Designed by positive psychology researchers Stemp and Vella-Brodrick (2013), it is a self-report instrument using a 6-item Likert scale. Based on Wrzesniewski and Dutton’s (2001) 3 areas, the JCQ takes only a short while to complete, with only 15 questions.

With 1 being Hardly Ever , and 6 being Very Often (as often as possible within the organizational context), employees indicate the degree to which they engage in tasks, relationships, and cognitive crafting. Here are some sample items.

Task Crafting Items

Please indicate the extent to which you…

• Give preference to work tasks that suit your skills or interest?
• Introduce new work tasks that you think better suit your skills or interests?
• Change the scope or types of tasks that you complete at work?

Relationship Crafting Items

• Organize special events in the workplace (e.g., celebrating a co-worker’s birthday)?
• Make friends with people at work who have similar skills or interests?
• Choose to mentor new employees (officially or unofficially)?

Cognitive Crafting Items

• Remind yourself about the significance your work has for the success of the organization?
• Think about the ways in which your work positively impacts your life?
• Remind yourself of the importance of your work for the broader community?

In developing the JCQ, the authors adapted some items from a measure of job crafting that was designed by Leana et al. (2008) for educators.

Job crafting – the power of personalising our work – Rob Baker

How do we start then, at an organizational level? The good news is that several studies have looked at job crafting interventions, and one, in particular, is described by Van Den Heuvel et al. in their 2015 study. Based on the JD-R Model, the authors developed a one-day training intervention for a Dutch police district to see if job crafting impacted their self-efficacy, wellbeing and positive affect.

The aims were to teach police participants to see their occupational environment and job characteristics under the framework, that is, as resources and demands that they could shape through job crafting (Van Den Heuvel et al., 2015). During the initial day-long session, they also learned to create, establish, and map their own crafting goals on a poster.

In the afternoon they reflected on them, and over the following four weeks, Van Den Heuvel and colleagues followed their progress. They had four key hypotheses, the third of which looked specifically at whether job crafters would experience greater positive affect and lower negative affect than ‘non-crafters’.

Outcomes of the Intervention

This intervention had mixed results. On one hand, there was some support for its efficacy:

• On average, police ‘crafters’ reported having more development opportunities than they did prior;
• Job crafting participants were also found to have higher self-efficacy (Bandura, 1997);
• They reported lower negative affect and an upward in positive affect; and
• Police ‘crafters’ were more inspired to look into and act on their learning opportunities.

On the flip side, the intervention showed no significant effect for reported job crafting behaviors, and the aforementioned ‘upward trend’ in positive affect was statistically insignificant.

Having a good sense of what job crafting involves is an excellent start if you want to give it a try. At the same time, it helps to have an idea of where you might start—what opportunities you might pursue. That’s what The Job Crafting Exercise aims to help you achieve, by encouraging you to view your job as malleable, craftable, and in your control.

In essence, The Job Crafting Exercise helps you perceive seemingly unconnected and segmented tasks as ‘building blocks’ for you to shape in a way that means something.

Developed by Berg, Dutton, and Wrzesniewski (2013), it’s broken into several parts. Throughout all of these, it helps to keep the JD-R Model in mind. Can you identify which aspects are demands, and which are resources? What could you benefit from more of, in terms of reducing your psychological costs—stress, energy, etc.? Where might you welcome a stretch or a challenge?

• First, you’ll create what’s known as a Before Sketch. This helps you understand how you’re allocating and spending your time across various tasks. Think here in terms of energy, and broadly about resources and demands.
• The next step is grouping your whole job into three types of Task Blocks. The biggest of these blocks are for tasks which consume the most of your effort, attention, and time; the smallest blocks are for the least energy-, attention-, and time-intensive tasks, and some will fall into the middle, ‘medium-sized’ blocks.
• With this knowledge of how your personal resources get allocated, you now craft an After Diagram of what your ideal role will look like. Of course, you aren’t stepping completely outside of what you’re formally required to do, but do use your strengths, passions, and motives to create something more meaningful. And in doing so, we use the same idea of task blocks—of course, this time with different priorities.
• Now you have an After Diagram, and you can ‘frame’ different task groups—Role Frames, which you see as serving different functions. Here, you’re crafting your perceptions so you can label different tasks in reimagined ways: rather like our chef-turned-food artisan above.
• The last step is where you create an Action Plan to set out clear goals for the short- and long-term. How are you going to move from your Before Diagram (current job) to your After Diagram (ideal job)?

If you’re looking to access The Job Crafting Exercise, you can purchase the resources  at the University of Michigan School of Business (Berg et al., 2013).

Originally published in the Harvard Business Review, the ‘Fatima’ case study looks in depth at the three different types of job crafting: task, relationship, and cognitive crafting (Wrzesniewski et al., 2010). Here’s a quick overview—at some points, you’ll easily be able to draw parallels with the Job Crafting Exercise described above.

About Fatima

A mid-level marketing manager, Fatima is a high-performing employee who has great relationships with her colleagues and others. While she meets and exceeds the KPIs for her role—monitoring team performance, responding to their inquiries, and so forth, she feels like she’s stuck.

Put simply, Fatima spends a lot more time doing the unengaging, less stimulating parts of her job than the things she’d rather be doing. She’s wondering why she applied for the job in the first place and whether she should get out.

Why Job Crafting?

This ‘stuck’ feeling isn’t only about how Fatima is spending her time. In fact, it’s just as much about how she’s not spending her time. She’s a talented social media user, passionate about learning and wants to integrate that growing expertise into her work for the team. And all the while, Fatima’s driven to improve.

While the case study doesn’t delve much further into her personal feelings, it’s pretty clear that she’s feeling unmotivated. Maybe even like she’s in the wrong job and unsatisfied because of it.

Task Analysis and Job Crafting

The great thing about Wrzesniewski and colleagues’ (2010) Fatima Case Study is that it offers visuals that clearly link task analysis with job crafting. Below, a diagram—similar to the cook/food artisan figure we saw earlier—shows how Fatima’s new tasks look before and after she’s reshaped and reimagined it.

Fatima’s role before crafting:

Here, we see task analysis coming into play; Fatima’s systematic approach to visualizing what she does and how much time she devotes to different aspects of her marketing role. A considerable bulk of her time is spent problem-solving with her team and responding to their questions, as one example. Tasks that she’s passionate about—like strategizing—fall toward the bottom, where she spends the least of her time.

Source: Wrzesniewski et al. (2010)

Fatima’s role after crafting:

Now, Fatima’s started from a different place: from her passions, motives, and strengths. As you’ll recall, she’s a social media enthusiast and wants to craft relevant tasks into her role. In fact, while she’s still performing the same job, she’s expanded it to encompass two roles.

Empowering her team covers a lot of the same duties, but from a new perspective that frames her input as valuable in terms of the organization’s goals. Simultaneously, outside the grey box, she’s added Building and using social media tasks that mean something to both her and the firm.

If you’re after more information, as well as another related example, you can find the whole job crafting case study here .

The Job Crafting Exercise can be done in workshops as groups. Typically they don’t need to last longer than a couple of hours as you work through the stages described above. It’s an interesting and often very useful way to get managers involved, as suggested earlier.

This detailed example will show you what a Job Crafting Workshop looks like in practice (Berg et al., 2013).

You can get the whole Job Crafting Exercise book  from the Center for Positive Organizations, but you will find that most information you need is readily available online.

Jump ahead to the reference section of this article if you’re after the most important research papers to date.

3 Recommended Videos

These three videos are quick takes on job crafting, with Prof Amy Wrzesniewski in the lead with the amazing work she has been doing.

1. Job Crafting – Amy Wrzesniewski on creating meaning in your own work

Professor Amy Wrzesniewski gives a little overview of her original hospital cleaning crew study, and how this gave rise to the idea of job crafting.

2. Redesigning Wellness Podcast 089: Job Crafting and Finding the Meaning of Work with Amy Wrzesniewski

Here’s another interview with Professor Wrzesniewski and Jen Arnold. Among other things, they discuss its role in performance, its limits, and how job crafting can redefine wellness in organizations.

3. Job Crafting: A Fresh Take on Your Old Job

Here’s a little overview of job crafting that appeared on TV. In this summary, there is a little discussion on how you can get started, and the potential downsides of crafting your job. Also, some useful tips for bringing up the topic with your boss.

The idea that your calling isn’t always “somewhere out there” doesn’t have to be terrifying. Especially if that’s because you’ve already got knowledge and tools to craft your own meaning. After all, as it’s been argued before, all employees are potential job crafters, and that alone is an empowering piece of knowledge.

Have you used job crafting to turn around a dull job? Or have you implemented a job crafting intervention before?

Why not share your thoughts on job crafting with us, I’d love to hear them!

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our three Work & Career Coaching Exercises for free .

• Bakker, A.B., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The Job Demands-Resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22 , 309–328.
• Bakker, A.B., Demerouti, E., Taris, T., Schaufeli, W.B. & Schreurs, P. (2003). A multi-group analysis of the Job Demands-Resources model in four home care organizations. International Journal of Stress Management, 10 , 16–38.
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control . Macmillan.
• Berg, J.M., Dutton, J.E., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2007). What is Job Crafting and Why Does It Matter?. Retrieved from https://positiveorgs.bus.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/What-is-Job-Crafting-and-Why-Does-it-Matter1.pdf
• Berg, J. M., Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2010). Perceiving and responding to challenges in job crafting at different ranks: When proactivity requires adaptivity. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31 (2-3), 158‐186.
• Berg, J. M., Dutton, J. E., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2013). Job crafting and meaningful work. Purpose and meaning in the workplace, 81 , 104.
• Bunderson, J. S., & Thompson, J. A. (2009). The call of the wild: Zookeepers, callings, and the double-edged sword of deeply meaningful work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54 (1), 32‐57.
• Caldwell, D. F., & O’Reilly, C. A., III. (1990). Measuring person-job fit with a profile-comparison process. Journal of Applied Psychology, 75 , 648–657.
• Demerouti, Peeters, Schaufeli, & Hetland, 2012 Petrou, P., Demerouti, E., Peeters, M. C. W., Schaufeli, W. B., & Hetland, J. (2012). Crafting a job on a daily basis: Contextual correlates and the link to work engagement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33 , 1120–1141.
• Dubbelt, L., Demerouti, E., & Rispens, S. (2019). The value of job crafting for work engagement, task performance, and career satisfaction: longitudinal and quasi-experimental evidence. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28 (3), 300-314.
• Frese, M., & Fay, D. (2001). Personal initiative: An active performance concept for work in the 21st century. In B. M. Staw & R. I. Sutton (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior (Vol. 23, pp. 133-187). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science
• Garg, P., & Rastogi, R. (2006). New model of job design: motivating employees’ performance. Journal of Management Development, 25 (6), 572-587.
• Goodman, S. A., & Svyantek, D. J. (1999). Person-organization fit and contextual performance: Do shared values matter? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 55 , 254–275.
• Gorgievski, M. J., & Hobfoll, S. E. (2008). Work can burn us out or fire us up: Conservation of resources in burnout and engagement. In J. R. B. Halbesleben (Ed.), Handbook of stress and burnout in health care (pp. 7–22). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
• Hackman, J. R.& Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work: Test of a theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16 , 250-279.
• Hackman, J. R.& Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
• Halbesleben, J. R. B. (2010). A meta-analysis of work engagement: Relationships with burnout, demands, resources, and consequences. In A. B. Bakker & M. P. Leiter (Eds.), Work engagement: A handbook of essential theory and research (pp. 102–117). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
• Harquail, C.V. (2009). A Job Crafting Example: The Pink Glove Dance, Retrieved from http://authenticorganizations.com/harquail/2009/12/08/a-job-crafting-example-the-pink-glove-dance/
• Leana, C., Appelbaum, E., & Shevchuk, I. (2009). Work process and quality of care in early childhood education: The role of job crafting. Academy of Management Journal, 52 (6), 1169-1192.
• Makul, A. Z. A., Rayhan, S. J., Hoque, F., & Islam, F. (2013). Job characteristics model of Hackman and Oldhamin garment sector in Bangladesh: A case study at Savar 109 area in Dhaka district. International Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Sciences, 1 (4), 188-195.
• Mindtools.com. Job Demands-Resources Model. Retrieved from https://www.mindtools.com/media/Diagrams/jdr-model-new.jpg
• Oldham, G. R., & Hackman, J. R. (2010). Not what it was and not what it will be: The future of job design research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31 , 463–479.
• Rosso, B. D., Dekas, K. H., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2010). On the meaning of work: A theoretical integration and review. Research in organizational behavior, 30 , 91-127.
• Schoberova, M. (2015). Job crafting and personal development in the workplace: Employees and managers co-creating meaningful and productive work in personal development discussions. MAPP Capstone Project, University of Pennsylvania.
• Seligman, M. E. (2004). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment . Simon and Schuster.
• Slemp, G. R., & Vella-Brodrick, D. A. (2013). The Job Crafting Questionnaire: A new scale to measure the extent to which employees engage in job crafting. International Journal of Wellbeing, 3 (2), 126-146.
• Strauss, K., Griffin, M. A., & Parker, S. K. (2012). Future work selves: How salient hoped-for identities motivate proactive career behaviors. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97 , 580–598.
• Tims, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Job crafting: Towards a new model of individual job redesign. South-African Journal of Industrial Psychology , 36 , 1–9.
• Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., & Derks, D. (2013). The impact of job crafting on job demands, job resources, and well-being. Journal of occupational health psychology, 18 (2), 230.
• Van den Heuvel, M., Demerouti, E., & Peeters, M. C. (2015). The job crafting intervention: Effects on job resources, self-efficacy, and affective wellbeing. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 88 (3), 511-532.
• Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. Academy of management review, 26 (2), 179-201.
• Wrzesniewski, A., Berg, J. M., & Dutton, J. E. (2010). Managing yourself: Turn the job you have into the job you want. Harvard Business Review, 88 (6), 114-117.

Share this article:

Article feedback

What our readers think.

This is great! If implemented correctly should improve the employees experience and also the engagement. This approach values the person and makes the job meaningful.

Fantastic article! Job crafting is an essential aspect of career development, and your insightful post provides a clear understanding of its significance. The five examples and exercises you’ve shared offer practical ways for individuals to shape their roles and find fulfillment in their careers. For those seeking ‘IT Jobs for Freshers,’ this knowledge can be invaluable in creating a more rewarding and tailored work experience. Thanks for shedding light on this empowering concept

I found this article fascinating, informative and logical as it separated technical, emotional and intellectual issues on job redesign and recrafting. Also it gave agency to the individual incumbent if the job instead of doing something to them! I worked as an Organisation Consultant in the 90 s and then VP of HR & OD and wish I had broken down the concepts and brought it in organisationally. I had already studied and written college papers on job redesign in the 1980s and in the 90 s and this century studied psychotherapy which melds with the thoughts and concepts in this article. Well done all

Let us know your thoughts Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Related articles

Company Culture: How to Create a Flourishing Workplace

Company culture has become a buzzword, particularly in the post-COVID era, with more organizations recognizing the critical importance of a healthy workplace. During the Great [...]

Integrity in the Workplace (What It Is & Why It’s Important)

Integrity in the workplace matters. In fact, integrity is often viewed as one of the most important and highly sought-after characteristics of both employees and [...]

Neurodiversity in the Workplace: A Strengths-Based Approach

Promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in the workplace is a priority for ethical employers who want to optimize productivity and leverage the full potential [...]

Read other articles by their category

• Body & Brain (50)
• Coaching & Application (58)
• Compassion (25)
• Counseling (51)
• Emotional Intelligence (23)
• Gratitude (18)
• Grief & Bereavement (21)
• Happiness & SWB (40)
• Meaning & Values (26)
• Meditation (20)
• Mindfulness (44)
• Motivation & Goals (45)
• Optimism & Mindset (34)
• Positive CBT (30)
• Positive Communication (22)
• Positive Education (47)
• Positive Emotions (32)
• Positive Leadership (19)
• Positive Parenting (16)
• Positive Psychology (34)
• Positive Workplace (37)
• Productivity (18)
• Relationships (43)
• Resilience & Coping (38)
• Self Awareness (21)
• Self Esteem (38)
• Strengths & Virtues (32)
• Stress & Burnout Prevention (34)
• Theory & Books (46)
• Therapy Exercises (37)
• Types of Therapy (64)

Download 3 Free Work & Career Tools Pack (PDF)

By filling out your name and email address below.

• Email Address *
• Your Expertise * Your expertise Therapy Coaching Education Counseling Business Healthcare Other
• Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Download 3 Work & Career Exercises Pack (PDF)

Why Job Crafting Is the Secret to Job Satisfaction

Job crafting is the key to job satisfaction. but how does it work.

Posted November 10, 2020

• What Is a Career
• Find a career counselor near me

Who is ultimately in charge of your job satisfaction? Your options are your supervisor, human resources, or top management . Got your answer?

It's actually a trick question. The answer is "you." The days of assuming that top management will push down a directive to human resources, who will then push down a system to be executed by a manager, is not only idealistic, it's outdated.

Organization-level, one-size-fits-all solutions don't work. You are in charge of ensuring that you are fulfilled, challenged, and happy, and the key to doing so is job crafting —proactive, employee-driven customization of tasks and relationships with others.

The idea of job crafting is as old as the idea of work itself. Only recently have scholars and practitioners alike begun to realize that it increases job satisfaction and work engagement while reducing boredom and burnout .

But job crafting is not for the faint of heart. It takes self- and other-awareness and a willingness to stimulate change, which in some cases creates conflict. Read on to ensure that you're thinking through the possibilities and potential implications.

But first, consider taking my free, validated, and theoretically grounded assessment, " Do You Know How to Job Craft? " This 12-question assessment will automatically generate your scores and a comparison to your peers.

The Four Types of Job Crafting

Increasing Structural Resources

If you're feeling like you're unable to get as much done as you'd like, consider evaluating opportunities to increase your structural resources, which entails finding opportunities for more autonomy or more avenues for getting work done efficiently and effectively.

The most popular way of doing this is by seeking out opportunities for increased discretion in how your work is conducted. Another important element of increasing structural resources is ensuring that you have the time to complete the work that you think is necessary to accomplish strategic, long-term goals , and not just short-term deliverables.

Increasing Social Resources

Increasing social resources entails constructing opportunities for feedback, advice, or mentorship. To fully realize your potential, it will be necessary to get ideas and suggestions from others.

If you feel like you're not getting new, thought-provoking insight, it might be time to proactively seek out alternative contacts. Further, if you feel that you aren't being challenged to think differently or think bigger, it might be time to find better social resources.

Keep in mind that social resources aren't always internal. Look outside your team, department, division, and company, to find your ideal support system.

Increasing Challenging Demands

Increasing challenging demands consists of pursuing projects and assignments that allow one to develop new skills. If you are feeling bored or uninterested in your work assignments, it might be time to increase your challenging demands.

Seeking out new challenges not only helps you stay engaged, but it can also be a necessary strategy for ensuring that you stay relevant. Although it might feel comfortable to have a handle on your work tasks, it's important to spend a small percentage of your time on challenging assignments that help you round out your skillset.

The best way to get started is by talking to your direct manager. If there aren't opportunities readily available, the next step is branching out into new areas of your organization. Start by sitting in on new projects. Eventually, you'll be asked to join in.

Decreasing Hindrance Demands

Decreasing hindrance demands entails shedding stressful tasks or relationships. Consider keeping track of your tasks and communications for the next two weeks. For each task and relationship, evaluate the degree to which it is energy-depleting. These are your opportunities for decreasing hindrance demands.

In many cases, it's as simple as discontinuing the task altogether. In some cases, it's about declining to work on initiatives that are not fulfilling or entail working with draining colleagues.

There are also situations where you need to be strategic and begin having conversations with colleagues or managers about re-negotiating your role. If it's stressful enough, even this more drastic option is worth considering.

The Future of Job Crafting

The nature of job crafting is quickly evolving. Below are three trends to look out for to ensure you’re staying on top of your opportunities to enhance your job satisfaction.

Collaborative Crafting

Job crafting is no longer just an individual phenomenon. Employees are also engaging in collaborative crafting , whereby individuals within dyads or teams trade-off and negotiate responsibilities.

The challenge is that it's difficult to monitor and manage the revised responsibilities stemming from these informal arrangements. It also assumes that everyone is willing and able to make mutually beneficial changes.

Optimizing Demands

A fifth job crafting dimension is on the rise. It's called optimizing demands , which entails simplifying the job and making work processes more efficient. This is a hybrid approach that simultaneously reduces stress and increases productivity .

Optimizing demands, by definition, is beneficial for the individual and the organization. While this win-win might not always be possible, it's the ideal approach.

Idiosyncratic Deals

A related but unique concept, idiosyncratic deals (I-deals), is also becoming popular. I-deals entail formally negotiating for customized flexible work arrangements. Instead of waiting for organizations to create options, employees are proactively asking for what they want, explaining why they want it, and offering something in exchange (e.g., less pay, less responsibility, etc.).

Organizations need to be clear on I-deal policies. On the one hand, it has promise for increasing employee satisfaction and retention, but on the other hand, it has the potential to create inefficiencies and intra-team competition .

Cautions and Caveats of Job Crafting

It's important to understand the limitations of job crafting. In a recent blog post, I wrote about the different types of work fit , including person-job fit, person-organization fit, and person-vocation fit.

Keep in mind that job crafting can fix person-job misfit , but it can't overcome systemic issues such as misalignment with organizational values (i.e., person-organization misfit ) or a lack of identification with your profession (i.e., person-vocation misfit). You must be in-tune with the problem you are trying to solve.

It's also critical to keep in mind that job crafting might not always be well-received by others. For example, job crafting might force colleagues to change in ways that they don't want to change . Relatedly, uninformed superiors might rate job crafters as low performers because they are spending time on unassigned responsibilities.

When it's all said and done, you, not your organization, are responsible for your job satisfaction . It's important to take stock of your options and approach strategically. Further, to ensure that job crafting doesn't lead to a backlash, it's important to consider the rationale for your potential job adjustments and your surrounding organizational circumstances.

Visit www.scottdust.com for more free resources for human capital enthusiasts.

Scott B. Dust, Ph.D., is a management professor at the University of Cincinnati. His writings offer evidence-based perspectives on leading oneself and others.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Online Therapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Self Tests NEW
• Therapy Center
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

At any moment, someone’s aggravating behavior or our own bad luck can set us off on an emotional spiral that threatens to derail our entire day. Here’s how we can face our triggers with less reactivity so that we can get on with our lives.

• Emotional Intelligence
• Gaslighting
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• Tools and Resources
• Customer Services
• Affective Science
• Biological Foundations of Psychology
• Clinical Psychology: Disorders and Therapies
• Cognitive Psychology/Neuroscience
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational/School Psychology
• Forensic Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems of Psychology
• Individual Differences
• Methods and Approaches in Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational and Institutional Psychology
• Personality
• Psychology and Other Disciplines
• Social Psychology
• Sports Psychology
• Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Job crafting.

• Fangfang Zhang , Fangfang Zhang Curtin University
• Sabreen Kaur Sabreen Kaur Independent scholar
•  and  Sharon K. Parker Sharon K. Parker Curtin University
• https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190236557.013.832
• Published online: 15 September 2022

It is difficult and sometimes impossible for organizations to design jobs that fit all employees due to increased complexity and uncertainty in the workplace. Scholars have proposed that employees can make changes to their jobs themselves by engaging in job crafting. Job crafting is defined as self-initiated change that employees make in their work to better fit their abilities, needs, and preferences. Employees can craft their jobs individually and collaboratively, as a team. Two main theoretical perspectives have been proposed, which are distinct in how they define job crafting. The application of these two job crafting perspectives has brought some confusion about the construct of job crafting and how it is measured, and has resulted in some challenges in synthesizing empirical studies. To reduce this confusion, scholars have integrated the two distinct job crafting paper; we begin by introducing the definitions and measurements of individual job crafting and team job crafting. Specifically, theories of job crafting are reviewed from two perspectives using three distinct categorizations, with approach crafting versus avoidance crafting identified as the most important. A great number of empirical studies have been conducted to investigate the consequences of job crafting and factors that affect it. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have shown positive effects of approach job crafting for employees, such as increased job satisfaction, motivation, work engagement, organizational commitment, and job performance, and decreased strain and turnover intentions. However, avoidance crafting has been associated with burnout and lowered job performance. Organizational factors and individual factors that affect individual job crafting have been identified, including job autonomy, organizational support, leadership, proactive personality, self-efficacy, and regulatory focus. Beyond antecedents and outcomes of job crafting that have been systematically reviewed in the literature, studies on job crafting have also (a) empirically tested the interrelationships of different job crafting constructs, (b) uncovered new forms of job crafting, (c) unraveled the complicated effects of job crafting, (d) unpacked the influences of social context in job crafting process and outcomes, (e) considered job crafting in different populations and contexts, (f) investigated the effect of cultural differences on job crafting, and (g) investigated antecedents and outcomes of team job crafting. Finally, evidence has shown that job crafting behaviors can be trained: intervention studies show the effectiveness of job crafting interventions in stimulating job crafting behaviors and related positive outcomes such as well-being, engagement, and performance.

• work design
• individual job crafting
• team job crafting
• performance
• intervention

You do not currently have access to this article

Please login to access the full content.

Access to the full content requires a subscription

Printed from Oxford Research Encyclopedias, Psychology. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a single article for personal use (for details see Privacy Policy and Legal Notice).

date: 03 June 2024

• Cookie Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Legal Notice
• Accessibility
• [66.249.64.20|195.190.12.77]
• 195.190.12.77

Character limit 500 /500

Longitudinal Job Crafting Research: A Meta-Analysis

• Review Article
• Open access
• Published: 06 May 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Likitha Silapurem   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9070-7995 1 ,
• Gavin R. Slemp 1 &
• Aaron Jarden 1  

384 Accesses

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

This study updates and extends upon previous meta-analyses by examining the key antecedents and outcomes within the longitudinal job crafting literature. Using a robust statistical approach that disattenuates correlations for measurement error, we further extend past work by exploring the moderating effect of time on the relationship between job crafting and its key correlates. A systematic literature search gathered all current longitudinal research on job crafting, resulting in k  = 66 unique samples in the current analysis. Random-effects meta-analysis was conducted for overall job crafting and also for each individual facet of job crafting dimensions. Results showed that both overall job crafting and the individual facets of job crafting had moderate to strong, positive correlations with all variables included in this analysis, except for burnout and neuroticism which were negatively associated. A similar pattern of findings was largely present for all individual facets of job crafting. The exception to this was decreasing hindering demands crafting that had weak, negative associations with all correlates examined, except for burnout where a moderate, positive association was found. Findings from the moderation analysis for work engagement, job performance, and job satisfaction showed that although there was a clear downward trend of correlational effect sizes over time, they did not reach significance. The current study contributes to the job crafting literature by advancing previous meta-analyses, demonstrating the effect that job crafting has on positive work outcomes for both the employee and organisation over time. We conclude by exploring the implications for future research and practice.

Similar content being viewed by others

Reporting reliability, convergent and discriminant validity with structural equation modeling: A review and best-practice recommendations

Work-life balance: an integrative review.

Work–Life Balance: Definitions, Causes, and Consequences

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Job crafting (Tims & Bakker, 2010 ; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001 ) is a job design approach that employees use to modify their work so that it better aligns with their values, motives, and needs, thereby promoting wellbeing and flourishing at work (Frederick & VanderWeele, 2020 ). In the face of ongoing organisational change and uncertainty, specifically through modern advancements which have fostered a more digitalised and flexible workplace, recent research has shown that employee-driven job redesign behaviours such as job crafting, offer a promising practical alternative to previously used traditional employer-led, top-down job re-design approaches (Lichtenthaler & Fischbach, 2019 ; Rudolph et al., 2017 ). Previous reviews have synthesized the existing research on job crafting to understand the benefits and implications of job crafting for both employees and organisations (Lichtenthaler & Fischbach, 2019 ; Rudolph et al., 2017 ). However, we estimate that as much as 50–55% of the current literature on job crafting is cross-sectional, thus not making it possible to empirically discern whether job crafting is a temporal antecedent or an outcome of the variables examined.

In addition to experimental research, which is often time-consuming and expensive to conduct, longitudinal research is one possible methodological design that can be used to establish associations between variables over time, and determine the temporal order between variables, providing a stronger base for causal inference. To date, there have been two meta-analyses that aggregate longitudinal research on employee job crafting behaviour (Frederick & VanderWeele, 2020 ; Lichtenthaler & Fischbach, 2019 ). These reviews combine the literature on job crafting within different work contexts (i.e., the settings or factors that influence the nature of work) and examine the effect this has on work content (i.e., factors that are controlled by the employee including the job demands and resources). Yet these reviews either contain effects that are biased downward by measurement error (Lichtenthaler & Fischbach, 2019 ), or contain effect sizes that are difficult to interpret due to the statistical aggregation across multiple different research designs (e.g., experimental, time-lagged designs; Frederick & VanderWeele, 2020 ). Thus, the first objective of the current study is to build upon the extant longitudinal job crafting literature and use psychometric meta-analysis to establish effect size estimates that are more easily interpretable. Second, we aim to examine the moderating effect of time on the relationship between job crafting and key correlates. In doing this, we provide stronger evidence to draw temporal inferences between job crafting and the commonly measured variables in the literature, and furthermore, provide insight into the long-term correlates of job crafting, an area which has received limited attention.

The remainder of the introduction is structured as follows. First, we outline the key conceptualisations present in job crafting research. Next, we review the current job crafting literature including existing meta-analytical reviews of job crafting. Finally, we examine time lag as a moderator in this analysis, that then leads to the aims and main research questions for this analysis.

1 Theory and Research Questions

1.1 job crafting.

Job crafting sits within the field of positive psychology (Seligman, 2002 ), specifically positive organisational scholarship (Wrzesniewski, 2003 ) which focuses on interventions aimed at promoting and enhancing employee wellbeing, rather than preventing and/or treating illbeing. Positive psychological interventions like job crafting, aim to cultivate positive feelings, behaviours and cognitions in participants to have an overall positive effect on wellbeing (Sin & Lyubomirsky, 2009 ). Although different approaches exist within the job crafting literature, the two most common approaches are the role-based approach (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001 ) and the resources-based approach (Tims & Bakker, 2010 ). In the role-based approach, Wrzesniewski and Dutton ( 2001 ) reviewed the literature on proactive job behaviour and suggested that employees can make changes to their work environment in three ways: 1) by altering the scope, number, sequence, or type of tasks, known as task crafting ; 2) by adapting the quality and/or amount of interaction and human connection at work known as relational crafting ; and 3) by reframing how they perceive the tasks within it, known as cognitive crafting . Tims and Bakker ( 2010 ) utilized the job demands and resources model (JD-R; Bakker & Demerouti, 2007 ) to define job crafting. This model suggests that employees seek to increase their job resources at work, while working to reduce problematic job demands. They refined this idea into four dimensions: 1) increasing structural job resources crafting (e.g., crafting more autonomy, and opportunities to develop oneself); 2) increasing social job resources crafting (e.g., crafting more social connections and support from colleagues); 3) increasing challenging job demands crafting (e.g., crafting more tasks and job responsibilities); and 4) decreasing hindering job demands crafting (e.g., crafting ways to have fewer emotional and cognitive demands). While there is much overlap between both perspectives, the omission of cognitive crafting from the Tims and Bakker’s ( 2010 ) model, as well as the lack of distinction between expansion (i.e., expanding the scope of the job by increasing job resources) and contraction (i.e., narrowing the scope of the job by decreasing demands) oriented behaviours regarding Wrzesniewski and Dutton’s ( 2001 ) task, relational and cognitive crafting, has let to further refinements and the theoretical integration of both models (Bindl et al., 2019 ; Zhang & Parker, 2019 ).

More recent models of job crafting are underpinned by regulatory focus theory (Higgins, 1997 ), and are thus known as, ‘promotion and prevention crafting’ (PPC; Bindl et al., 2019 ; Zhang & Parker, 2019 ) or as ‘approach and avoidance crafting’ (Bruning & Campion, 2018 ). Promotion-focused job crafting (i.e., altering the job to increase positive outcomes), is geared toward pleasure attainment and employees obtaining and creating favourable outcomes to bring about change (Higgins, 1997 ; Lichtenthaler & Fischbach, 2019 ). Such an approach aligns with increasing job resources, challenging job demands, and expansion-oriented task, relational and cognitive crafting aspects of previous job crafting models (Slemp & Vella-Brodrick, 2013 ). Prevention-focused job crafting (i.e., altering the job to reduce negative outcomes) is associated with the avoidance of pain, and reflects people’s need for safety, security and the avoidance of negatives states where needs are not satisfied (Higgins, 1997 ; Lichtenthaler & Fischbach, 2019 ). Prevention crafting aligns with decreasing hindering job demands, and contraction forms of task, relational and cognitive crafting (Bindl et al., 2019 ; Lichtenthaler & Fischbach, 2019 ). By combining the previous conceptualisations of job crafting, this new model of promotion and prevention crafting encompasses both the tangible and intangible changes that employees can create in work boundaries. This approach allows for a clearer definition of job crafting behaviour, thereby creating a stronger model for future research.

Despite the varying conceptualisations, published literature on job crafting has grown considerably over the last ten years. Much of this growing interest is due to the substantial research showing the benefit of job crafting on individual work outcomes such as work engagement, job satisfaction, wellbeing (Rudolph et al., 2017 ), job performance (Bohnlein & Baum, 2020 ) and burnout (Lichtenthaler & Fischbach, 2019 ). While certain work characteristics such as work experience (Niessen et al., 2016 ) and job autonomy (Sekiguchi et al., 2017 ) may present more opportunities for employees to craft their job and thus facilitate job crafting behaviour, typically, research has shown that the positive effect of job crafting is consistent across a range of organisational contexts and cultures, suggesting that all employees may be able to benefit from crafting their job despite their occupation or working condition. Furthermore, the collective evidence suggests that job crafting is associated with benefits not just for individual job crafters, but also work teams and organisations. For instance, studies have shown that team job crafting is positively associated with individual performance (Tims et al., 2013 ), team performance (McClelland et al., 2014 ), and team innovativeness (Seppala et al., 2018 ). Similarly, job crafting is positively associated with organisational citizenship behaviour (Guan & Frenkel, 2018 ; Shin & Hur, 2019 ), organisational commitment (Wang et al., 2018 ), and negatively associated with turnover (Esteves & Lopes, 2017 ; Vermooten et al., 2019 ; Zhang & Li, 2020 ), which, if we accept these reflect causal relationships, can lead to substantial financial benefits for organisations (Oprea et al., 2019 ).

Despite such research findings, much of the current literature on job crafting is cross-sectional, which poses some challenges for the field (Rindfleisch et al., 2008 ). Although cross-sectional research is beneficial in giving us a snapshot of the association between variables (Levin, 2006 ), there are two primary limitations that pertain to this study design. First, it is more prone to common method variance (CMV; i.e., the systematic method error due to the use of a single rater or source; Podsakoff et al., 2003 ), which means effect sizes are generally biased upwards. Second, due to a single measurement at one point in time, cross-sectional data places constraints on the ability to infer the direction of associations (Rindfleisch et al., 2008 ). Our estimates reveal that around 52% of the current research on job crafting is cross-sectional in nature, suggesting that concerns regarding the lack of interval validity in cross-sectional research leading to potentially inflated associations, may be applicable to the job crafting literature (Ostroff et al., 2002 ). For instance, despite overwhelming evidence showing a positive, moderately strong relationship between job crafting and work engagement in cross-sectional research (Rudolph et al., 2017 ), there have been smaller and more varied effects among intervention studies (Oprea et al., 2019 ), and randomized control trials (Sakuraya et al., 2020 ). Thus, to confirm findings from cross-sectional research and to attain a more accurate representation about how job crafting is associated with its key correlates, insights from more sophisticated research designs that help reduce these limitations are needed.

One of the main ways that researchers recommend reducing the threat of CMV bias is by gathering data over multiple time periods (Ostroff et al., 2002 ; Podsakoff, 2003 ; Rindfleisch et al., 2008 ). Fortunately, there have been numerous individual longitudinal studies conducted within the job crafting literature to determine the key outcomes of job crafting using such designs. Although there are some exceptions, findings amongst longitudinal studies also lend support to the hypothesis that job crafting predicts future positive work outcomes, such as person-job fit, meaningfulness, flourishing, job performance, and job satisfaction (Cenciotti et al., 2017 ; Dubbelt et al., 2019 ; Kooij et al., 2017 ; Moon et al., 2018 ; Robledo et al., 2019 ; Tims et al., 2016 ; Wang et al., 2018 ). There are currently two meta-analyses that have examined longitudinal literature on job crafting (see Frederick & VanderWeele, 2020 ; Lichtenthaler & Fischbach, 2019 ). Lichtenthaler and Fischbach ( 2019 ) found that prevention-focused job crafting at Time 1 had a positive relationship with work engagement and a negative relationship with burnout at Time 2. They also found an inverse relationship with prevention-focused job crafting, which showed a negative relationship with work engagement, and positive relationship with burnout at Time 2. Using Tims and Bakker’s ( 2010 ) framework, Frederick and VanderWeele ( 2020 ), found a positive relationship with job crafting at Time 1 and work engagement at Time 2.

However, while this evidence is promising, these reviews contain methodological limitations that warrant a new meta-analysis to help overcome them. For instance, the statistical analysis used to calculate the meta-analytic correlations in Lichtenthaler and Fischbach ( 2019 ) does not correct for measurement unreliability in the predictor or criterion, which may lead to a downward bias in effect sizes (Schmidt & Hunter, 2015 ; Wiernik & Dahlke, 2020 ). Similarly, Frederick and VanderWeele’s ( 2020 ) meta-analysis is limited insofar as it included both observational longitudinal studies, as well as intervention studies, in the same analysis. Because results from different study designs tend to differ systematically, this may lead to increased, as well as artificially introduced, heterogeneity (Higgins et al., 2019 ). Thus, such approaches may serve to establish effect size estimates that are some what difficult to interpret. In meta-analyses, it is important to take account of the fact that experimental studies, such as randomized control trials (RCTs) of intervention studies, generate effect sizes in fundamentally different ways than do observational studies (Borenstein et al., 2009 ; Deeks et al., 2019 ). For instance, effects from RCTs (for quasi-experimental trials) are generated by comparing the degree to which groups change over time, whereas observational studies generate effects by quantifying the strength of association between variables. Another notable difference is that in intervention studies, participants are actively trained in job crafting behaviours, whereas in observational studies, participants are untrained and observed in their natural work setting (Borenstein et al., 2009 ). Because both research designs are used to examine fundamentally different types of research questions, we suggest that it a new meta-analysis is needed so that so that study designs can be separated during the analysis (Higgins et al., 2019 ).

In sum, these issues suggest that a new investigation on longitudinal studies is needed to determine true effect sizes within this literature. In doing this, improved accuracy on the actual strength of association between job crafting and its key antecedents and outcomes will be identified.

1.2 Time Lag as a Possible Moderator of Effects

In addition to building upon previous meta-analyses, we also aim to generate insight into the effect of time on the relationships between job crafting and its key outcomes. Previous research suggests that, in addition to reducing CMV, longitudinal research allows one to examine the way in which the relationships change as a function of time (Ford et al., 2014 ). This has long been recognized in the job crafting literature (e.g., Oprea et al., 2019 ; Rudolph et al., 2017 ), yet there has been little consideration to the effect of time lags on effect sizes. Such a situation is unfortunate as time lags over which variables are measured are very likely to influence effect size magnitudes. Thus, to better understand whether job crafting is stable over time in longitudinal research, the optimal time lag must be considered. Without this insight, drawing conclusions about the stability of job crafting over time may be inaccurate without also taking into the account the specific time period in which stability is measured. Similarly, in cases where experimental manipulation is not possible, a proxy for understanding causal processes shows that one variable (e.g., job crafting) is able to predict later levels of a presumed outcome (e.g., work engagement; Card, 2019 ). An understanding of these predictive relations over time are critical goals in cumulative science, which we address here.

Given the above, the aim of the current study was to address two research questions:

Research Question 1 : What are the most prevalent antecedents and outcomes of the longitudinal job crafting literature, and how strongly is job crafting related to these variables?

Research Question 2 : To what extent does time lag influence the strength of relationships between job crafting and its key antecedents and outcomes?

In addressing these research questions, we aim to overcome existing methodological limitations present in the literature. In contrast to existing meta-analyses which use longitudinal studies and examined work engagement, burnout and performance we contribute to advancing knowledge by examining the key antecedents and outcomes of job crafting that have been studied in the literature to date, rather than focusing on a select few. Finally, in order to further advance the field of job crafting, we examine the moderating effect of time lag.

2.1 Literature Search Strategy

The search strategy was developed to retrieve all possible sources on job crafting, from which only longitudinal studies were included in the current meta-analysis. In line with best practice guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (Appelbaum et al., 2018 ; Rudolph et al., 2020 ; Siddaway et al., 2019 ), we employed a variety of search strategies to systematically search for studies that examined the longitudinal antecedents and consequences of job crafting. First, to retrieve both published and unpublished sources, we conducted a literature search using eight databases that covered both published and unpublished literature: Education Resources Information Centre (ERIC), Business Source Complete (searched through Ebscohost), Web of Science Core Collection, Medline, PyscINFO, Open Dissertations, ProQuest Theses and Dissertations, and Scopus. Our search covered all years to April, 2020. In line with literature search strategies recommended by Harari et al. ( 2020 ), we consulted a university librarian to help select the most relevant databases and also to select search terms for our literature search.

In line with current conceptions of job crafting (Slemp & Vella-Brodrick, 2013 ; Tims et al., 2012 ; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001 ), we ran the search using the following base terms: “job”, “task”, “relational”, “cognitive”, “increasing structural demands”, “increasing social job resources”, “increasing challenging job demands”, “decreasing hindering job demands,” which were combined with “crafting” using the Boolean operator “AND”. This was done to ensure that the search only returned sources that had at least one of the base terms, as well as “crafting” in the title, abstract or key words. Second, we searched Google Scholar for sources that cited papers that are associated with the most commonly used measures of job crafting (Slemp & Vella-Brodrick, 2013 ; Tims et al., 2012 ). Third, we examined the reference lists of key meta-analyses for relevant longitudinal studies.

In total, our search process returned 1,692 sources, from which 883 remained after duplicates were removed (see Fig.  1 ). We first assessed the relevance of the source using the title and abstract, and subsequently further screened sources using the full text and our inclusion criteria (outlined below). This process yielded 320 empirical studies on job crafting, of which 68 were identified as longitudinal studies that met our inclusion criteria. Because Schmidt and Hunter ( 2015 ) suggested we need to identify any studies that may have duplicate sampling, as meta-analytic procedures are sensitive to the violation of the assumption of sample independence, in the final step of our screening we used the recommended procedures outlined in Wood ( 2008 ) to identify studies with duplicate samples. In doing this, we identified seven studies which used duplicate samples (e.g., Kim & Beehr, 2018 , 2019 , 2020 ). Where necessary, if the studies that identified as duplicates examined the same outcomes, we only included the earliest or ‘original’ sample in our analysis, as recommended by von Elm et al. ( 2004 , p. 975). However, we included duplicates in some analyses if there was no overlap in the variables studied. Overall, after applying these criteria we were left with 64 studies, three of which were unpublished ( k  = 66 independent samples, combined N  = 27,195).

Systematic search flow diagram (PRISMA)

2.2 Inclusion Criteria

Studies were included in the meta-analysis if they satisfied the following criteria: (a) the study directly measured and reported overall job crafting or a facet of job crafting (i.e., task crafting, relational crafting, cognitive crafting, increasing structural resources, increasing social resources, increasing challenging demands, decreasing hindering demands, increasing quantitative job demands, and physical job crafting), and the relevant antecedent or outcome; (b) the study was written in English; (c) the study contained primary data; (d) the full text was readily available; (e) job crafting was empirically measured using a known job crafting scale (see Table 1 in Rudolph et al., 2017 for a list of known measures in the job crafting literature); (f) the study has at least two waves of measurement; and (g) the study has at least a one month time lag between waves of measurement. This last criterion was set on the basis of Dormann and Griffin ( 2015 ), who used cross-lagged regression coefficients of both direct and reciprocal relationships, to determine the optimal time lag that will have the highest chance to detect an effect size if one exists for two waves of measurement. Findings from this study showed that ‘shortitudinal’ research with around approximately 1 month time lag (24 days), was found to be the minimal optimal length. Thus, studies with shorter time lags, such as daily diary studies and shorter longitudinal research, were excluded from the study.

2.3 Study Coding and Data Transformations

All studies were manually coded using an established coding template. The studies were coded for (a) the sample size, (b) the zero-order correlation coefficient ( r ) between job crafting and the relevant correlate variable, (c) the reliability of job crafting measure ( Rxx ), (d) the reliability of correlate measure ( Ryy ), (e) the scale used to measure job crafting, (f) the country in which the study was published, (g) the publication status of the paper (published vs unpublished), (h) the number of waves of measurement, (i) the time lag between waves (in months), (j) occupational status of participants, and (k) the study design.

Where necessary, we used the data transformation procedures described by Schmidt and Hunter ( 2015 ) to establish composite correlations for studies that only reported correlations at a facet level, but not the corresponding aggregate to reflect the overall construct. We did this by combining the correlation coefficients using their intercorrelations between the variable facets. We also established corresponding composite reliabilities using Mosier ( 1943 ) formulas. We calculated the composite to determine the overall job crafting construct. Based on regulatory focus theory, we did this to establish composites for approach and avoidance crafting, using a similar approach to Lichtenthaler and Fischbach ( 2019 ). Taking this approach meant that decreasing hindering resources crafting was excluded when calculating the overall job crafting composite. Unlike promotion-oriented forms of job crafting, decreasing hindering resources crafting is labelled a prevention form of job crafting, and often viewed as a protective mechanism when job demands are high (Demerouti, 2014 ). As such, the direction of association between the correlates of decreasing hindering resources crafting is often the inverse when compared to promotion crafting. Thus, combining these facets in the same analysis would result in downwardly biased aggregated effect sizes. Where necessary, we also established composite correlations when studies reported only facets of the antecedent or outcome variables.

2.4 Meta-Analytic Procedure

To conduct our meta-analysis, we used the psychometric meta-analysis approach, proposed by Schmidt and Hunter ( 2015 ). We conducted our analyses with R Studio (Version 1.4.1717) using the “psychmeta” package (Dahlke & Wiernik, 2019 ) and the unbiased sample variance estimator. We first calculated a sample-size weighted mean observed correlation between each facet of job crafting and each correlate variable. Next, we estimated the population correlation ( \(\overline{\uprho }\) ) using artifact (reliability) distributions, which are reported in our supplementary file .

Schmidt and Hunter’s ( 2015 ) approach to meta-analysis is based on the random effects model. The advantage of the random effects model is that it allows parameters to vary across studies and does not have strong assumptions about the homogeneity of effect parameters. Thus, random effect meta-analyses determine the mean effect size from an assumed distribution of effect sizes (Borenstein et al., 2010 ; Hedges & Vevea, 1998 ; Schmidt & Hunter, 2015 ), which leads to more accurate and generalizable estimates of effect sizes and confidence intervals (CI; Field, 2003 ; Schmidt & Hunter, 2015 ). While the random effects model requires at least three studies, the psycmeta package in R will aggregate effects when two studies are available, so we also report a meta-analytic correlation for all outcomes that had a minimum of two studies available, and also generated the 95% confidence intervals for each estimate.

Heterogeneity was assessed using \(S{D}_{\uprho }\) and the 80% credibility interval (CV). \(S{D}_{\uprho }\) is the corrected standard deviation of the true score correlation and, greater values of \(S{D}_{\uprho }\) suggest greater heterogeneity in meta-analytic associations (Schmidt & Hunter, 2015 ). We also generated the 80% credibility interval (CV), which provides an estimate of heterogeneity around each effect size. The CV is interpreted such that 80% of the distribution of true correlations (the \(\overline{\rho }\) distribution) falls within this interval (Schmidt & Hunter, 2015 ).

We summarize the meta-analytic findings by reporting (a) the number of studies in the analysis ( k ), (b) the combined sample size ( N ), (c) the “bare bones” meta-analytic correlation (Schmidt & Hunter, 2015 ) which is the meta-analytic correlation corrected only for sampling error ( \(\overline{r }\) ), (d) the observed standard deviation ( \(S{D}_{r}\) ), (e) the residual standard deviation ( \(S{D}_{res}\) ) for the meta-analytic correlation, (f) an estimate of the true correlation that is corrected for both sampling and measurement error ( \(\overline{\uprho }\) ), (g) the variance in this estimate ( \(S{D}_{\uprho }\) ), (h) the observed standard deviation of corrected correlations ( \(S{D}_{{r}_{c}}\) ), (i) the 95% CI and, (j) the 80% CV for the true correlation parameter. To interpret our effect sizes, we used Bosco et al.’s ( 2015 ) empirically established correlational benchmarks for applied psychological research. Specifically, we used benchmarks of | r |= 0.07, 0.16, and 0.32 to indicate the lower-bound thresholds of weak, moderate, and strong, which correspond to the 25th, 50th and 75th percentile, respectively.

2.4.1 Moderator Analysis: Time Lag

In line with our second aim, we conducted moderator analyses using meta-regression to examine whether time lag was related to study-level effect sizes. Time lag was coded as the time (in months) between the measurement of job crafting, or a facet of job crafting, and the correlate of interest. We concluded that the moderator was significant if the 95% CIs for the regression coefficients did not encompass zero (Borenstein et al., 2009 ).

2.5 Publication Bias Analysis

Although active steps were taken to locate and obtain unpublished data sources, it is possible that our findings could still be subject to publication bias. Thus, in line with recommendations by Field et al. ( 2021 ) we conducted a thorough analysis to assess whether publication bias was present in our findings, which we considered in several ways. First, we visually analysed funnel plots which displayed effect sizes plotted against their standard errors. The distribution of effect sizes on the funnel plots will be asymetrical in the case of biased literatures, which is often caused by having ‘missing’ published studies containing nonsignificant or small effects. Second, we also used Egger’s regression test of funnel plot assymtery to assess the symmetry of the funnel plot (Egger et al., 1997 ). Finally, Duval and Tweedie’s ( 2000 ) trim and fill procedure was used to examine the extent to which ‘missing’ studies would affect the original effect estimates. To ensure that a reasonable distribution of published and unpublished studies were considered, and also because findings from the trim and fill method may be biased for small sample sizes, only variables where k  > 10 were considered for the analyses. To run these analyses, we used the free, open source software Meta-Sen ( https://metasen.shinyapps.io/gen1/ ), which provides a comprehensive software platform to examine for sensitivity analyses and outlier-induced heterogenity. All analyses using Meta-Sen are included in our supplementary file .

3.1 Antecedents of Job Crafting

As indicated in Table  1 , overall job crafting exhibted near-zero, non-significant meta-analytic correlations with most of the demographic variables, except for education ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.10 [95% CI = 0.05, 0.14]; k  = 17; N  = 7,809), work hours ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.21 [95% CI = 0.15, 0.28]; k  = 3; N  = 1,013), and experience ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.27 [95% CI = 0.19, 0.35]; k  = 2; N  = 627), which showed a moderate positive relationship. By contrast, personality factors were moderate to strong antecedents of job crafting, with proactive personality having a positive, strong relationship ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.37 [95% CI = 0.15, 0.58]; k  = 6; N  = 2,161), and neuroticism having a moderate, negative relationship ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = -0.19 [95% CI = -0.40, 0.02]; k  = 3; N  = 864), on job crafting behaviours. Generally, moderate to strong correlations were observed for different work contexts, except for burnout ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = -0.16 [95% CI = -0.17, -0.16]; k  = 2; N  = 2,320) which had a moderate, negative relationship with job crafting. Of these, positive leadership ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.68 [95% CI = 0.47, 0.90]; k  = 6; N  = 4,193), HR flexibility ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.48 [95% CI = 0.31, 0.65]; k  = 3; N  = 1,294), and work engagement ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.46 [95% CI = 0.42, 0.50]; k  = 3; N  = 1,018) were the strongest antecedents of job crafting. Strong positive correlations were also observed between all motivational factors and job crafting.

Similar to overall job crafting, near-zero, non-significant correlations were found between demographic variables and task, relational and cognitive crafting (see Table  2 ). The exception to this was the correlation found between age (relational crafting: \(\overline{\rho }\) = -0.07 [95% CI = -0.10, -0.05]; k  = 3; N  = 1,802; cognitive crafting: \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.07 [95% CI = -0.01, 0.14]; k  = 3; N  = 1,802) and gender (relational crafting: \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.06 [95% CI = 0.02, 0.10]; k  = 4; N  = 2,048; cognitive crafting: ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.06 [95% CI = 0.05, 0.07]; k  = 3; N  = 1,802), which exhibited a weak negative, and a weak positive relationship, respectively. These findings suggest that females engaged in more relational and cognitive crafting than men. Social support was a strong, positive antecedent to job crafting behaviour for both task ( \(\overline{r }\) = 0.35, k  = 1; N  = 253) and relational crafting ( \(\overline{r }\) = 0.50, k  = 1; N  = 253). Similarly, self-esteem also exhibited a strong, positive association for both task ( \(\overline{r }\) = 0.44, k  = 1; N  = 138) and cognitive crafting ( \(\overline{r }\) = 0.54, k  = 1; N  = 138). Motivation had a strong positive association with task crafting ( \(\overline{r }\) = 0.34, k  = 1; N  = 426), and similar findings were also found between interdependence and relational crafting ( \(\overline{r }\) = 0.32, k  = 1; N  = 253). Neuroticism had a moderate, negative association with cognitive crafting ( \(\overline{r }\) = -0.10, k  = 1; N  = 253).

All demographic variables had non-significant associations with the facets of job crafting defined by Tims and Bakker ( 2010 ) (see Table  3 ). Work engagement was one of the strongest antecedents across all facets of job crafting, and had positive associations with structural resources crafting ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.45 [95% CI = 0.39, 0.51]; k  = 8; N  = 4,570), social resources crafting ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.31 [95% CI = 0.27, 0.35]; k  = 3; N  = 2,607), and challenging demands crafting ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.54 [95% CI = 0.48, 0.61]; k  = 3; N  = 2,607). By contrast, there was a moderate negative relationship between work engagement and hindering demands ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = -0.27 [95% CI = -0.31, -0.15]; k  = 3; N  = 2,608). Burnout also had consistently moderate, negative associations with all of Tims et al.’s ( 2012 ) facets of job crafting (structural resources crafting: \(\overline{\rho }\) = -0.21 [95% CI = -0.31, -0.12]; k  = 2; N  = 2,320; social resources crafting: \(\overline{\rho }\) = -0.10 [95% CI = -0.15, -0.04]; k  = 2; N  = 2,320; challenging demands crafting: \(\overline{\rho }\) = -0.17 [95% CI = -0.23, -0.11]; k  = 2; N  = 2,320), except for hindering demands crafting which exhibited a strong, positive association with burnout ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.40 [95% CI = 0.30, 0.51]; k  = 2; N  = 2,320). Workaholism exhibited low to moderate, positive associations with all of Tims et al.’s ( 2012 ) facets of job crafting (structural resources crafting: \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.11 [95% CI = 0.07, 0.15]; k  = 3; N  = 2,607; social resources crafting: \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.09 [95% CI = 0.01, 0.18]; k  = 3; N  = 2,607; challenging demands crafting: \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.22 [95% CI = 0.16, 0.29]; k  = 3; N  = 2,607), however this association was not significant for hindering demands crafting ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.13 [95% CI = -0.02, 0.27]; k  = 2; N  = 2,320). Moderate, positive associations were observed between psychological capital and social resources crafting ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.20 [95% CI = 0.00, 0.19]; k  = 2; N  = 1,935). and challenging demands crafting ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.25 [95% CI = 0.13, 0.37]; k  = 2; N  = 1,260).

3.2 Outcomes of Job Crafting

Of note in Table  1 is the strong positive association between job crafting and different job attitude outcomes, with work engagement ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.46 [95% CI = 0.40, 0.52]; k  = 14; N  = 6,493) and meaningfulness ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.52 [95% CI = 0.22, 0.83]; k  = 3; N  = 957) showing the strongest effects. In contrast, a moderate negative meta-analytic correlation emerged between burnout and job crafting ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = -0.22 [95% CI = -0.27, -0.18]; k  = 4; N  = 1,523). A strong, moderate, positive association was found between job crafting and performance ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.28 [95% CI = 0.22, 0.34]; k  = 15; N  = 6,193). Very strong positive correlations were found between job crafting and self-efficacy ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.58 [95% CI = 0.45, 0.71]; k  = 3; N  = 947) and psychological capital ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.44 [95% CI = 0.29, 0.58]; k  = 2; N  = 1,289).

Generally task, relational, and cognitive crafting had moderate to strong positive associations with job attitudes, with need-supply fit and work-family balance having the strongest associations with relational crafting (work-family balance: \(\overline{r }\) = 0.19, k  = 1; N  = 1,411) and cognitive crafting (need-supply fit: \(\overline{r }\) = 0.32, k  = 1; N  = 118). A moderate, negative relationship existed between relational crafting and job dissatisfaction ( \(\overline{r }\) = -0.15, k  = 1; N  = 246). By contrast, only a weak relationship existed between task crafting and work-family balance ( \(\overline{r }\) = 0.08, k  = 1; N  = 1,411) and job dissatisfaction ( \(\overline{r }\) = 0.04, k  = 1; N  = 1,411). Task crafting had a moderate, positive association with creativity ( \(\overline{r }\) = 0.15, k  = 1; N  = 86).

Work engagement and job satisfaction had strong, positive associations with all of Tims et al.’s ( 2012 ) facets of job crafting, except for hindering demands crafting which had near-zero, non-significant associations with these outcomes (work engagement: \(\overline{\rho }\) = -0.03 [95% CI = -0.11, 0.05]; k  = 7; N  = 1,797; job satisfaction: \(\overline{\rho }\) = -0.04 [95% CI = -0.20, 0.12]; k  = 5; N  = 1,670). A similar pattern of results was observed for job performance (structural resources crafting: \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.33 [95% CI = 0.25, 0.41]; k  = 5; N  = 1,719; social resources crafting: \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.13 [95% CI = 0.06, 0.21]; k  = 5; N  = 1,313; challenging demands crafting: \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.28 [95% CI = 0.13, 0.42]; k  = 6; N  = 1,893; hindering resources crafting: \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.05 [95% CI = -0.07, 0.17]; k  = 6; N  = 2,059). Similarly but conversely, all of Tims et al.’s ( 2012 ) facets of job crafting had moderate to strong, negative associations with burnout, except hindering demands crafting which exhibited a positive, yet non-significant association with burnout ( \(\overline{\rho }\) = 0.19 [95% CI = -0.08, 0.46]; k  = 3; N  = 1,192). Generally, all of Tims et al.’s ( 2012 ) facets of job crafting, except decreasing hindering resources crafting, had a significant, moderate to strong correlation with other commonly measured job attitudes, including organisational citizenship behaviour (structural resources crafting: \(\overline{r }\) = 0.32, k  = 1; N  = 288; challening demands crafting: \(\overline{r }\) = 0.27, k  = 1; N  = 288) and psychological captial (structural resources crafting: \(\overline{r }\) = 0.54, k  = 1; N  = 940). The exception to this was the association between social resources crafting and psychological empowerment, which exhibited a near-zero relationship ( \(\overline{r }\) = 0.03, k  = 1; N  = 320). By contrast, decreasing hindering resource crafting had near-zero to small, negative correlations with job attitudes such as flourishing ( \(\overline{r }\) = -0.03, k  = 1; N  = 443) and adaptivity ( \(\overline{r }\) = -0.07, k  = 1; N  = 368).

3.3 Moderator Analysis: Time Lag

We used meta-regression to examine whether the aforementioned correlations were related to the time lag between measurements. To do this, we used z-transformed effect sizes and examined whether these changed as a function of time-lag. In line with Cochrane guidelines (Deeks et al., 2019 ), we only conducted the meta-regression when there were at least 10 effect sizes for each outcome variable, which limited our analyses to work engagement, job satisfaction and job performance, which were all outcomes of overall job crafting. To aid our interpretation of these analyses, we generated bubble plots to convey overall trends in the associations over time (see Fig.  2 below).

Bubble plots showing the moderation analyses between job crafting and ( a ) work engagement, ( b ) job satisfaction, and ( c ) job performance. Note : Size of the bubble represents sample size in each study, with larger bubbles representing larger sample sizes

As displayed in Fig.  2 , a clear downward trend in correlation effect sizes can be observed across all of these criteria, suggesting that effect sizes attenuate as a function of time lag. However, results did not reach significance. The moderation analysis with work engagement,while trending downwards, was not significant ( k  = 14, SE  = 0.0033, β =  − 0.006, CI = [− 0.0124, 0.0005]), as the confidence intervals encompass zero (see Fig.  2 a). Moderation also did not reach significance between job crafting and job satisfaction ( k  = 10, SE  = 0.0105, β =  − 0.0076, CI = [− 0.0283, 0.0130]), or job peformance ( k  = 15, SE  = 0.009, β =  − 0.0091, CI = [− 0.0269, 0.0086]) (see Fig.  2 b and c).

3.4 Publication Bias

Within our supplemental material (SM), SM Table 1  displays the sensitivity analysis results for all correlates of job crafting that had 10 or more effect sizes. Again, the correlates that fit this criterion were work engagement, job satisfaction and job performance, which were all outcomes of overall job crafting.

An assessment of SM Table 1  suggests that outliers did not threaten the observed meta-analytic findings. No outliers were found for job satisfaction, and one outlier was removed for both work engagement and job performance. However, an examination of the adjusted meta-analytic mean estimates shows a similar value for the corresponding original mean estimate before the outlier was removed. Specifically, the absolute differences between the original meta-analytic estimate and adjusted estimate did not exceed 20% of the original estimate (Field et al., 2021 ). Hence, results of our sensitivity analyses suggest that outliers did not threaten the observed meta-analytic results.

Similarly for publication bias, the sensitivity analyses suggest that the meta-analytic estimates between overall job crafting and work engagement, job satisfaction and job performance were not threatened by publication bias (see SM Table 1 ). In fact, results of the adjusted meta-analytic effect sizes suggest that, if anything, the original effect size was underestimated, as indicated by typically stronger, not weaker, effects after accounting for publication bias. Hence, the sensitivity analyses indicate that our original meta-analytic estimates are likely conservative estimates of the observed data and are not threatened by outliers or publication bias.

4 Discussion

Our aim in the present meta-analysis was to uncover key antecedents and outcomes in the longitudinal job crafting literature, and determine the strength of association between these variables. We also aimed to examine whether the lag between job crafting and its key correlates moderated the strength of the relationship between these variables. In the following sections, we summarize and interpret our findings, discuss relevant limitations, and suggest directions for future research.

4.1 Study Findings and Contributions

Our results contribute to the literature in several ways. First, we extend previous meta-analyses that only included a select few variables, by examining all the key variables within longitudinal job crafting research, and reveal that certain antecedents have a meaningful relationship with overall job crafting. Individual demographic characteristics (i.e., education levels, experience and working hours), psychological factors (i.e., motivation and psychological capital), and personality traits were all found to be positively associated with overall job crafting behaviour. Our findings are consistent with human capital theory, which suggests that older employees, as well as more experienced, educated, and longer-tenured employees possess greater accumulated knowledge about their job, and are more readily able to find opportunities where they can craft their job, and are thus in a better position to do so. Unsurprisingly, our findings also revealed that employees who have more traits associated with a proactive personality were also more likely to engage in job crafting. Proactive employees generally have higher levels of initiative, are able to overcome barriers, identify opportunities, and persevere to achieve their goals, thus making them more likely to engage in job crafting behaviour (Bakker et al., 2012 ; Bindl & Parker, 2011 ; Parker et al., 2010 ). However, a point of difference between findings from this study and previous meta-analyses, was that gender, age and tenure were found to be non-significantly associated to overall job crafting, whereas Rudolph et al. ( 2017 ) found a significant effect. However, the association between gender and relational and cognitive crafting was the exception to these results, with our findings indicating that women tended to engage in relational and cognitive crafting more than men.

Our findings revealed that, in addition to positive traits (e.g., proactive personality), negative traits were also found to be associated with job crafting behaviour. Specifically, workaholism was found to be a positive, weak to moderate, antecedent of all facets of job crafting, except decreasing hindering demands crafting. This may be because, workaholics have been found to self-impose demands on themselves and choose to take up new challenges and tasks at work, whilst seeking to expand their capabilities at work, as well as manage their job demands (Schaufeli et al., 2008 ). These characteristics of workaholism overlap with Tims et al.’s ( 2012 ) dimensions of job crafting, and our weak to moderate associations reflect this. However, workaholism was positively associated with decreasing hindering demands crafting, as workaholics have been found to do whatever is important at work, including avoiding demanding tasks or people that may be potential obstacles in achieving their work goals (Hakanen et al., 2018 ). Our findings are consistent with previous research which has found that other negative traits, such as obsessive passion examined in previous research, is also positively associated with job crafting, thereby further supporting existing theoretical propositions stating that job crafting does not yield only ‘good’ outcomes for both the employee and organizations (Slemp et al., 2021 ; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001 ). Instead, job crafting contains both positive and negative qualities, and certain forms of job crafting, potentially through workaholism, could entice maladaptive outcomes such as burnout (Petrou et al., 2015 ; Tims et al., 2015 ). Thus, future job crafting interventions should consider the potentially negative effects that job crafting could have, and attempt to limit this by educating employees on ways in which they can reduce maladaptive forms of job crafting.

Our results are consistent with Wang et al.’s ( 2020 ) previous meta-analytic findings, which suggest that work context and social factors serve key antecedent functions for job crafting. Specifically, our findings reveal that working environments that are more flexible and supportive, in addition to the presence of positive leadership styles, may enhance an individual’s motivational state to encourage employees to craft their job (Parker et al., 2010 ; Zhang & Parker, 2019 ). Our findings reflect this notion as, positive leadership styles (e.g., empowering and charismatic leadership), HR flexibility, feelings of autonomy and social support, were all found to be strong, positive antecedents of overall job crafting behaviour. These findings have practical implications in terms of emphasising the need to incorporate the organisation within future job crafting interventions, as this may be more successful in encouraging and motivating employees to craft their job and make a proactive effort to improve their work wellbeing.

An interesting finding was that work engagement and burnout were both antecedents and outcomes of overall job crafting and for each facet of Tims et al.’s ( 2012 ) job crafting model. Specifically, lower burnout and higher work engagement was significantly associated with later job crafting behaviour, but were also possible outcomes of job crafting. Indeed, it is possible that a reciprocal relationship exists between job crafting and burnout/work engagement, such that more engaged/less burned out employees are more/less likely to engage in job crafting in the first place, thereby influencing later engagement and burnout. While we suggest that this is a possibility, the literature in its current form does not allow for such an analysis, and this should be an aim for future research to address. Nevertheless, our findings extend previous meta-analyses by highlighting that burnout and engagement serve as both antecedents and outcomes of job crafting, raising the possibility of a reciprocal relationship.

Although our findings align with previous meta-analyses that showed job crafting to be positively associated with work engagement and negatively with burnout at later time points (Frederick & VanderWeele, 2020 ; Lichtenthaler & Fischbach, 2019 ), there were some differences in effect sizes. The meta-analytic correlation between job crafting and later work engagement was significantly stronger than that found in Frederick and VanderWeele ( 2020 ). This may be because, Frederick and VanderWeele’s ( 2020 ) meta-analysis combined longitudinal and experimental research together when applying the meta-analysis. As interventions typically rely on successfully increasing employee job crafting beyond an existing level that they already display, typically unconsciously, intervention studies are likely to yield smaller effect sizes than observational studies insofar as effects are contingent on the difference between pre-post levels of job crafting, rather than capturing natural variance aggregating correlations (Bakker et al., 2019 ; Diener et al., 2021 ). Consequently, combining interventions with longitudinal research may be pulling the meta-analytic effect size downwards, thereby making them smaller than what would be found when observing job crafting in its natural form in organisations. As we only included longitudinal research in our meta-analysis, this may explain why we found much stronger correlational estimates for work engagement than Frederick and VanderWeele ( 2020 ).

Although Lichtenthaler and Fischbach ( 2019 ) did not correct for measurement error in their meta-analysis, we found similar effect sizes for both work engagement and burnout. This suggests that while Lichtenthaler and Fischbach’s ( 2019 ) meta-analytic findings were fairly accurate in their estimates, it was necessary to conduct our meta-analysis to show that their findings are not simply an artifact of CMV or measurement error. This is because, in our meta-analysis, we limited both upward bias which is created through CMV by including only longitudinal research in our analysis. At the same time, we also control for downward bias by imposing corrections for measurement error, thereby resulting in the most accurate effect sizes. Thus, these consistent findings allude to the robustness of the relationship that job crafting has with work engagement and burnout, and further suggests that the measures used in job crafting research are consistent with the way they associate with other variables.

Decreasing hindering job demands crafting was the only dimension of job crafting that had little to no association with any of the correlates included in our findings. Although it is expected that reducing problematic job demands through decreasing hindering demands crafting is thought to have a positive influence on job outcomes, these findings support previous speculations which suggest that decreasing hindering demands may signal a withdrawal from work (Demerouti, 2014 ). For example, previous research has found that decreasing hindering demands is positively related with exhaustion (Petrou, 2013 ) and has detrimental effects on motivation (Petrou et al., 2012 ). Thus, it is possible that in instances where employees are withdrawing from work, decreasing demands may potentially be an ineffective strategy to improve job attitudes and performance at work (Demerouti, 2014 ).

While prior intervention research suggests that job crafting effects likely wane over time (Sakuraya et al., 2016 ; van Wingerden et al., 2017 ), our non-significant findings from the moderation analysis indicate that the effect of time on correlation magnitudes is likely to be modest. These findings contribute to the limited literature that examines the long-term effects of job crafting. Longitudinal research allows for the examination of the dynamic nature of job crafting over time that would not otherwise be possible with cross-sectional research. In doing this, more precise estimates between job crafting and other variables can be found, leading to more accurate conclusions about the effect of job crafting. It should be noted that while we were interested in the moderation effect of time lag on both the antecedents of job crafting as well as how job crafting relates to its outcomes, there were only sufficiently available studies for the outcomes, which we tested. However, it is possible that the association between certain antecedents and later job crafting behaviour may also change over time, and thus should be explored in future research.

4.2 Limitations and Future Directions

The current study includes a number of limitations that should be considered. First, one limitation of meta-analyses is that it is dependent on the quality, scope and number of studies present in the existing literature. Also, the inclusion of questionnaire studies in the current meta-analysis may potentially make it more susceptible to the traditional limitations of self-report questionnaires such as response bias, monomethod bias, and method variance (Razavi, 2001 ). Although interest and research on job crafting continues to grow, some of our meta-analytic findings were based on a small number of studies, which was further limited due to the focus of time-lagged correlations within the job crafting literature. Although only two studies are needed to conduct a meta-analysis (Valentine et al., 2010 ), this may have increased the possibility that our results for such analyses are influenced by second-order sampling error (Schmidt & Oh, 2013 ), or by extreme or inflated effect sizes (Turner et al., 2013 ). Thus, having a larger sample size would allow more power to estimate robust effect sizes. Second, there is not sufficient research that examines Wrzesniewski and Dutton’s ( 2001 ) cognitive crafting dimension, and, as such, we were unable to further examine the antecedents and outcomes associated with these dimensions of job crafting. Cognitive crafting is a valuable component of job crafting and is viewed as the facet of job crafting that is most closely aligned with work identity and meaningfulness (Slemp & Vella-Brodrick, 2013 ; Zhang & Parker, 2019 ). Employees can achieve greater fit with their work environment by reframing and redefining the way they perceive their work (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001 ; Zhang & Parker, 2019 ), even without any physical behaviour change. Thus, it is possible that cognitive crafting may have a significant positive effect on perceived job characteristics, as well as other desirable outcomes including work identity, meaningfulness, and emotions (Berg et al., 2013 ; Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001 ; Zhang & Parker, 2019 ), which we were not able to directly test. Research exploring the effect of cognitive crafting on work outcomes, as well as the interaction between behavioural- and cognitive-crafting, would be a valuable avenue for future research.

Third, there is limited research on prevention-oriented job crafting in the current literature. In this study, we defined prevention-oriented job crafting as behavioural changes that employees deploy in their job to reduce negative job demands. However, while Tims et al.’s ( 2012 ) measure of decreasing hindering job demands offers a reliable facet of prevention-oriented job crafting, it is only one form of prevention-oriented job crafting and does not include broader job crafting strategies (Bindl et al., 2019 ). Newer measures are emerging that integrate regulatory focused promotion- and prevention-oriented job crafting with Wrzesniewski and Dutton’s ( 2001 ) model of job crafting (Bindl et al., 2019 ), and offer a way forward in this regard.

Moreover, as findings from this meta-analysis revealed that decreasing hindering demands has potentially maladaptive effects on certain work outcomes, such as burnout, there is limited research exploring when and why these negative outcomes occur. Hu et al. ( 2020 ) suggests that employees reduce stress by alleviating or actively removing harmful stimuli, known as active coping, as well as by distancing themselves from the problem, known as withdrawal, which could lead to different outcomes. Active coping behaviour is a more adaptive form of job crafting that results in increased proactive behaviour, whereas employees who withdraw from stressful demands are less likely to engage in adaptive behaviour, which negatively impacts goal-related behaviours and hence leads to negative work-related wellbeing (Hu et al., 2020 ). Thus, future research should seek to create measures that differentiate between the coping mechanism employees use when engaging in prevention-oriented job crafting behaviour in order to identify the true effect that prevention-oriented job crafting has on individual and organisational outcomes.

While employee characteristics such as tenure and experience were included within this analysis, it did not include other potentially important descriptive variables such as size of the organisation, employee status (i.e., the employee’s position and seniority in an organisation) and specific job type. This is potentially a limitation within the current analysis as previous research has shown that variables such as employee status (Sekiguchi et al., 2017 ) and organisational rank (Roczniewska & Puchalska-Kaminska, 2017 ) affect employee job crafting behaviour such that those in higher positions typically craft their job more frequently than those in lower positions within the organisation. Thus, this is an avenue for future research to further understand.

Last, the current meta-analysis examined how job crafting changed over time. However, the nature of work also tends to change and evolve over time, and this change may not be well captured in longitudinal research which generally does not take potential moderators or covariates into account. Thus, future research could examine why changes in job crafting may occur in relation to changes in the work environment.

5 Conclusions

The present study provides a meta-analytical review of the antecedents and outcomes in the longitudinal job crafting literature. From a theoretical standpoint, we advanced on the knowledge of job crafting by remedying methodological shortcomings that were present in several previous meta-analyses. Results from our study revealed that promotion-oriented job crafting has a moderate to strong, positive association with all antecedents and outcomes examined in this analysis, except for burnout where a weak, negative effect was found. However, in most instances, prevention-oriented job crafting was found to be very weakly associated with most of the correlates examined in longitudinal literature, although such a result could be attributed to the limited literature available on this form of job crafting. Furthermore, moderation analyses suggest that effect sizes between job crafting and its key outcomes may attenuate over time, but are unlikely to completely diminish. From a practical standpoint, practitioners may be able to utilise findings from this analysis to highlight the effectiveness of job crafting on positive work outcomes and suggest that there is promise in job crafting as a way to target employee engagement and productivity.

Appelbaum, M., Cooper, H., Kline, R. B., Mayo-Wilson, E., Nezu, A. M., & Rao, S. M. J. A. P. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for quantitative research in psychology: The APA publications and communications board task force report. The American Psychologist, 73 (1), 3.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Bakker, A., Cai, J., English, L., Kaiser, G., Mesa, V., & Van Dooren, W. (2019). Beyond small, medium, or large: Points of consideration when interpreting effect sizes. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 102 , 1–8.

Article   Google Scholar  

Bakker, A., & Demerouti, E. (2007). The job demands-resources model: State of the art. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 22 (3), 309–328.

Bakker, A. B., Tims, M., & Derks, D. (2012). Proactive personality and job performance: The role of job crafting and work engagement. Human Relations, 65 (10), 1359–1378. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726712453471

Berg, J. M., Dutton, J. E., & Wrzesniewski, A. (2013). Job crafting and meaningful work. Purpose and meaning in the workplace (pp. 81–104). American Psychological Association.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Bindl, U. K., & Parker, S. K. (2011). Proactive work behavior: Forward-thinking and change-oriented action in organizations. APA handbook of industrial and organizational psychology, Vol 2: Selecting and developing members for the organization., 567–598. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12170-019

Bindl, U. K., Unsworth, K. L., Gibson, C. B., & Stride, C. B. (2019). Job crafting revisited: Implications of an extended framework for active changes at work. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 104 (5), 605–628. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000362

Bohnlein, P., & Baum, M. (2020). Does job crafting always lead to employee well-being and performance? Meta-analytical evidence on the moderating role of societal culture. International Journal of Human Resource Management . https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2020.1737177

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). When does it make sense to perform a meta-analysis. In Introduction to Meta-Analysis (pp. 357–364).

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P., & Rothstein, H. R. (2010). A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis. Research Synthesis Methods, 1 (2), 97–111.

Bosco, F. A., Aguinis, H., Singh, K., Field, J. G., & Pierce, C. A. (2015). Correlational effect size benchmarks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100 (2), 431.

Bruning, P. F., & Campion, M. A. (2018). A role-resource approach-avoidance model of job crafting: A multimethod integration and extension of job crafting theory. Academy of Management Journal, 61 (2), 499–522.

Card, N. A. (2019). Lag as moderator meta-analysis: A methodological approach for synthesizing longitudinal data. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 43 (1), 80–89.

Cenciotti, R., Alessandri, G., & Borgogni, L. (2017). Psychological capital and career success over time: The mediating role of job crafting. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 24 (3), 372–384.

Dahlke, J. A., & Wiernik, B. M. (2019). psychmeta: An R package for psychometric meta-analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 43 (5), 415–416.

Deeks, J. J., Higgins, J. P., & Altman, D. G. (2019). Chapter 10: Analysing data and undertaking meta‐analyses. In Higgins, J. P. T., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A. (Eds.), Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (pp. 241–284): Cochrane Statistical Methods Group

Demerouti, E. (2014). Design your own job through job crafting. European Psychologist, 19 (4), 237–247.

Diener, E., Northcutt, R., Zyphur, M., & West, S. G. (2021). Beyond experiments. Perspectives on Psychological Science . 17 (4) 1101–1119.

Dormann, C., & Griffin, M. A. (2015). Optimal time lags in panel studies. Psychological Methods, 20 (4), 489.

Dubbelt, L., Demerouti, E., & Rispens, S. (2019). The value of job crafting for work engagement, task performance, and career satisfaction: Longitudinal and quasi-experimental evidence. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 28 (3), 300–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2019.1576632

Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000). Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot–based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics, 56 (2), 455–463.

Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ, 315 (7109), 629–634.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Esteves, T., & Lopes, M. P. (2017). Crafting a calling: The mediating role of calling between challenging job demands and turnover intention. Journal of Career Development, 44 (1), 34–48.

Field, A. P. (2003). The problems in using fixed-effects models of meta-analysis on real-world data. Understanding Statistics: Statistical Issues in Psychology, Education, the Social Sciences, 2 (2), 105–124.

Field, J. G., Bosco, F. A., & Kepes, S. (2021). How robust is our cumulative knowledge on turnover? Journal of Business and Psychology, 36 (3), 349–365.

Ford, M. T., Matthews, R. A., Wooldridge, J. D., Mishra, V., Kakar, U. M., & Strahan, S. R. (2014). How do occupational stressor-strain effects vary with time? A review and meta-analysis of the relevance of time lags in longitudinal studies. Work and Stress, 28 (1), 9–30.

Frederick, D. E., & VanderWeele, T. J. (2020). Longitudinal meta-analysis of job crafting shows positive association with work engagement. Cogent Psychology, 7 (1), 1746733.

Guan, X. Y., & Frenkel, S. (2018). How HR practice, work engagement and job crafting influence employee performance. Chinese Management Studies, 12 (3), 591–607. https://doi.org/10.1108/cms-11-2017-0328

Hakanen, J. J., Peeters, M. C., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2018). Different types of employee well-being across time and their relationships with job crafting. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 23 (2), 289–301.

Harari, M. B., Parola, H. R., Hartwell, C. J., & Riegelman, A. (2020). Literature searches in systematic reviews and meta-analyses: A review, evaluation, and recommendations. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 118 , 103377.

Hedges, L. V., & Vevea, J. L. (1998). Fixed-and random-effects models in meta-analysis. Psychological Methods, 3 (4), 486.

Higgins, E. T. (1997). Beyond Pleasure and Pain. American Psychologist, 52 (12), 1280–1300.

Higgins, J. P., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A. (2019). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions . Wiley.

Hu, Q., Taris, T. W., Dollard, M. F., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2020). An exploration of the component validity of job crafting. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology Review, 29 (5), 776–793.

Kim, M., & Beehr, T. A. (2018). Can empowering leaders affect subordinates’ well-being and careers because they encourage subordinates’ job crafting behaviors? Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 25 (2), 184–196.

Kim, M., & Beehr, T. A. (2019). The power of empowering leadership: Allowing and encouraging followers to take charge of their own jobs. International Journal of Human Resource Management . https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2019.1657166

Kim, M., & Beehr, T. A. (2020). Job crafting mediates how empowering leadership and employees’ core self-evaluations predict favourable and unfavourable outcomes. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 29 (1), 126–139. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2019.1697237

Kooij, D. T., Tims, M., & Akkermans, J. (2017). The influence of future time perspective on work engagement and job performance: The role of job crafting. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 26 (1), 4–15.

Levin, K. (2006). Study design III: Cross-sectional studies. Evidence-Based Dentistry, 7 (1), 24–25.

Lichtenthaler, P. W., & Fischbach, A. (2019). A meta-analysis on promotion- and prevention-focused job crafting. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 28 (1), 30–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2018.1527767

McClelland, G. P., Leach, D. J., Clegg, C. W., & McGowan, I. (2014). Collaborative crafting in call centre teams. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 87 (3), 464–486. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12058

Moon, T. W., Youn, N., Hur, W. M., & Kim, K. M. (2018). Does employees’ spirituality enhance job performance? The mediating roles of intrinsic motivation and job crafting. Current Psychology , 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-9864-0

Mosier, C. I. (1943). On the reliability of a weighted composite. Psychometrika, 8 (3), 161–168.

Niessen, C., Weseler, D., & Kostova, P. (2016). When and why do individuals craft their jobs? The role of individual motivation and work characteristics for job crafting. Human Relations, 69 (6), 1287–1313.

Oprea, B. T., Barzin, L., Virga, D., Iliescu, D., & Rusu, A. (2019). Effectiveness of job crafting interventions: A meta-analysis and utility analysis. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology . https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432x.2019.1646728

Ostroff, C., Kinicki, A. J., & Clark, M. A. (2002). Substantive and operational issues of response bias across levels of analysis: An example of climate-satisfaction relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (2), 355.

Parker, S. K., Bindl, U. K., & Strauss, K. (2010). Making things happen: A model of proactive motivation. Journal of Management, 36 (4), 827–856.

Petrou, P. (2013). Crafting the change: The role of job crafting and regulatory focus in adaptation to organizational change . Utrecht University.

Petrou, P., Demerouti, E., Peeters, M. C., Schaufeli, W. B., & Hetland, J. (2012). Crafting a job on a daily basis: Contextual correlates and the link to work engagement. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33 (8), 1120–1141.

Petrou, P., Demerouti, E., & Schaufeli, W. B. (2015). Job crafting in changing organizations: Antecedents and implications for exhaustion and performance. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 20 (4), 470–480. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039003

Podsakoff, N. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 885 (879). https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879

Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 (5), 879.

Razavi, T. (2001). Self-report measures: An overview of concerns and limitations of questionnaire use in occupational stress research. (Discussion Papers in Accounting and Management Science, 01-175) Southampton, UK. University of Southampton p 23.

Roczniewska, M. A., & Puchalska-Kaminska, M. (2017). Are managers also “crafting leaders”? The link between organizational rank, autonomy, and job crafting. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 48 (2), 198–211.

Rindfleisch, A., Malter, A. J., Ganesan, S., & Moorman, C. (2008). Cross-sectional versus longitudinal survey research: Concepts, findings, and guidelines. Journal of Marketing Research, 45 (3), 261–279.

Robledo, E., Zappalà, S., & Topa, G. (2019). Job crafting as a mediator between work engagement and wellbeing outcomes: A time-lagged study. International Journal Of Environmental Research And Public Health, 16 (8). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16081376

Rudolph, C. W., Chang, C. K., Rauvola, R. S., & Zacher, H. (2020). Meta-analysis in vocational behavior: A systematic review and recommendations for best practices. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 118 , 103397.

Rudolph, C. W., Katz, I. M., Lavigne, K. N., & Zacher, H. (2017). Job crafting: A meta-analysis of relationships with individual differences, job characteristics, and work outcomes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 102 , 112–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2017.05.008

Sakuraya, A., Shimazu, A., Imamura, K., & Kawakami, N. (2020). Effects of a job crafting intervention program on work engagement among japanese employees: A randomized controlled trial. Frontiers In Psychology, 11 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00235

Sakuraya, A., Shimazu, A., Imamura, K., Namba, K., & Kawakami, N. (2016). Effects of a job crafting intervention program on work engagement among Japanese employees: A pretest-posttest study. BMC Psychology, 4 (1), 49–49.

Schaufeli, W. B., Taris, T. W., & Bakker, A. B. (2008). It takes two to tango: Workaholism is working excessively and working compulsively. The long work hours culture: Causes, consequences choices, 203–226.

Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (2015). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting error and bias in research findings (3rd ed.). Sage.

Schmidt, F. L., & Oh, I.-S. (2013). Methods for second order meta-analysis and illustrative applications. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 121 (2), 204–218.

Sekiguchi, T., Li, J., & Hosomi, M. (2017). Predicting job crafting from the socially embedded perspective: The interactive effect of job autonomy, social skill, and employee status. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 53 (4), 470–497.

Seligman, M. E. (2002). Authentic happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment . Simon and Schuster.

Google Scholar  

Seppala, P., Hakanen, J. J., Tolvanen, A., & Demerouti, E. (2018). A job resources-based intervention to boost work engagement and team innovativeness during organizational restructuring: For whom does it work? Journal of Organizational Change Management, 31 (7), 1419–1437. https://doi.org/10.1108/jocm-11-2017-0448

Shin, Y., & Hur, W. M. (2019). Linking flight attendants’ job crafting and OCB from a JD-R perspective: A daily analysis of the mediation of job resources and demands. Journal of Air Transport Management, 79 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2019.101681

Siddaway, A. P., Wood, A. M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019). How to do a systematic review: A best practice guide for conducting and reporting narrative reviews, meta-analyses, and meta-syntheses. Annual Review of Psychology, 70 , 747–770.

Sin, N. L., & Lyubomirsky, S. (2009). Enhancing well-being and alleviating depressive symptoms with positive psychology interventions: A practice-friendly meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65 (5), 467–487.

Slemp, G. R., & Vella-Brodrick, D. (2013). The Job Crafting Questionnaire: A new scale to measure the extent to which employees engage in job crafting. International Journal of Wellbeing, 3 (2). 126–146.

Slemp, G. R., Zhao, Y., Hou, H., & Vallerand, R. J. (2021). Job crafting, leader autonomy support, and passion for work: Testing a model in Australia and China. Motivation and Emotion, 45 (1), 60–74.

Tims, M., & Bakker, A. B. (2010). Job crafting: Towards a new model of individual job redesign. SAJIP: South African Journal of Industrial Psychology, 36 (2), 12–20. https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v36i2.841

Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., & Derks, D. (2012). Development and validation of the job crafting scale. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 80 (1), 173–186.

Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., Derks, D., & Rhenen, W. V. (2013). Job crafting at the team and individual level: Implications for work engagement and performance. Group & Organization Management, 38 (4), 427–454.

Tims, M., Bakker, A. B., & Derks, D. (2015). Job crafting and job performance: A longitudinal study. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 24 (6), 914–928. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2014.969245

Tims, M., Derks, D., & Bakker, A. B. (2016). Job crafting and its relationships with person-job fit and meaningfulness: A three-wave study. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 92 , 44–53.

Turner, R. M., Bird, S. M., & Higgins, J. P. (2013). The impact of study size on meta-analyses: Examination of underpowered studies in Cochrane reviews. PLoS ONE, 8 (3), e59202.

Valentine, J. C., Pigott, T. D., & Rothstein, H. R. (2010). How many studies do you need? A primer on statistical power for meta-analysis. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 35 (2), 215–247.

van Wingerden, J., Bakker, A. B., & Derks, D. (2017). The longitudinal impact of a job crafting intervention. European Journal of Work & Organizational Psychology, 26 (1), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359432X.2016.1224233

Vermooten, N., Boonzaier, B., & Kidd, M. (2019). Job crafting, proactive personality and meaningful work: Implications for employee engagement and turnover intention. SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 45 . https://doi.org/10.4102/sajip.v45i0.1567

von Elm, E., Poglia, G., Walder, B., & Tramèr, M. R. (2004). Different patterns of duplicate publicationan analysis of articles used in systematic reviews. JAMA, 291 (8), 974–980. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.8.974

Wang, H., Li, P., & Chen, S. (2020). The impact of social factors on job crafting: A meta-analysis and review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17 (21), 8016.

Wang, H. J., Demerouti, E., Blanc, P. L., & Lu, C. Q. (2018). Crafting a job in ‘tough times’: When being proactive is positively related to work attachment. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology, 91 (3), 569–590. https://doi.org/10.1111/joop.12218

Wiernik, B. M., & Dahlke, J. A. (2020). Obtaining unbiased results in meta-analysis: The importance of correcting for statistical artifacts. Advances in Methods: Practices in Psychological Science, 3 (1), 94–123.

Wood, J. A. (2008). Methodology for dealing with duplicate study effects in a meta-analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 11 (1), 79–95.

Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. Academy of Management Review, 26 (2), 179–201. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMR.2001.4378011

Wrzesniewski, A. (2003). Finding Positive Meaning in Work. In K. S. Cameron, J. E. Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational scholarship: Foundations of a new discipline (pp. 296–308). Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Zhang, F., & Parker, S. K. (2019). Reorienting job crafting research: A hierarchical structure of job crafting concepts and integrative review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 40 (2), 126–146. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2332

Zhang, T. T., & Li, B. X. (2020). Job crafting and turnover intention: The mediating role of work engagement and job satisfaction. Social Behavior and Personality, 48 (2). https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.8759

Download references

Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Centre for Wellbeing Science, Faculty of Education, The University of Melbourne, 100 Leicester Street, Parkville, VIC, 3010, Australia

Likitha Silapurem, Gavin R. Slemp & Aaron Jarden

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Likitha Silapurem .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval.

Not applicable as this research did not use procedures performed on human participants.

Informed Consent

Not Applicable.

Conflict of Interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (PDF 1126 KB)

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Silapurem, L., Slemp, G.R. & Jarden, A. Longitudinal Job Crafting Research: A Meta-Analysis. Int J Appl Posit Psychol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41042-024-00159-0

Download citation

Accepted : 28 March 2024

Published : 06 May 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s41042-024-00159-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Job crafting
• Meta-analysis
• Longitudinal
• Antecedents
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Find out how Siemens has benefited from our services

of the DAX 30 companies work with us​​

• Solutions Use cases Answer to your HR questions. smartData - Know the future Labor market insights Power your workforce strategy with actionable data. smartPlan - Plan the future Workforce planning Design your future workforce & uncover skills risks and gaps. smartPeople - Build the future Talent marketplace Discover your internal skills and build a future-fit workforce.
• Podcasts & interviews
• ROI calculator
• HR Glossary

See why 100+ companies choose HRForecast​.

• Book a demo

Back to Blog

Job crafting: everything you need to know and how companies can benefit.

Table of contents

What is job crafting .

• Task crafting  
• Relationship crafting  
• Cognitive crafting  
• Time crafting  

Energy crafting

Identity crafting.

• The power of upskilling, re skilling, and cross-skilling in job crafting  

Have you ever personalized your workspace with photos, plants, or other items that help create a more positive and engaging work environment?

Do you often try to find more efficient ways to complete tasks or improve processes, even if it goes beyond your job description?

Do you naturally build relationships with colleagues, managers, and customers that can lead to more enjoyable work experiences and open up new opportunities?

If you answered yes to any of the above questions, you are job crafting without knowing it!

Amy Wrzesniewski, Jane Dutton, and Justin Berg, in their seminal 2010 paper “Job Crafting and Meaningful Work,” introduced the term job crafting and defined it as “the physical and cognitive changes individuals make in the task or relational boundaries of their work.”

This definition emphasizes that job crafting involves modifying the tasks and relationships with others and how individuals think about their roles. It highlights the active participation of employees in shaping their work experience to align with their strengths, passions, and values.

Job crafting allows employees to align their work experiences with their strengths, interests, and personal values, resulting in increased job satisfaction, engagement, and motivation to perform well. By providing opportunities for job crafting, organizations can improve employee productivity, reduce turnover rates and recruitment costs, and enhance their employer brand.

Job crafting examples, and how job crafting improves employee engagement and satisfaction

Berg, Dutton, and Wrzesniewski’s cook job design illustrates how job crafting can improve an employee’s job satisfaction and engagement. Before job crafting, the cook’s job was focused on completing repetitive and monotonous tasks, such as chopping vegetables and preparing ingredients. In addition, the cook was assigned to a specific station and had limited autonomy and control over their work.

After applying job crafting techniques, the cook’s job was redesigned to provide more opportunities for creativity and autonomy. For example, the cook was free to experiment with different flavor combinations and cooking techniques and was encouraged to create new dishes and recipes. The cook was also given more control over their work schedule, allowing them to work during the hours when they felt most productive.

As a result of job crafting, the cook felt more engaged and motivated in their work. They felt greater ownership and control over their job and could express their creativity and passion for cooking. This increased job satisfaction and engagement not only improved the cook’s well-being but also positively impacted the overall quality of the food and the dining experience for guests. This example demonstrates how job crafting can transform a job from a mundane and unsatisfying experience to a fulfilling and rewarding one.

Source: What is Job Crafting, and Why Does It Matter?

Let’s explore job crafting models and explain how HR leaders can use them to create a more fulfilling and rewarding work experience for employees. An employee who has a fulfilling work experience is like a superhero with a power boost, and we all know what superheroes can do for an organization — they can save the day! If you want your organization to be as successful as the Avengers , try the following job crafting methods to keep your employees happy and fulfilled in their work!

Task crafting

Task crafting involves modifying the tasks an employee performs to better align with the employee’s strengths and interests. For example, an accountant who enjoys problem-solving can be upskilled to take on more analytical tasks that involve data analysis and forecasting. Similarly, a marketing executive who enjoys writing can be provided training on content creation tasks such as writing blog articles, social media posts, and ad copy.

Empower your team with upskilling

Unlock the full potential of your workforce with upskilling! Download our free infographic and discover the many benefits of investing in your team’s skills.

Relationship crafting

Relationship crafting involves modifying relationships at work to better align with employees’ needs and preferences. For example, HR leaders can help employees seek mentorship with senior leaders who can provide guidance and support in career development . By building positive relationships and seeking out mentorship, employees can develop a strong support system that can help them grow and thrive in their jobs.

Cognitive crafting

Cognitive crafting involves modifying how employees perceive their job to better align with their values and goals. For example, if employees feel unfulfilled in their work, HR leaders may reframe their job responsibilities to focus on their impact on clients or customers. Similarly, if employees feel demotivated by a job’s mundane aspects, HR leaders can help them focus on the bigger picture and their contribution to the company’s goals.

Time crafting

Time crafting involves modifying how employees use their time on the job to better align with their priorities and goals. For example, employees who struggle with time management can be trained to use time-blocking techniques to schedule specific time for tasks and prioritize the most important tasks first. Similarly, employees who feel overwhelmed by their workload may be provided help through delegation of specific tasks to others or through the use of automation tools to streamline their workflow.

Energy crafting involves modifying how employees use their energy at work to better align with their needs and preferences. For example, easily distracted employees may work quietly or wear noise-canceling headphones to create a more focused work environment. Similarly, employees who feel drained by long work hours should be allowed to take breaks throughout the day to recharge, such as by walking or practicing mindfulness techniques.

Identity crafting involves modifying how employees see themselves in their job to better align the job with their values and passions. For example, employees who value creativity could be provided with opportunities to incorporate their creative skills into their job, such as by suggesting new design ideas for a project. Similarly, employees who are passionate about helping others could be given opportunities to mentor or support their colleagues.

The power of upskilling, reskilling, and cross-skilling in job crafting

Upskilling, reskilling, and cross-skilling opportunities are crucial components of job crafting because they allow employees to develop new skills and take on new challenges within their roles. This not only helps employees to stay engaged and motivated in their work but also enables them to enhance their job satisfaction and overall well-being.

By upskilling, employees can acquire new skills that enable them to perform their existing job responsibilities more effectively or take on additional responsibilities. This not only benefits employees by providing them with a sense of accomplishment but also benefits the organization by increasing productivity and efficiency.

Reskilling allows employees to transition into new roles or take on new responsibilities within their current roles. This can be especially important in industries that are rapidly changing or in positions that require keeping up with the latest technological advancements. By providing reskilling opportunities, employers can retain valuable employees and ensure they remain competitive in the marketplace.

Cross-skilling allows employees to gain experience in different areas of the organization. This can help employees broaden their skillset and better understand the organization as a whole. It also provides employers with a more versatile workforce that can adapt to changing needs and business demands.

At HRForecast, we understand the importance of upskilling, reskilling, and cross-skilling in job crafting. Our team of experts can help you identify the skills gaps in your organization and develop customized solutions to bridge them. Contact us to learn how we can help you take your team to the next level.

Stay up to date with our newsletter

Every month, we’ll send you a curated newsletter with our updates and the latest industry news.

More stories we think you will like

Navigating the Changing Landscape: Upgrading Skills for HR Professionals in the Heating Industry

Navigating Disruptive Tech Trends: Upskilling the Workforce for the Future

Absenteeism in the workplace: causes, impact on a business, and possible solutions

HRForecast newsletter

Get only relevant and insightful letters from us every month

Not a customer yet? Contact us

Career at HRForecast

Why hrforecast.

• Customer Stories
• Trust and Security
• Data Analytics Approach
• IT Skills Analytics
• smartPeople

2023 © Copyright - HRForecast | Imprint | Privacy policy | Terms and conditions (MSA)

What Is Job Crafting and How It Helps Employee Motivation & Engagement

by Dr Valeria Lo Iacono

If we want to have happy, engaged, and motivated employees, then they need to enjoy their work and be committed to what they do. So the question becomes, how can we create a workplace where we facilitate employees being able to help shape, cultivate, and craft their own roles to improve their passion for their roles and to improve team unity?

Page Contents

What Is Job Crafting?

Job crafting is a transformative approach to work that empowers employees to take an active role in shaping their roles and responsibilities.

Instead of merely accepting predefined job descriptions, individuals can reshape their tasks, relationships, and perceptions to better align with their strengths, passions, and personal objectives.

In essence, job crafting is a personalized approach to work design, allowing employees to tailor their job experiences to better suit their needs and aspirations.

By offering employees more control over their work experiences, job crafting not only enhances job satisfaction but also leads to higher levels of intrinsic motivation, improved engagement , and increased well-being .

Benefits and Why Is Job Crafting Important for Employee Engagement and Motivation?

When employees actively modify their tasks to align with their skills, preferences, and passions, several noteworthy benefits emerge , including the following:

1. Increased Intrinsic Motivation

By allowing employees to choose tasks that resonate with their interests and strengths, task crafting taps into their intrinsic motivation.

When individuals find their work more personally meaningful and fulfilling, they become more driven and enthusiastic about their responsibilities .

2. Job Satisfaction

Greater motivation, and the opportunity to match their skills and interests to their work, leads to greater satisfaction with their roles , creating a positive feedback loop that reinforces motivation and engagement.

3. Higher Productivity

When an employee is able to help shape their own job role, the employee is naturally likely to be more productive because they have more interest in the role and buy into their work more.

They are motivated to excel in areas that genuinely interest them, and this dedication to their work often translates into increased productivity and a higher quality of output.

4. Adaptive Skills Development

Job structuring and job design give employees the chance to stretch and grow their skills by taking on tasks that challenge them in constructive ways.

This constant learning and skill development can contribute to their overall motivation, as they see tangible progress and development in their careers.

5. Reduced Stress and Burnout

When employees have the ability to adjust their workload and task distribution, they can better manage their stress levels and prevent burnout .

This flexibility contributes to a healthier work-life balance , which, in turn, fosters higher motivation and engagement as employees feel more in control of their professional lives.

Case Studies and Examples of Job Crafting in Practice

1. Marketing Coordinator Case Study

Problem : A marketing coordinator, Laila, was feeling overwhelmed with her daily tasks and she lacked motivation due to the repetitive nature of her work.

Solution : Laila discussed her concerns with her manager and proposed a task-crafting plan. She suggested taking on more responsibilities related to social media management, which she’s passionate about and believes will benefit the company.

Outcome : Laila’s manager approved the plan, and Laila started focusing on social media management. She became more engaged, creative, and motivated. As a result, her company’s social media presence improved, and Laila’s job satisfaction increased.

2. Software Developer Case Study

Problem : Lucia, a software developer, felt disengaged because she was stuck working on a specific project she found uninteresting.

Solution : Lucia talked to her team lead about her passion for mobile app development and suggested a task-crafting approach. She proposed taking on more app-related tasks while balancing her current project.

Outcome : The team lead agreed, and Lucia got involved in app development. Her motivation and enthusiasm increased significantly. Her contributions led to the successful launch of a new mobile app for the company, showcasing her talent and benefiting the company.

3. Sales Rep Case Study

Problem : Karim, a sales representative, was struggling with his high-pressure sales targets and he felt stressed.

Solution : Karim spoke to his manager about his interest in eco-friendly products and his belief that he could better serve clients with this focus. He suggested creating a sub-niche within the company’s product offerings for eco-friendly solutions.

Outcome : The manager supported Karim’s idea, and he became the eco-friendly products specialist. His job satisfaction increased, and he excelled in this niche, leading to a significant boost in sales for eco-friendly products and increased engagement among clients.

4. HR Manager Example

Problem : Alex, an HR manager, was becoming less motivated because of the repetitive nature of hiring people and having to train new employees during the onboarding process and for the departure interviews .

Solution : Alex discussed his concerns with the HR director and he proposed a job crafting approach that involved shifting his focus to employee development and training programs .

Outcome : The HR director approves the plan, and Alex starts implementing training initiatives. He becomes more engaged and proactive in fostering employee growth. This leads to improved retention rates and skill development among employees at Global Innovations.

5. Financial Analyst Example

Problem : Kayleigh, a financial analyst, felt that her job lacked strategic impact. She believed that the company should have been investing more in emerging technologies, but her current role involved routine financial reporting.

Solution : Kayleigh discussed her concerns with her manager and proposed a job crafting plan that combined her financial skills with a strategic thinking perspective . She suggested becoming a technology-focused financial analyst responsible for identifying investment opportunities in the tech sector.

Outcome : The manager supported Kayleigh’s idea, and she began analyzing potential tech investments. Laura’s insights led to successful tech investments and significantly improved the company’s portfolio and its positioning in the market.

3 Key Components of Job Crafting

The terms Relational, Cognitive, and Task Crafting are often used in discussions on job crafting. These three terms were first mentioned by Wrzesniewski and Dutton (2001) and are often still used today as the three dimensions of job crafting:

• Task Crafting: This involves modifying the specific tasks and activities that your job is composed of. Employees may take on new tasks that they find more interesting, delegate tasks they dislike, or find ways to add variety to their jobs.
• Relational Crafting: Involves altering one’s relationships and interactions at work. Employees can build stronger connections with colleagues or managers, seek out mentors, or change the way they collaborate with others.
• Cognitive Crafting: Refers to changing one’s mindset and how one perceives their work. This might involve finding more meaning in one’s tasks, redefining one’s role, or adjusting one’s approach to challenges and setbacks.

8 Steps for How to Implement Job Crafting as an Employee

Embracing job crafting can be a pivotal step in shaping your work experience to ensure that it matches your strengths, passions, and career aspirations. Begin by thinking carefully about what truly motivates you.

1. Unearth Your Motivations

What aspects of your job energize you, and when do you find yourself in the zone and truly happy in your work?

Identifying these sources of inspiration can help guide you in your job crafting plan.

2. Visualize Your Ideal Role

Imagine your perfect job, where your interests and skills are utilized.

This ideal scenario serves as a compass and can be used to guide you and shape your job-crafting efforts.

3. Craft a Personal Mission Statement

Articulate a mission statement that embodies your career goals and purpose.

This will not only clarify your intentions but also help you explain your job-crafting vision to your superiors.

4. Dialogue with Your Manager

Initiate a candid conversation with your manager about your job crafting aspirations.

You will of course need to ensure that your proposal to your boss includes an explanation of the benefits for the company.

Try and include an explanation of how your suggestions fit in with the company’s goals and mission (if you do not know the company’s mission statement then check their website or Google it and you might soon find it).

Likewise, if you can explain how it might benefit your colleagues and your manager then your case will be even stronger.

5. Propose a Trial Phase

Suggest implementing your job crafting changes in a trial phase.

This minimizes risks and gives everyone a chance to assess the feasibility and impact of the modifications .

6. Sculpt Incremental Adjustments

Rather than drastic overhauls, consider making small, incremental adjustments in the beginning.

Test the waters, and fine-tune your role accordingly.

7. Forge Alliances

Collaborate with colleagues, especially those who might be affected by your job crafting endeavors.

Discuss how your changes can enhance teamwork and productivity and actively seek their input.

8. Collect Data

Monitor and collect data on the outcomes of your job crafting efforts.

Measure the impact on your job satisfaction, productivity, and your contribution to the company’s strategic goals.

Job and Task Crafting Challenges

Job crafting is a powerful tool for enhancing job satisfaction and engagement, but it’s not without its challenges.

Here are some common obstacles employees might encounter while job crafting:

Challenges and Issues

1. Resistance from Management

As an employee, you may face resistance or reluctance from managers when proposing changes to your role, especially if these changes disrupt existing processes or responsibilities.

2. Workload and Time Constraints

Attempting to modify one’s job may lead to concerns about increased workload or time constraints, which can be daunting.

3. Lack of Skills or Training

You might identify tasks you want to take on but lack the necessary skills or training in, making the transition challenging.

4. Organizational Policies and Constraints

Some organizations have strict policies or job descriptions that limit the extent to which you as an employee can modify your role.

Solutions and Strategies to Overcome the Issues

To successfully overcome these challenges and maintain motivation while job crafting, consider the following strategies:

1. Effective Communication

When proposing changes, communicate openly with managers. Explain how the modifications benefit the organization, and be receptive to feedback and compromises.

2. Prioritization and Time Management

To manage workload and time constraints, prioritize tasks, delegate, or reorganize your work schedule to accommodate the changes effectively.

3. Continuous Learning

Invest in training and development to acquire the necessary skills for the new tasks you wish to take on. Seek out mentorship or online courses to bridge any knowledge gaps.

4. Incremental Changes

Instead of drastic overhauls, start with small and simple changes.

This is a technique that can be highly effective and one that I have seen work very well. The old adage that taking baby steps towards a bigger goal can work really well for job and task crafting.

With baby steps, you have the chance for your manager and colleagues to gradually see and buy into the benefits that they also gain.

5. Policy Awareness and Negotiation

Familiarize yourself with organizational policies and explore opportunities for negotiation or adaptation. Some policies may be open to change if they match the company’s goals.

Overcoming challenges and maintaining motivation during the job crafting process requires resilience , effective communication , and a commitment to personal and professional growth.

Additional Resources

• Free job crafting exercises and icebreakers – to use in your training sessions as a corporate trainer
• HBR Guide to Crafting Your Purpose  Kindle Edition
• The Approach-Avoidance Job Crafting Scale – an interesting academic paper on job crafting
• Job crafting after making mistakes – an interesting paper about personal growth initiative (PGI) and job crafting.

• Recent Posts

• Adaptability Training Course Materials - June 2, 2024
• Human Resources Training Materials – 7 Popular Topics for Getting Started - May 25, 2024
• Growth Mindset Training Course Materials - May 12, 2024

>> View All Training Course Materials

Training Materials Catalogue & Prices

Payment Options

Bulk Discounts

What Is Included in Our Training Packages?

• Is Business Right for Me?
• Bachelor of Business Administration
• Business Minor
• Entrepreneurship Minor
• Real Estate Development Minor
• Course Catalog
• Electives, Minors & Opportunities
• Global Student Experiences
• Summer Business Academy
• All-Access Weekend
• Discover Ross

Ranked #4 by U.S. News & World Report, the Michigan Ross BBA Program is one of the best undergraduate business program in the world. Explore what makes our inclusive community of learners so unique.

• Which MBA Format is Right for Me?
• Full-Time MBA
• Weekend MBA
• Executive MBA
• Evening MBA
• Which One-Year Master's Degree is Right for Me?
• Master of Accounting
• Master of Business Analytics
• Master of Management
• Master of Supply Chain Management
• Global Student Experiences (graduate)
• MAP Projects & Testimonials

At Michigan Ross, you gain more than just a first-class business education. Our collaborative, supportive, inclusive community enriches your experience, and sets you up with a lifetime network of friends across the globe.

• Faculty Overview
• Faculty Directory
• Faculty News & Research
• Academic Areas
• Books & Publications
• Faculty Excellence
• Faculty Recruiting
• Centers, Institutes & Initiatives
• India Initiatives
• Technology & Business Innovation Forum
• Thomas C. Jones Undergraduate Innovation Initiative
• Tozzi Electronic Business and Finance Center
• PhD Program

The work of Michigan Ross faculty influences the world’s largest companies and global economies. Every day we’re creating real-world solutions for the most pressing challenges in our world. 

• Centers & Institutes
• Executive Education
• Alumni News
• Michigan Ross+Financial Times
• School News
• Student Voices
• Browse All Events
• Social Media
• News Archive
• For the Media
• Commencement
• Handleman Lecture Series
• William K. McInally Memorial Lecture Series
• Mitchell Lecture Series
• Full-Time MBA: Ross Women’s Weekend and UpClose Diversity Weekend

Follow a monthly poll co-created by Financial Times and Michigan Ross for insights on how American voters perceive key financial and economic issues in the lead-up to the 2024 U.S. presidential election.

• About Michigan Ross
• Mission & Values
• Diversity, Equity & Inclusion
• Key Facts & Figures
• Ross Experiences in Action-Based Learning: REAL
• Business+Impact
• Business+Tech
• Ross Around the World
• About Sharon F. Matusik
• Ross Leadership Team
• Ross School Advisory Board
• 100 Years of Michigan Ross
• Visit Ann Arbor
• Visit Detroit

Discover more about the history, people, milestones, and contributions that have shaped Michigan Ross.

Personal Stories Illuminate Three Main Types of Job Crafting

You may have heard about the concept of “job crafting” — finding ways to make your work more meaningful — but wondered how it could apply to your unique professional situation.

In a new essay in Harvard Business Review , Michigan Ross Professor Emerita Jane Dutton and Amy Wrzesniewski of the Yale School of Management provide real-life examples that illustrate the three main types of job crafting : task crafting, relational crafting, and cognitive crafting. 

“The positive impact of making thoughtful changes to the design of a job has been documented and studied in a broad range of occupations since our research was first published 20 years ago ,” the authors wrote. “The principles of job crafting remain deeply relevant in a world where job structure is rapidly changing, putting more and more responsibility on the individual for the experience and engagement in their work.”

Jane Dutton is the Robert L. Kahn Distinguished University Professor Emerita of Business Administration and Psychology at the University of Michigan Ross School of Business, and a cofounder of the Center for Positive Organizations.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE Media Contact: Bridget Vis, Public Relations Specialist, [email protected]

Matthew Trevor, Senior PR Specialist  [email protected]

Authentic Happiness

• Creativity and Imagination
• Grit and Self-Control
• Growth Through Adversity
• Positive Health
• Positive Neuroscience
• Prospective Psychology
• Resilience Training for Educators
• Resilience Training for the US Army
• World Well-Being Project
• Popular Books
• The Seligman Times
• External Resources
• Newsletter Archive
• Press Articles
• Scholarly Publications
• Questionnaire Center
• Approaches to Happiness
• Authentic Happiness Inventory
• Brief Strengths Test
• CES-D Questionnaire
• Close Relationships Questionnaires
• Compassionate Love Scale
• Fordyce Emotions Questionnaire
• Gratitude Survey
• Grit Survey
• Meaning In Life Questionnaire
• Optimism Test
• PANAS Questionnaire
• PERMA™ Meter
• The Workplace PERMA™ Profiler
• Satisfaction with Life Scale
• Primals Inventory
• Primals Inventory – Abridged
• Primals Inventory – Micro
• Stress & Empathy Questionnaire
• Subjective Happiness Scale
• Transgression Motivations Questionnaire
• VIA Survey of Character Strengths
• VIA Strength Survey for Children
• Well-Being Survey
• Work-Life Questionnaire
• Create new account
• Request new password

You are here

by Amy Wrzesniewski, 2014

Rarely are jobs designed to match the talents, preferences, and aspirations of the individual. Dr. Amy Wrzesniewski, professor of Organizational Behavior at the Yale School of Management, discussed the art and science of job crafting. Wrzesniewski studied hospital maintenance workers to look at how job crafting affected their work experience and morale. She set up two groups - one simply followed the job description while the second was asked to take on other, related tasks of their own choosing. Differences between the two groups were significant - the second group found meaning in their work and saw themselves and their purpose as radically different from their counterparts. Allowing an employee to influence work scope changes the meaning of that work, and allows them to take ownership of their job. Wrzesniewski’s work shows that job crafting can foster engagement, job satisfaction, and resilience.

Theory of Well-Being

• Privacy Policy

Social Media

Shaping Roles, Building Resilience: The Power of Job Crafting in SMEs

Empower your employees by bringing their individual strengths and aspirations in line with their responsibilities.

Building resilience in the fast-paced and continuously changing landscape of today's workplace is more important than ever, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises that often face unique challenges. One forward-thinking strategy that plays a pivotal role in enhancing organizational resilience is job crafting. This approach empowers employees to personalize their roles to better match their abilities, interests , and values , leading to improved engagement and job satisfaction.

Understanding Job Crafting in the Context of SMEs

Job crafting represents a proactive endeavor by employees to tweak their job responsibilities, relationships, and their perspective of the job itself, aiming to better synchronize their work with their individual strengths and aspirations. This concept underscores the significant impact individuals can have on their work environment. For SMEs, where flexibility and adaptability are often key to success, job crafting can be particularly beneficial. By modifying the scope of their roles, employees not only carve out more meaningful and rewarding work experiences for themselves but also drive organizational benefits by enhancing motivation, engagement, and overall performance.

In SMEs, where resources may be tighter and roles tend to be more fluid, job crafting is not just advantageous, it's essential. It empowers employees to shape their job roles to better suit their unique competencies and passions, ensuring that personal career growth and organizational objectives advance hand in hand. This strategic alignment is the lifeblood of a resilient workforce, one adept at steering through the complexities of the modern business ecosystem and seizing opportunities for growth. It's through this lens of adaptability and alignment that we can explore the five pivotal ways in which job crafting fortifies an SME's ability to endure and excel.

1. Enhanced Employee Engagement and Satisfaction

Job crafting leads to higher levels of employee engagement and job satisfaction. When employees feel their jobs are meaningful and aligned with their personal values, they are more motivated and committed. This heightened engagement acts as a buffer against burnout and stress, enabling individuals to cope better with change and adversity. High levels of engagement and satisfaction contribute to a resilient workforce capable of navigating challenges and uncertainties.

2. Fostering Innovation and Creativity

By encouraging job crafting, organizations empower employees to think creatively about their roles and how they can improve their work processes. This autonomy supports innovation, as employees are more likely to experiment with new ideas when they feel ownership over their tasks. In an environment where adaptation and flexibility are essential, the innovative solutions generated by employees can lead to breakthroughs that strengthen organizational resilience.

3. Improving Team Dynamics and Collaboration

Job crafting can also enhance team dynamics and collaboration. When team members craft their jobs to leverage their unique strengths, the team as a whole becomes more effective. This diversity of skills and approaches fosters a collaborative environment where team members support each other in overcoming obstacles. Such strong, cohesive teams are a cornerstone of organizational resilience, providing the collective capability to adapt to change and bounce back from setbacks.

4. Building a Learning Culture

Job crafting contributes to the development of a learning culture within organizations. As employees experiment with new ways of working and continuously refine their job designs, they engage in ongoing learning. This culture of learning and development makes organizations more agile and adaptable, key attributes of resilience. Employees who are accustomed to learning and growing are better prepared to face new challenges and are more likely to find innovative solutions to problems.

5. Enhancing Agility and Flexibility

Organizations that embrace job crafting foster a culture of agility and flexibility. By allowing employees to adapt their roles and responsibilities, organizations can more easily realign resources and focus in response to changing market conditions or strategic priorities. This flexibility is crucial for resilience, as it enables organizations to pivot quickly in the face of disruptions without losing momentum.

Implementing Job Crafting for Resilience

Leaders aiming to leverage job crafting to bolster organizational resilience must take a proactive stance. By nurturing an environment where employees feel they have the autonomy to mold their roles, businesses instill a robust sense of ownership and accountability. Such empowerment is a catalyst for heightened engagement and a hotbed for innovation. But autonomy alone isn't enough; it must be underpinned by adequate support and resources. Providing training, mentoring, and ready access to information equips employees with the tools necessary to craft their jobs effectively. This empowerment, coupled with a culture that prizes open communication, creates a fertile ground for job crafting. When employees openly discuss their aspirations, challenges, and successes in tailoring their jobs, it can ignite inspiration and promote the spread of job crafting practices across the company. Moreover, when creativity in job crafting is recognized and rewarded -- especially when it aligns with and contributes to team and organizational objectives -- it not only reinforces the value of such initiatives but also motivates others to pursue similar paths. Each of these strategies is a thread in the fabric of a resilient organization, weaving together individual aspirations with collective goals to create a durable, adaptive, and thriving enterprise.

Job crafting represents a powerful tool for building organizational resilience. By empowering employees to align their jobs with their strengths and passions, organizations can enhance engagement, foster innovation, improve collaboration, and create a culture of learning and adaptability. These elements are crucial for organizations aiming to thrive in the face of change and uncertainty. As such, fostering an environment that supports job crafting can prepare teams to adapt and overcome challenges, securing a competitive edge in today's dynamic business landscape. Implementing job crafting requires a commitment to flexibility, autonomy, and support from leadership, but the rewards in terms of organizational resilience and employee fulfillment are substantial. As organizations look to the future, embracing job crafting will be key to developing the agile, resilient workforces needed to navigate the complexities of the modern world.

This post originally appeared at inc.com .

Click here to subscribe to the Inc. newsletter: inc.com/newsletters "

Job Redesigning and Crafting

Introduction, hospitality, abc corporation, sports injury clinic, similarities between job redesigning and job crafting, key differences between job redesigning and job crafting.

In the 21 st century, work can change and become attractive to employees who actively craft their tasks. The physical and cognitive alterations people make at their interpersonal work boundaries are called job crafting. The workers develop a more optimal design of their tasks by creating a wide range of bottom-up moves. The design is crucial; for instance, it permits the workers to alter the meaning of their duties in suitable ways and create stages for meaningful tasks. Employees can customize their jobs’ designs, and therefore they meet the need of the work and create an encouraging self-image in the study (Griffin, 2007). Job crafting leads to positive results, such as personal development.

The ship crew team will work well if they craft their task. They are responsible for the navigation, safety, and maintenance of the ship. Task crafting aims at redesigning the job, altering the series of errands involving the employee while still performing the roles for which they are responsible (Wrzesniewski, 2014). The main function is to ensure the principles of the task are adhered to and therefore, place the required actions in place. Similarly, the function alters what is done and ensures the task stays active but relates to the assigned activities. The availability of numerous strategies and techniques is assumed to steer the main activities (Dik & Duffy, 2012). Job crafting is the primary strategy where the workers are given duties based on their needs and personalities vital in ensuring employees are assigned specific tasks boosting productivity.

The nature of the job in the hospitality field needs designing through which workers satisfy customers’ needs. Relational crafting is appropriate for hospitality staff since it alters the relationship of their daily interaction. The team manages to create a group enhancing good skills for marketing and interaction and therefore, strengthening a collaborative interaction (Dik & Duffy, 2012). Relational crafting encourages employees and controls the type of business experience among the staff, therefore resulting in better results (Wrzesniewski, 2014). It is advisable for the hospitality department to employ relational crafting to improve the relationships between them and the staff. Implementation of relational crafting enables the staff to develop proper work relations enabling them to share their job experiences on an interactive platform.

The team of telemarketers is responsible for calling potential clients who visit the company’s webpage. In this scenario, the company succeeds in telemarketing. Telemarketing makes the company concerned about the high turnover among the employees, with the corporation being willing to enrich the job. According to Bauer and Erdogan (2012), the five main job scopes to be reviewed when redesigning the job include autonomy, task significance, task recognition, skill variation, and feedback. The critical job dimension which needs revision in the ABC Company and the telemarketers’ turnover is the skill variety. The corporation is working successfully with the other four core dimensions: task significance, task identity, feedback, and autonomy. Skill variety is the only dimension failing to give evidence of proper operation.

Skills can be described as the expertise and talent which are essential in performing any task. According to Bauer and Erdogan (2012), skill variety is defined as the extent to which the job needs several steps encompassing different capabilities and talents. An individual is required to apply several skills. The employee requires few skills to contact the customers. Although the revision of skill variety provides the telemarketers with extra skills, they need to deal with the clients’ complaints and offer appropriate solutions.

Job dimensions are critical for any company since they help in ensuring the quality and standardization of service provision. The telemarketers at ABC Corporation have the freedom of customizing their individual sales pitches to avoid misleading potential customers (Bauer & Erdogan, 2012). The company gives them the freedom to formulate their schedules. According to Bauer and Erdogan (2012), feedback is the extent to which the job’s activities inform a person directly and clearly on the effectiveness of their performance. Their performance feedback is obtained by evaluations that depend on the monthly sales volume and conducted surveys on customer satisfaction (Griffin, 2007). The telemarketers get monthly reports on the feedback which helps in informing their decision making

The management needs to employ job crafting to make the specialists feel less monotonous and highly rewarding. This will enable the workers to attain their target goals. Crafting the job motivates the practitioners and encourages a positive attitude toward their activities. The management has to determine the length of time the task will take and efficiently help in planning to efficiently perform. The strategy applicable for use is the optimization of the job. The specialists should be encouraged to virtually analyze their tasks and the interaction involved.

The values to be expressed in the work should be carefully assessed. Similarly, the focus should be on strengths that will help them enjoy the work. Optimizing the job design to proactively shape their task’s meaning and experience is important to achieving the set goals (Wrzesniewski, 2014). The specialists should undergo cognitive crafting which identifies their perceptions requiring improvements for the task. This should not be done as an obligation but encourages them to prepare to offer better services to the clients (Duffy & Dik, 2012). Cognitive crafting motivates them to work willingly; therefore, the employees fail in their jobs as a way of earning money and helping the injured.

Table 1: Job designing and Job Crafting Definitions.

Job crafting and job redesigning have been different; however, there are quite similar aspects. Both jobs redesigning and job crafting involve the expansion and addition of new tasks to already existing ones. Both cognitive crafting and job rotation require an individual’s perception of a specific task (Griffin, 2007). The rotation of the worker from one task to other focuses on their perception of the particular jobs.

According to the definition, job redesigning aims at increasing the roles and responsibilities of the job while job crafting focuses on the employee, their roles, and how they relate with other workers. Furthermore, job crafting focuses on the opinions and feelings of the employees, the tasks, and their meanings (Wrzesniewski, 2014). Job redesigning is mainly deliberated by the managers to motivate employees, while in job crafting the employees mostly perform assignment crafting to maximize results. Job crafting involves continuous proactive adjustments lacking specific arrangements hence taking a short time, whereas job redesigning consists of a sequence of steps, therefore taking a long time.

Bauer, T., & Erdogan, B. (2012) Chapter 6.1: Motivating employees through job design . In Introduction to organizational behavior . Flatworld Knowledge. Web.

Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2012). Chapter 7: Job crafting. In Make your Job a calling: How the psychology of vocation can change your life at work. Templeton Press.

Griffin, R. (2007). Chapter 6: Organization structure and design. In Principles of Management . Houghton Mifflin. Web.

Wrzesniewski, A. (2014). Chapter 6: Engage in job crafting. In Dutton, J. E., & Spreitzer, G. M. (Eds). How to be a positive leader: Small actions, big impact . Berrett-Koehler Publishers.

Cite this paper

• Chicago (N-B)
• Chicago (A-D)

StudyCorgi. (2022, July 8). Job Redesigning and Crafting. https://studycorgi.com/job-redesigning-and-crafting/

"Job Redesigning and Crafting." StudyCorgi , 8 July 2022, studycorgi.com/job-redesigning-and-crafting/.

StudyCorgi . (2022) 'Job Redesigning and Crafting'. 8 July.

1. StudyCorgi . "Job Redesigning and Crafting." July 8, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/job-redesigning-and-crafting/.

Bibliography

StudyCorgi . "Job Redesigning and Crafting." July 8, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/job-redesigning-and-crafting/.

StudyCorgi . 2022. "Job Redesigning and Crafting." July 8, 2022. https://studycorgi.com/job-redesigning-and-crafting/.

This paper, “Job Redesigning and Crafting”, was written and voluntary submitted to our free essay database by a straight-A student. Please ensure you properly reference the paper if you're using it to write your assignment.

Before publication, the StudyCorgi editorial team proofread and checked the paper to make sure it meets the highest standards in terms of grammar, punctuation, style, fact accuracy, copyright issues, and inclusive language. Last updated: October 15, 2022 .

If you are the author of this paper and no longer wish to have it published on StudyCorgi, request the removal . Please use the “ Donate your paper ” form to submit an essay.

• HR Strategy
• Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging
• People Analytics
• Talent Acquisition
• Learning & Development

• Business Transformation
• HR Effectiveness
• Rewards and Benefits
• Event Calendar
• HRD Collective
• HRD Collective Europe
• Case Studies
• HRD Live Podcast
• HRD Network
• HRD Buyers Guide
• Global Advisory Board

Connect with us

The rise of job crafting in modern organizations.

Job crafting is an innovative strategy that breaks away from rigid job structures, which can stifle motivation and creativity. It lets employees redefine their roles, using their unique skills and interests to feel more ownership and excitement about their work. It’s a proactive, employee-driven process where you can tailor your tasks, relationships, and how you […]

• Author: HRD Connect
• Date published: May 28, 2024
• Employee Engagement

Job crafting is an innovative strategy that breaks away from rigid job structures, which can stifle motivation and creativity. It lets employees redefine their roles, using their unique skills and interests to feel more ownership and excitement about their work.

It’s a proactive, employee-driven process where you can tailor your tasks, relationships, and how you see your job to better align with your strengths and values. By embracing job crafting, organizations can boost productivity and retention, ushering in a new era of empowered employees and flexible organizations.

The evolution of job structures

The way we work is changing. Businesses are moving away from traditional job structures towards cultures of flexibility and independence. This shift is driven by the changing desires of the workforce.

While past generations focused on climbing the corporate ladder, today’s employees are motivated by purpose and the chance to use their entrepreneurial spirit. Companies recognize this change, allowing employees to craft their roles, fostering innovation and creativity in the process.

This evolution reflects a deeper understanding that the one-size-fits-all approach to job descriptions is outdated. Modern job structures accommodate individual strengths and development goals, ensuring employees stay engaged and their work aligns with the company’s evolving goals.

The three pillars of job crafting

Job crafting rests on three main supports: task crafting, relational crafting, and cognitive crafting.

Task crafting lets you modify your job by changing the number or type of tasks you do, aligning your work more closely with your interests and skills. For example, a software developer might expand their role to include user experience design.

Relational crafting allows you to change your interactions with colleagues, building relationships that can boost job satisfaction and performance. Imagine a customer service representative who seeks deeper involvement with the product development team to better address customer needs.

Cognitive crafting involves reframing how you see your job, focusing on the elements that resonate with your values and passions. This elevates your experience and engagement with your role. Together, these pillars empower you to personalize your work experience and contribute uniquely to your organization.

The benefits of job crafting for employees and organizations

Job crafting offers a win-win situation for both employees and organizations. For employees, it enhances engagement and well-being as you can align your roles with your interests, leading to increased job satisfaction. For instance, an IT professional might focus on creative tasks, leading to a greater sense of fulfillment.

This autonomy in role definition can also reduce stress and burnout, resulting in a more resilient workforce. Organizations benefit from increased productivity and innovation as engaged employees are more likely to suggest improvements and develop new ideas. For example, Google’s 20% time policy, which allowed employees to work on projects outside their primary job descriptions, resulted in significant innovations.

Job crafting can also lead to stronger team dynamics and a more supportive work environment. Employees build more effective relationships and collaborate more closely, enhancing overall organizational performance.

Challenges and considerations of implementation

While job crafting offers significant advantages, it also presents challenges that require careful management. Ensuring that employees’ personalized roles don’t compromise core responsibilities is key. Managers need to find the right balance between granting autonomy and maintaining the essential functions of the job.

Equally important is managing fairness within teams, as perceptions of unfairness can arise when certain team members modify their roles. This could potentially lead to conflict or dissatisfaction among colleagues. Additionally, managers need to provide adequate support and resources to facilitate effective job crafting, ensuring that it aligns with both individual aspirations and organizational objectives.

Embracing job crafting is essential for cultivating a dynamic workforce. It empowers employees, fosters innovation, and aligns personal aspirations with organizational goals.

Subscribe to get your daily business insights

Upcoming Events

Navigating the digital apprenticeship landscape.

Related Articles

• Reward and Recognition
• Leadership Learnings
• Employee Experience
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Future of Work
• Talent Management
• Digital Transformation
• HR Technology

The power of recognition programs for employee engagement

Companies constantly seek effective strategies to motivate and retain their workforce. Recognition programs have become a powerful tool, as a...

• HRD Connect

Great managers = Great workplaces?

Managers have a major impact on employees’ productivity and engagement, as well as other factors that create a great place to work such as...

Spotify presses play on employee experience hyper-personalization with new platform 'Bounce'

[powerpress] Picture your music service recommending the perfect playlist as a soundtrack for an upcoming road trip. Or, as you hit shuffle,...

• Benjamin Broomfield

Enhancing the employee experience as a strategy to prevent burnout 

Building a welcoming, inclusive and sustainable workplace is at the top of the agenda for companies across the globe. Yet, the rise of employee...

• Finbarr Toesland

Building a culture of belonging: the key to boosting employee engagement and productivity

In today's fast-paced and fiercely competitive economic environment, organizations are constantly seeking out ways to gain an edge over their...

Blueprint: A scalable, automated performance management approach to underperformer optimization

Confronting organization-wide underperformance is a critical, yet often avoided, responsibility for HR leaders. Left unchecked, these performance...

Elevating employee engagement and productivity in a hybrid workplace 

In a rapidly evolving landscape of work, the role of Human Resources (HR) has never been more pivotal. The questions surrounding employee engagement...

Meeting employee expectations to drive company performance

The impact of events over the past two years has created new challenges for the leaders of today. Supporting employee needs is still often tied to...

HRD Roundtable: Combating 'Quiet Quitting'…

08 june 2023, hrd network roundtable: the retention…, 15 june 2023, manage change and drive value…, 01 june 2023, we sent a code to your email..

Enter the 6-digit verification code sent to

Stay connected to the global HR community

• Open access
• Published: 03 June 2024

The factors of job crafting in emergency nurses: regression models versus qualitative comparative analysis

• Yu Wang 2 ,
• Qiaofang Yang 2 ,
• Luwen Wang 3 ,
• Qingwei Zhang 2 &
• Yingli Li 1  

BMC Nursing volume  23 , Article number:  369 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Job crafting is defined as a series of proactive behaviors exhibited by employees in order to balance work resources and needs, which has a significant positive impact on the nurses. It is necessary to find the core factors that influence the job crafting, as emergency nurses deal with the most complex tasks, so as to improve their job satisfaction.

To investigate the core factors of job crafting among emergency nurses.

A cross-sectional design was used in the study. A total of 255 nurses were recruited from two hospitals in Zhengzhou and Shenzhen, China in December 2021. 255 nurses completed an online questionnaire. Hierarchical regression models and fsQCA models were used to explore the factors influencing job crafting among emergency nurses and helped us to identify core factors.

The hierarchical regression model and the fsQCA model found that the occupational benefit, psychological empowerment, and research experience were the core factors affecting their job crafting. Job involvement was not significant in the regression model, but the QCA model indicated that it needs to be combined with other factors to impact on job crafting. The QCA model uncovered seven key conditional configurations that led to high and low job crafting among emergency nurses, explaining 80.0% of the results for high job crafting and 82.6% of the results for the low job crafting, respectively.

Conclusions

The results of this study provide valuable insights into the job crafting experienced by emergency nurses. Junior emergency nurses should be granted a high level of psychological empowerment without assigning them overly complex tasks, such as research tasks, as these challenges can stop their job crafting. Intermediate and senior emergency nurses, on the other hand, can be assigned research tasks coupled with high psychological empowerment to enhance their job crafting.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

As diseases become more complex and technology evolves rapidly, nursing work is changing, which has posed new tasks and demands for the nurses these days. It was noted that employees should work stepwise in the traditional human resource management system. However, in recent years, researchers have encouraged employees to change their jobs in line with the reality of their work. ‘Job crafting’ is an employee-focused approach to job redesigning [ 1 ].Job crafting is defined as a series of proactive behaviors exhibited by employees in order to balance work resources and needs, with the aim of aligning their work with their own preferences, motivations, and passions [ 2 ].YEPES-BALDÓ surveyed 530 Spanish nurses and found that the job crafting score was 3.17 ± 0.66 [ 3 ]. BAGHDADI conducted a survey among 594 nurses in Saudi Arabia, reporting the job crafting score was 3.54 ± 0.50 [ 4 ]. In summary, it is observed that there are variations in the level of job crafting among nurses, which is generally at a moderate level.

Wrzesniewski first proposed job crafting, suggesting that employees could engage in job crafting in three dimensions: cognitive, task, and relational [ 1 ]. Job demand-resource was further integrated by Tims and Bakker, and it suggested that all working conditions can be classified as job demands or resources [ 5 , 6 ], which includes four dimensions: reducing hindering job demands, increasing challenging job demands, increasing structural job resources and increasing social job resources. Promoting-focused job crafting has been shown to be positively related to job involvement and satisfaction, and negatively related to burnout, depression, and illness [ 7 , 8 ]. Furthermore, studies conducted in the field of career development have shown that promotion-focused job crafting is positively related to career competency and career promotion [ 9 ]. Emergency nurses encounter more complex clinical environments and problems than other departments. The emergency department serves as the first line of defense in hospitals to save patients’ lives. However, it is also the department where adverse events such as nurse-patient disputes and complaints are most likely to occur. According to reports, emergency nurses experience higher occupational stress than other departments, which can lead to dissatisfaction with nursing work among nurses, and even turnout [ 10 ]. This, in turn, will result in a shortage of emergency nurses, further increasing the occupational stress on those remaining in the emergency department. Furthermore, nurses face additional research tasks and pressures in addition to solving clinical problems in China. So, we defined emergency nurse’s hindering and challenging demands as a research experience, professional position, number of night shifts, etc.

Autonomy is an important work feature, as it can be associated with a better capacity to handle stress [ 6 ]. Structural and psychological empowerment are two categories of authority that can give nurses some autonomy at work. Psychological empowerment as an extension of structural empowerment, focuses on the internal feelings of an individual toward organizational empowerment. Spritzer defined psychological empowerment as a sense of control over one’s work environment, which includes the dimensions of impact, meaning, competence, and self-determination [ 11 ]. Increased psychological empowerment of nurse has been shown to lead to job satisfaction and more positive organizational behavior [ 12 ]. The sense of control over their work behaviors can be increased if nurses have a stronger psychological empowerment. They feel more confident acquiring the required knowledge and skills to do their job, and also have a greater perception of their impact on organizational management, decision-making, and performance [ 13 ]. This helps nurses take the initiative toward rebuilding the organizational relationships and actively redesigning work content to address the challenges on the job [ 14 ]. Therefore, we defined the work resources as the level of psychological empowerment given to nurses by their organizations.

Occupational benefits are internal, personal motivators that nurses blend with their good work experiences and cognitive assessments [ 15 ]. It can also result in greater job satisfaction, the promotion of creative behavior, and a reduction in burnout and turnover intentions [ 16 ]. Occupational benefits reflect how satisfied employees are with the organization’s management, which has a significant impact on whether or not they want to stay. According to the JD-R theory, nurses’ job crafting has resulted in favorable occupational benefits for them. Emergency nurses are often faced with critically ill patients, and their nursing work demands a high level of expertise. Correspondingly, the rehabilitation of patients can bring them a sense of accomplishment and self-worth, providing a strong sense of occupational benefits [ 17 ]. In order to continually obtain this feeling, emergency nurses may engage in job crafting to reshape their work.Their practice reflects how they view the rewards and advantages of their profession, which supports their involvement in their work.

Job involvement, as a type of work commitment, is the psychological recognition of an individual’s work. It is more linked with the satisfaction of internal needs.From the perspective of an organization, Pfeffe stated that job involvement is crucial for motivating employees [ 18 ]. However, there is a disagreement at the moment on whether or not job involvement affects individual performance [ 19 ]. On the other hand, some studies have shown that job involvement is the only variable associated with the nurses’ intention to continue working in their current position, not withstanding their work environment [ 20 ]. When demands exceed resources, employees feel immense pressure, leading to negative emotions and affecting job involvement [ 21 ]. Thus, this suggests that work involvement may arise from job crafting. From this, we hypothesized that emergency nurses with high levels of job involvement may pay more attention to the details of work, which in turn identifies work processes or tasks that need to be improved and triggers job crafting. Therefore, it is worth to be further analyzed whether job involvement would have an impact on job crafting.

Due to the growing complexity of the nurses’ work, one antecedent variable cannot fully explain the causes of the findings. Regression model could only examine the net effect of one of the independent variables on outcomes rather than exploring complex causal relationships between the antecedent variables [ 22 ]. The configuration theory is based on the idea of sets, as it allows the analysis of configuration effects generated by multiple conditional variables of the organization’s management [ 23 ]. This study used both regression modeling and fsQCA modeling. fsQCA adds depth by showing complex paths to job crafting, where variables can combine differently to explain outcomes. Even non-significant regression variables can impact job crafting in fsQCA. Combining both methods gives a comprehensive view of why emergency nurses reshape their work, revealing intrinsic motivations. Therefore, the aim of our study is to explore the core factors influencing job crafting in emergency nurses through a hierarchical regression model and fuzzy set qualitative comparative analysis.

A convenience sampling method was applied in the study, an online questionnaire was sent to the emergency nurses through a mobile program in the cities of Shenzhen and Zhengzhou, China, in March 2023. The inclusion criteria were: working in the emergency department; working for more than 1 year; voluntary participation, and informed consent. The exclusion criteria were: trainee nurses, vacation nurses. Based on sample size estimation principles, this study calculated the required sample size to be 5–10 times the number of independent variables. We calculated a required sample of 110–220, given 22 independent variables. Considering a 20% invalid questionnaire rate, we distributed 280 questionnaires.

Instruments

General information questionnaire.

The general information questionnaire was designed by the researcher and includes gender, age, monthly income, etc.

Perceived occupational benefits Questionnaire[ 24 ]

The questionnaire contains 5 dimensions and 29 items. The questionnaire had a 5-point Likert scale, with 1 indicating “strongly disagree” and 5 indicating “strongly agree”. No reverse scoring items were available for the scale. The scores represented the nurses’ perception of professional benefits along with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.96 in the study.

Job crafting Scale[ 2 ]

With 21 items, the scale is scored on a 5-point Likert scale. Here, higher scores indicate better job crafting. The scale comprises four dimensions: increasing structural work resources, increasing social work resources, increasing challenging work demands, and decreasing hindering work demands. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient is 0.93 in the study.

Psychological empowerment Scale[ 25 ]

This scale includes 4 dimensions: work meaning, autonomy, self-efficacy, and work influence. Each dimension has 3 items under it, totaling 12 items. The 5-point Likert scale is used, where a higher total score indicates a higher degree of PE. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of this scale was tested to be 0.94.

Job involvement Scale[ 26 ]

The scale consists of 10 items on a 5-point Likert scale, with items 2 and 7 being reverse-scored. The level of score indicates the extent of job involvement. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of the scale in the study was tested to be 0.82.

Date collection

Researchers contacted nursing management personnel from various hospitals to obtain their consent and support. Nurses were informed about the research objectives, significance, and principles of anonymity and then shared the questionnaire links to those who agreed to participate. The survey was set up through a survey platform, and to ensure quality, all questions were mandatory. Each nurse gets the link via WeChat and is limited to one response. After the survey concluded, a total of 280 questionnaires were collected. Among them, those questionnaires with identical responses for all items and completion times less than 3 min were excluded. Ultimately, 255 questionnaires were valid, resulting in an effective response rate of 91.07%.

SPSS 24.0 software was used to analyze the data; it was described using frequencies, percentages, or means ± standard deviations, depending on the data type. Comparisons between groups were analyzed using independent samples t-test or one-way ANOVA with a test level of α = 0.05. The paper looks at the amount of variance explained by demographic factors on Job crafting(R 2 ) in the one-way analysis of the first level of the hierarchical regression model. In the second level of the hierarchical regression model, other factors that may affect job crafting are integrated to observe the amount of variance explained variance (ΔR 2 ).

Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA ) is a new method for analysing complex causal relationships in histological problems based on Boolean algebra and set theory.QCA is a new method that combines quantitative and qualitative analysis, providing strong support for studying the configuration problem. Based on variable type, QCA is divided into csQCA, mvQCA, and fsQCA. fsQCA has been selected in this paper to analyze the configuration effects of job crafting factors among emergency nurses. QCA requires the calibration of the original data into the set. Calibration is the process of assigning sets to cases. Sociodemographic variables that were meaningful for univariate analysis were included in the analysis of the fsQCA model. In this case (Research experience: 0 = None; 1 = have), (Professional Position: 0 = Advanced; 0.5 = Intermediate; 1 = Junior). The fuzzy set requires setting three critical values according to the theoretical or conceptual settings: fully affiliated, crossover, and fully unaffiliated, and with the affiliation of the transformed set between 0 and 1. For the continuous variables, the 0.05th, 0.5th and 0.95th percentile of the data were taken and substituted into the Calibrate function (x, fully in, crossover, fully out).It was analyzed whether the antecedent variable was necessary for job crafting in emergency nurses before the sufficient analysis. If the antecedent variable was greater than 0.9 [ 27 ], it was considered necessary. A truth table for sufficient analysis was constructed using fsQCA 3.0, with consistency set to 0.8 and frequency set to 1. If variables appear in both parsimonious and intermediate solutions, they are called core conditions. If they only appear in intermediate solutions, they are called edge conditions [ 28 ].

Descriptive and univariate analysis

A total of 255 nurses were included, of which 228 (89.4%) were female and up to 209 (82.0%) had no research experience. The results demonstrated that research experience and job position were considered influential variables for job crafting among emergency nurses. Also, the differences were all statistically significant ( p  < 0.05), as seen in Table  1 .

Hierarchical regression models

A variance variation of 0.047 was obtained after entering the sociodemographic factors into the regression model, with significance in the one-way analysis. In the paper, it was shown that nurses with no research experience had a lower job crafting than nurses with research experience( P <0.05) In the second step, three psychological variables were added, and it was found that a variance variation of 0.283 was obtained. The significant variables were research experience (β=-0.135, p  < 0.05), perceived occupational benefits (β = 0.177, p  < 0.05), and psychological empowerment (β = 0.317, p  < 0.001), as can be seen in Table  2 .

Necessary analysis

The consistency score was considered necessary for evaluating whether the antecedent variable was available as the outcome variable. The consistency score is similar to the significance of the coefficient in a regression model. It represents the extent to which the outcome has to rely on the antecedent variable. In this study, no variable existed as a necessary condition since none of the antecedent variables reached 0.9. Refer to Table  3 for details.

Sufficient analysis

Six conditional configurations that generated high job crafting and six conditional configurations that generated low job crafting were analyzed together. The twelve configurations were sufficient conditions to constitute high and low job crafting for the emergency nurses. The overall solution coverage of high and low job crafting was 0.800 and 0.826, as seen in Table  4 . This shows that the twelve configurations explain 80% of the results for high job crafting and 82.6% for low. The paper remove unique coverage of less than 0.1 for the configuration because it was hard to cover 10% of the samples. Three configurations of high job crafting and four configurations of low job crafting for emergency nurses are obtained.The raw coverage of H1 was 0.106 in the high job crafting configuration, which meant that this configuration could explain 10.6% of the sample.Among the low job crafting configurations, it was found that L2 had the highest raw coverage. The configurations are elaborated as follows: ① H1: high psychological empowerment + high job involvement + junior professional position + no research experience. ② H2: high psychological empowerment + high job involvement + have research experience. ③ H3:high job involvement + high perceived occupational benefits + senior professional position + no research experience. ④ L1: low perceived occupational benefits + senior professional position + no research experience. ⑤ L2: low psychological empowerment + senior professional position + no research experience. ⑥ L3: high job involvement + senior professional position + low perceived occupational benefits. ⑦ L4: low job involvement + senior professional position + research experience.The most relevant pathway or combination to explain low job crafting was L2 (raw coverage = 0.038; consistency = 0.879), which explained 64.3% of the cases. The most relevant pathway or combination to explain high job crafting was H1 (raw coverage = 0.106; consistency = 0.798), which explained 60.1% of the cases.Refer to Table 4 for details.

Discussions

This study explored the effects of sociodemographic variables, psychological empowerment, occupational benefits, and job involvement, on job crafting among the emergency nurses. The majority of existing studies have concentrated on linear regression models. This neglects the complement of other methods, like the fsQCA model [ 29 ]. The study overlooked the synergy between factors if the researcher focuses only on regression models. In helping the researcher to construct intervention plans, the fsQCA models with different pathways formed by the synergy between factors are particularly important [ 30 ]. Regression models indicated that research experience, psychological empowerment and occupational benefits were associated with job crafting, which is consistent with existing research [ 31 ]. Based on the results of the fsQCA analysis, no necessary conditions for job crafting were found. In terms of the sufficiency analysis, it was found that H1 has the highest coverage, explaining 10.6% of cases after comparing the raw coverage of the three configurations that stimulate high job crafting among emergency nurses. This suggested that the majority of emergency nurses who exhibit high job crafting are influenced by the conditions present in H1, and psychological empowerment is the core condition. For the four paths of the low job crafting, L2 has the highest raw coverage. This indicated that nurses with junior professional position and no research experience who lack sufficient psychological empowerment are unlikely to engage in job crafting. Once again, psychological empowerment emerges as a core condition in this path, reinforcing the results obtained through regression analysis.

We can discuss the professional position and research experience from “increasing the challenging work demands” and “lessening hindering work demands”, based on the job crafting theory [ 6 ]. Since junior emergency nurses were newly exposed to clinical nursing work along with the special characteristics of emergency nursing, they faced higher work stress when addressing clinical problems that were primarily acute and serious. The problems mentioned above can also serve as a cause of stress that constantly reduces self-efficacy in the emergency care process. Additionally, the junior emergency nurses lack knowledge and experience in nursing research when they were students, and the research ability of nurses working in clinical settings is low in China [ 32 ]. Most nurses are under pressure to perform the job guided by the goal of job position improvement [ 33 ], and the inner drive to explore and solve research problems was insufficient [ 34 ]. If the nurses were assigned to research work by the organization, the work demands would inevitably exceed their abilities, leading to work hindrances. Junior nurses experience less pressure about job position improvement, and they may be fearful of research work. This may create defensive job crafting by lessening hindering work demands. Although this helps them to accomplish their clinical goals, it may reduce their work motivation and job involvement. The second dimension of job crafting is about increasing the challenging work demands. It has been revealed that a lack of challenging work may lead to absences and job dissatisfaction. Research tasks, as a challenge, may lead to the creation of job crafting for advanced practice nurses. By expanding task boundaries and increasing challenging work demands, the nurses have contributed to the organization. It was shown that challenge demands were associated with goal achievement and work motivation [ 6 ]. The H2, with research experience as a core condition, confirmed that the high job crafting was associated with the individuals’ promotion of “challenge demands”.

The high level of psychological empowerment in nurses was a core condition that influenced the level of job crafting on both core configurations (H1&L2). From regression models, it was also seen that psychological empowerment was a core element affecting job crafting (β = 0.317, p  < 0.001). This means that the job crafting gradually increased with the psychological empowerment. The self-determination theory suggests that autonomous motivational orientation, as opposed to control motivational orientation, would be more beneficial in addressing the basic psychological needs. A high level of psychological empowerment as a variable of autonomous motivational orientation could enhance individual job performance and job ability [ 35 ]. The resource conservation theory states that employees can experience higher psychological security as they sense higher levels of psychological empowerment through a cycle of resource loss and gain spirals. These positive job resources assist them in conserving and building more resources to cope with the prospect of poor career outcomes and job demands [ 36 ], which precisely confirm the findings of this paper.

In the emergency departments, nurses face a large number of job challenges on a daily basis. The ability of nurses to cope better with these challenges is closely related to perceived occupational benefits. Emergency nurses who perceive high levels of empowerment were better able to respond to the work challenges [ 37 ]. With increased resources for employees to do their jobs, a positive impact was bound to be seen on their psychological empowerment [ 14 ]. By acquiring and conserving resources, nurses are most likely to achieve the most appropriate match between people and job demands. Nurses who are motivated and empowered can develop more job crafting [ 38 ]. If this goal is achieved, it would increase nurses’ satisfaction and thus would promote job crafting resulting in a virtuous circle. To summarize, the results of both the QCA and the regression model demonstrated that the psychological empowerment was a core condition that influenced job crafting among the emergency nurses. From H1, H2 and L2, it can also be proved that high psychological empowerment was the core condition for a high job crafting, regardless of whether or not they had done clinical research work.

The identification with one’s job based on its potential to meet one’s needs and expectations is called job involvement. The job involvement has been mentioned in the literature as a reason why nurses feel so committed to their jobs [ 39 ]. Nurses with a high level of job involvement deliberately consider their work an important part of their lives. Whether or not they can feel good about themselves is closely related to their personal work. Thus, a healthy management structure should consider job involvement as an important predictor of organizational productivity. This attitude of nurses toward their jobs should be promoted [ 20 ]. However, the regression model shows that job involvement does not influence job crafting. Meanwhile, the H1-H3 all indicated that job involvement was an impact on job crafting, and two of these paths indicated that job involvement was a core condition for a high job crafting. Job involvement is influenced by the worker’s identification with the job they are doing. This is, in turn, derived from whether the job can meet the needs of the worker or not. This means that once a nurse has job involvement, a balance between job resources and demands can be reached and the nurse’s job crafting would be suspended. The QCA model revealed that job involvement may need to have an impact on job crafting in conjunction with the other factors. Several studies have also shown that job involvement is correlated with psychological empowerment [ 40 ]. The impact of nurses’ job involvement on their job crafting needs to be further explored.

The occupational benefits of nurses is a cognitive assessment of their feelings about the content of their work, which comes from their internal traits and the external work environment [ 41 ]. Job crafting is a positive behavior for individuals to balance job demands and resources. It can help individuals use available job resources to cope with the stress of job demands and achieve higher levels of job performance [ 42 ]. It enables the nurses to perceive occupational benefits. The H3 demonstrated that both the occupational benefits and the job involvement must be maintained at high levels for junior emergency nurses to lead to a high job crafting. The existence of a low occupational benefits and job involvement will inevitably lead to low job crafting, as seen from L3 and L4. When junior emergency nurses perceive occupational benefits, it may lead to more job autonomy which results in increased psychological recognition of their work [ 43 ]. High levels of job involvement allow nurses to be fully immersed in their work, improving efficiency and quality. With increased efficiency and quality, nurses can obtain more job performance and achievement, in turn bringing them stronger occupational benefits.

Limitations

Although the study obtained some results that could be effective in improving the job crafting for the emergency nurses, the limitations of the study are as follows. First, this cross-sectional survey was conducted with emergency nurses in China, which may limit the extension of these results to other regions. And convenient sampling techniques and the non-calculated sample size of the study limits the generalizability. Secondly, the cross-sectional study does not allow for the detection of possible changes in the levels of job crafting in each participant over time. Lastly, the data were collected from participants using self-report measures, and thus may not reflect their true feelings.

Implications for the profession

The findings of the paper provided two important insights for motivating job crafting in emergency nurses. Firstly, we recognized challenge demands have a significant contribution to job crafting. As such, nursing managers in emergency departments should assign nurses challenging tasks, such as participating in nursing research. These challenges not only stimulate nurses’ potential but also foster their personal growth. However, it’s crucial to align these challenging work demands with commensurate rewards, such as promotion in position, bonus allocation, etc. Meanwhile, it is necessary to give adequate psychological empowerment and cultivate a proper understanding of challenge demands such as research tasks to inspire job crafting in the nurses. This approach will encourage nurses to more actively engage in job crafting, continually improving their work efficiency. Secondly, emergency nursing managers should should carry out a layered method and focus on the main job demands of the nurses at different levels. Junior nurses experience more difficulty in facing the challenges brought by clinical work, which may not deal with the busy and ever-changing work of the emergency department. Thus, special attention should be paid to their psychological endurance and work stress to prevent job burnout and turnover when assigning research or other challenging tasks to them. For senior nurses, management should provide more psychological empowerment, making them feel trusted and respected by the organization. An organization that meets the staff needs and promotes staff development on priority allows nurses to perceive occupational benefits, enhances their sense of emotional belonging, and lastly, boosts the job crafting with a rise in job involvement [ 44 ]. Nurses will be more proactive in participating in work planning and implementation, actively adjusting and optimizing work processes to better meet the various challenges in the emergency department.

The study explored various influencing factors on the job crafting of emergency nurses through hierarchical regression and fsQCA models. Both the models have demonstrated that research experience, psychological empowerment, and occupational benefits were predictors of job crafting, along with high levels of psychological empowerment being the core condition on the higher paths (H1 & S2). Based on research findings, junior emergency nurses should be granted a high level of psychological empowerment without assigning them overly complex tasks, such as research tasks, as these challenges can stop their job crafting. Intermediate and senior emergency nurses, on the other hand, can be assigned research tasks coupled with high psychological empowerment to enhance their job crafting.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Wrzesniewski A, Dutton JE. Crafting a job: revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. Acad Manage Rev. 2001;26(2):179.

Article   Google Scholar  

Tims M, Bakker AB, Derks D. Development and validation of the job crafting scale. J VOCAT BEHAV. 2012;80(1):173–86.

Yepes-Baldó M, Romeo M, Westerberg K, Nordin M. Job Crafting, Employee Well-being, and Quality of Care. WESTERN J NURS RES. 2018;40(1):52–66.

Baghdadi NA, Farghaly Abd EL, Aliem SM, Alsayed SK. The relationship between nurses’ job crafting behaviours and their work engagement. J NURS MANAGE. 2021;29(2):214–9.

Bakker AB, Demerouti E. Job demands–resources theory: taking stock and looking forward. J OCCUP HEALTH PSYCH. 2017;22(3):273–85.

Tims M, Bakker AB. Job crafting: towards a new model of individual job redesign. SA J IND PSYCHOL 2010, 36(2).

Rudolph CW, Katz IM, Lavigne KN, Zacher H. Job crafting: a meta-analysis of relationships with individual differences, job characteristics, and work outcomes. J VOCAT BEHAV. 2017;102:112–38.

Lichtenthaler PW, Fischbach A. A meta-analysis on promotion- and prevention-focused job crafting. EUR J WORK ORGAN PSY. 2019;28(1):30–50.

Akkermans J, Tims M. Crafting your Career: how Career competencies relate to Career Success via Job crafting. Appl Psychol. 2017;66(1):168–95.

Yinghao Z, Dan Z, Qi L, Yu W, Xiaoying W, Ao F, Lin Z. A cross-sectional study of clinical emergency department nurses’ occupational stress, job involvement and team resilience. INT EMERG NURS. 2023;69:101299.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Spreitzer GM. PSYCHOLOGICAL, EMPOWERMENT IN THE WORKPLACE: DIMENSIONS, MEASUREMENT AND VALIDATION. ACAD MANAGE J. 1995;38(5):1442–65.

Jafari F, Salari N, Hosseinian-Far A, Abdi A, Ezatizadeh N. Predicting positive organizational behavior based on structural and psychological empowerment among nurses. COST EFFECT RESOUR A. 2021;19(1):38.

Hatamian P, Farsani MA. Predicting Job Satisfaction Based on Personality Traits and Psychological Empowerment in Employed Middle-Aged and Elderly People. Sālmand 2019, 13(4):418–427.

Matsuo M. Personal growth initiative as a predictor of psychological empowerment: the mediating role of job crafting. HUM RESOUR DEV Q. 2019;30(3):343–60.

Hu Y, Hu J, Li L, Zhao B, Liu X, Li F. Development and preliminary validation of a brief nurses’ perceived professional benefit questionnaire (NPPBQ). BMC MED RES METHODOL. 2020;20(1):18.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Zhan T, Li H, Ding X. Can social support enhance sense of coherence and perceived professional benefits among Chinese registered nurses? A mediation model. J NURS MANAGE. 2020;28(3):488–94.

Mollanazari M, Shams Z. The Influence of Professional Identity and Outcome Knowledge on Professional Judgment. 2017.

Paullay IM, Alliger GM, Stone-Romero EF. Construct validation of two instruments designed to measure job involvement and work centrality. J APPL PSYCHOL. 1994;79(2):224–8.

Zhang B, Chen JZ. The Summary of Work Engagement,Job involvement and Job Embeddedness. East China Economic Manage 2009.

Nylen-Eriksen M, Grov EK, Bjornnes AK. Nurses’ job involvement and association with continuing current position-A descriptive comparative study. J CLIN NURS. 2020;29(13–14):2699–709.

Jiang D, Ning L, Liu T, Zhang Y, Liu Q. Job demands-resources, job crafting and work engagement of tobacco retailers. FRONT PUBLIC HEALTH 2022, 10.

Furnari S, Crilly D, Misangyi VF, Greckhamer T, Fiss PC, Aguilera RV. Capturing Causal Complexity: Heuristics for Configurational Theorizing. ACAD MANAGE REV. 2020;46(4):778–99.

Rihoux B, Ragin CC. Configurational comparative methods: qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and related techniques : Configurational comparative methods.

Jing H, Xiaohong L. Establishment of a questionnaire of nurses’ perceived professional benefits: reliability and validity assessment. Nurs J Chin People’s Liberation army. 2013;22(30):1–5.

Google Scholar  

Chaoping L, Xiaoxuan L, Kan S, Xuefeng C. Psychological empowerment: measurement and its effect on emplpyee work attitude in China. ACTA PSYCHOL SIN. 2006;1(38):99–106.

Kanungo RN. Measurement of job and work involvement. J APPL PSYCHOL. 1982;67(3):341–9.

Ming Z, Du Y. Qualitative comparative analysis(QCA) in management and organization research: position, tactics and directions. Chin J Manage. 2019;16(09):1312–23.

Fernandez-Garcia D, Moreno-Latorre E, Gimenez-Espert M, Prado-Gasco V. Satisfaction with the clinical practice among nursing students using regression models and qualitative comparative analysis. NURS EDUC TODAY. 2021;100:104861.

Gimenez-Espert M, Valero-Moreno S, Prado-Gasco VJ. Evaluation of emotional skills in nursing using regression and QCA models: a transversal study. NURS EDUC TODAY. 2019;74:31–7.

Mei S, Lv J, Ren H, Guo X, Meng C, Fei J, Yuan T, Yue J, Gao R, Song Q, et al. Lifestyle behaviors and depressive symptoms in Chinese adolescents using regression and fsQCA models. FRONT PUBLIC HEALTH. 2022;10:825176.

Harbridge R, Ivanitskaya L, Spreitzer G, Boscart V. Psychological empowerment and job crafting among registered nurses working in public health: a quantitative study. APPL NURS RES. 2023;69:151649.

Wang M, Xie R, Lu Q, Ou J, Gao L. Determinants of research ability among nurses in a tertiary hospital in China: a cross-sectional survey. J Educational Res Reviews. 2019;7(10):206–12.

Gao L, Lu Q, Hou X, Ou J, Wang M. Effectiveness of a nursing innovation workshop at enhancing nurses’ innovation abilities: a quasi-experimental study. NURS OPEN. 2022;9(1):418–27.

Chun T, Shizhe L, Wenrui L, Xiangqun M, Abdi A. Current situation and influencing factors of scientific research innovation activities of professionals in disease control and prevention institutions in Jiangxi Province. Mod Prev Medicin. 2022;49(06):1148–52.

Deci EL, Olafsen AH, Ryan RM. Self-determination theory in Work organizations: the state of a science. ANNU REV ORGAN PSYCH. 2017;4(1):19–43.

Zhou H, Chen J. How does psychological empowerment prevent emotional exhaustion? Psychological safety and Organizational Embeddedness as mediators. FRONT PSYCHOL. 2021;12:546687.

Boudrias JS, Morin AJ, Brodeur MM. Role of psychological empowerment in the reduction of burnout in Canadian healthcare workers. NURS HEALTH SCI. 2012;14(1):8–17.

Miller ML. Relationships Between Job Design, Job Crafting, Idiosyncratic Deals, and Psychological Empowerments. Dissertations & Theses - Gradworks 2015.

Abd-El AS, Abou HE. The relationship between transformational Leadership practices of First-Line nurse managers and nurses’ organizational resilience and job involvement: a structural equation Model. WORLDV EVID-BASED NU. 2021;18(5):273–82.

Faulkner J, Laschinger H. The effects of structural and psychological empowerment on perceived respect in acute care nurses. J NURS MANAGE. 2008;16(2):214–21.

Zhou H, Zhu Y, Zhang X, Peng J, Li Q, Wang X, Wang L, Cai X, Lan L. Psychological capital and Perceived Professional benefits: testing the Mediating role of perceived nursing work environment among Chinese nurses. J PSYCHOSOC NURS MEN. 2018;56(4):38–47.

Hui C, Hui Y. Application progress on job demand-resources model in the field of nursing. Chin Evidence-Based Nurs. 2021;7(16):2181–5.

Jinxia J, Haiyan S, Zhu X, Meimei T. Perspectives of professional benefits among emergency nurses: a qualitative study. J Nurs Sci. 2020;35(11):63–5.

Clegg C, Spencer C. A circular and dynamic model of the process of job design. J OCCUP ORGAN PSYCH. 2007;80(2):321–39.

Download references

This work was supported by grants from Henan Provincial Medical Science and Technology Research Project(LHGJ20200109);and Jiaxing University Research Fund (CD70522005).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Medicine, Jiaxing University, Jiaxing, China

Department of Nursing, Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital, Zhengzhou, China

Yu Wang, Qiaofang Yang & Qingwei Zhang

Heart Failure Ward, Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital, Zhengzhou, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Yu Wang : Preparation, creation and/or presentation of the published work, specifically writing the initial draft (including substantive translation). Development or design of methodology; creation of models. Qiaofang Yang : Provision of study materials, participants, instrumentation, computing resources, or other analysis tools. Luwen Wang : Visualization, Investigation. Qingwei Zhang: Application of statistical, mathematical, computational, or other formal techniques to analyze or synthesize study data, and acquisition of the financial support for the project leading to this publication. Yingli Li : Writing- Reviewing and Editing, and Funding acquisition.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yingli Li .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

This research focuses on nursing management. The Ethics Committee of Fuwai Central China Cardiovascular Hospital has verified that no approval from the Research Ethic Committee is necessary. All methods were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations(Declaration of Helsinki).The objective of the study was communicated to the participants, and informed consent was obtained prior to data collection. To safeguard the confidentiality of the participants, personal identifiers were not included in the data collection format.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Wang, Y., Yang, Q., Wang, L. et al. The factors of job crafting in emergency nurses: regression models versus qualitative comparative analysis. BMC Nurs 23 , 369 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02035-3

Download citation

Received : 25 August 2023

Accepted : 21 May 2024

Published : 03 June 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02035-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Job crafting
• Emergency nurses
• Hierarchical regression model
• fsQCA model
• Configuration

BMC Nursing

ISSN: 1472-6955

• General enquiries: [email protected]

More From Forbes

5 strategies to unlock your winning college essay.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS - JUNE 29: People walk through the gate on Harvard Yard at the Harvard ... [+] University campus on June 29, 2023 in Cambridge, Massachusetts. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that race-conscious admission policies used by Harvard and the University of North Carolina violate the Constitution, bringing an end to affirmative action in higher education. (Photo by Scott Eisen/Getty Images)

The college application season is upon us, and high school students everywhere are staring down at one of the most daunting tasks: the college essay. As someone who has guided countless applicants through the admissions process and reviewed admissions essays on an undergraduate admissions committee, I've pinpointed the essential ingredient to a differentiated candidacy—the core of your college admissions X-factor .

The essential ingredient to your college admissions X-factor is your intellectual vitality. Intellectual vitality is your passion for learning and curiosity. By demonstrating and conveying this passion, you can transform an average essay into a compelling narrative that boosts your chances of getting accepted to your top schools. Here are five dynamic strategies to achieve that goal.

Unleash Your Authentic Voice

Admissions officers sift through thousands of essays every year. What stops them in their tracks? An authentic voice that leaps off the page. Forget trying to guess what the admissions committee wants to hear. Focus on being true to yourself. Share your unique perspective, your passions, and your values. Authenticity resonates deeply with application reviewers, making your essay memorable and impactful. You need not have experienced trauma or tragedy to create a strong narrative. You can write about what you know—intellectually or personally—to convey your enthusiasm, creativity, and leadership. Intellectual vitality shines through when you write with personalized reflection about what lights you up.

Weave A Captivating Story

Everyone loves a good story, and your essay is the perfect place to tell yours. The Common Application personal statement has seven choices of prompts to ground the structure for your narrative. The most compelling stories are often about the smallest moments in life, whether it’s shopping at Costco or about why you wear socks that have holes. Think of the Common Application personal statement as a window into your soul rather than a dry list of your achievements or your overly broad event-based life story. Use vivid anecdotes to bring your experiences to life. A well-told story can showcase your growth, highlight your character, and illustrate how you've overcome challenges. Intellectual vitality often emerges in these narratives, revealing how your curiosity and proactive approach to learning have driven you to explore and innovate.

Reflect And Reveal Insights

It's not just about what you've done—it's about what you've learned along the way. When you are writing about a specific event, you can use the STAR framework—situation, task, action, and result (your learning). Focus most of your writing space on the “R” part of this framework to dive deeply into your experiences and reflect on how they've shaped your aspirations and identity.

World No 1 Djokovic Survives 5 Set Epic To Advance In French Open Match That Ends After 3 AM

New android warning shows why iphone is impossible to beat, nsa warns iphone and android users to turn it off and on again.

The most insightful college-specific supplement essays demonstrate depth of thought, and the ability to connect past experiences with your future life in college and beyond. Reflecting on your intellectual journey signals maturity and a readiness to embrace the college experience. It shows admissions officers that you engage deeply with your studies and are eager to contribute to the academic community.

Highlight Your Contributions—But Don’t Brag

Whether it's a special talent, an unusual hobby, or a unique perspective, showcasing what you can bring to the college environment can make a significant impact. Recognize that the hard work behind the accomplishment is what colleges are interested in learning more about—not retelling about the accomplishment itself. (Honors and activities can be conveyed in another section of the application.) Walk us through the journey to your summit; don’t just take us to the peak and expect us know how you earned it.

Intellectual vitality can be demonstrated through your proactive approach to solving problems, starting new projects, or leading initiatives that reflect your passion for learning and growth. These experiences often have a place in the college-specific supplement essays. They ground the reasons why you want to study in your major and at the particular college.

Perfect Your Prose

Great writing is essential. Anyone can use AI or a thesaurus to assist with an essay, but AI cannot write your story in the way that you tell it. Admissions officers don’t give out extra credit for choosing the longest words with the most amount of syllables.

The best essays have clear, coherent language and are free of errors. The story is clearly and specifically told. After drafting, take the time to revise and polish your writing. Seek feedback from teachers, mentors, or trusted friends, but ensure the final piece is unmistakably yours. A well-crafted essay showcases your diligence and attention to detail—qualities that admissions officers highly value. Intellectual vitality is also reflected in your writing process, showing your commitment to excellence and your enthusiasm for presenting your best self.

Crafting a standout college essay is about presenting your true self in an engaging, reflective, and polished manner while showcasing your intellectual vitality. Happy writing.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions