MSNIM Besant Campus, Bondel, Mangalore - 575008

“A STUDY ON THE ANTECEDENTS OF JOB

CRAFTING IN ORGANISATION”

Project Report Submitted to Mangalore University in partial fulfilment of the

Requirement for the award of the Degree of Master of Business Administration.

SUBMITTED BY

SHAWN YAKSHITH SHIRI

REGISTER NUMBER: P05ML21M0048

UNDER THE GUIDANCE OF

DR. SHILPI SAHA

Assistant professor

Manel Srinivas Nayak Institute of Management, Bondel

Mangalore

1
 MANEL SRINIVAS NAYAK INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT
(Affiliated to Mangalore University and approved by AICTE)
Besant Vidya Kendra, Bondel, Mangalore – 575008
(Sponsored by: Women’s National Education Society)
Website: www.msnmbesant.edu.ac.in, Email: [email protected], Phone No: 0824-
2482668 / 69, Fax: 0824- 2482669

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I am pleased to present this project in “A STUDY ON THE ANTECEDENTS OF JOB

CRAFTING IN ORGANISATION”, I take it as my privilege and joy to express a few words of
gratitude and respect to all those who guided me and encouraged me to complete this study.

I would like to take this opportunity to express my deepest gratitude to Director Dr. Molly S

Chaudhuri, Dr. Shilpi Saha, Assistant professor Manel Srinivas Nayak Institute of

Management for leading me and giving me the opportunity to do this work.

I will always owe my parents, faculty member, friends and best wishes for their encouragement,

moral support, appreciation and sincere wishes.

Thanks to the esteemed respondents who took their time to complete the list of questions.

Ultimately in regards to all those who have helped me directly or indirectly in carrying out the

project work successfully.

SHAWN YAKSHITH SHIRI

2
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that MR. Shawn Yakshith Shiri bearing Mangalore University Registration

No 201531361118 has prepared project entitled “A STUDY ON THE ANTECEDENTS OF

JOB CRAFTING IN ORGANISATION.” In partial fulfillment of the requirement for the

award of the Degree of Master of Business Administration (MBA) under my research

guidance during the academic year 2020-2022.

This project has not been submitted to Mangalore University or any other University

for the award of any other Degree, Diploma or any other similar title.

Place: Mangalore

Date:

Faculty guide

Shilpi Saha

Mr. Shawn Yakshith Shiri

Reg No: P05ML21M0048

Final Year MBA

Manel Srinivas Nayak Institute of Management

MSNM Besant Campus, Bondel

Mangaluru-575008

3
 DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this project report entitled in “A STUDY ON THE ANTECEDENTS

OF JOB CRAFTING IN ORGANISATION” has been carried out by me during the

Academic year 2020-2022 under the valuable guidance of Dr. Shilpi Saha for partial

fulfillment of requirements for the MBA degree.

I further declare that this report is an original work undertaken by me and has not been

previously submitted for any purpose.

Place: Mangalore

Date: SHAWN YAKSHITH SHIRI

4
 EXICUTIVE SUMMARY

An overview of a study on the causes of job crafting in organizations is given in this executive
summary. Job crafting is the deliberate action taken by employees to reshape and restructure
their work relationships, duties, and cognitive processes to better reflect their own beliefs,
objectives, and interests. In order to encourage employee engagement, contentment, and
performance, organizations must have a thorough understanding of the elements that affect job
crafting. To compile the body of existing information on the subject, a thorough literature review
was carried out. A survey that was given to workers from various organizations and industries
was used to gather primary data. According to the study, employees who experience a sense of
competence, impact, and meaning at work are more likely to participate in job crafting.

The proactive personality, self-efficacy, and intrinsic motivation of an individual were found to
be important predictors of work crafting behaviour. The results of this study have a number of
ramifications for businesses hoping to encourage job crafting and improve employee outcomes.
Organizations can promote job crafting behaviors by fostering an organizational culture that
supports employee autonomy and offers opportunities for discretion. Convenience sampling is
the study methodology utilized to collect the data. In order to create a job effectively, this study
emphasizes the significance of organizational support, work qualities, psychological
empowerment, and individual traits. Job crafting has the ability to increase employee
satisfaction, performance, and engagement, which will boost organizational success and
competitiveness in the fast-paced workplace of today.

5
 CONTENTS
CHAPTER TITLE PAGE NO.

1. INTRODUCTION
9-16

LITERATURE REVIEW 17-26

2

3 27-29
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

4 DATA ANALYSIS AND

30-71
INTERPRENTATION OF THE
DATA

5. CONCLUSION&
RECOMMENDATIONS 72-73

6. BIBLIOGRAPHY 74-76

7. ANNEXURE
77-79

6
 LIST OF TABLES
Table Particulars Pg.

no
1.1 Gender wise classification 31

1.2 AGE wise classification 32

1.3 Marital status wise classification 33

1.4 Education wise classification 34

1.5 Salary range 35

2.1 Relationship between Age and Interest Value. 36

2.2 Relationship between Age and Social Value. 37

2.3 Relationship between Age and Economic Value. 38

2.4 Relationship between Age and Development Value. 39

2.5 Relationship between Age and Application Value. 40

2.6 Relationship between Age and Security Value. 41

2.7 Relationship between Age and Job Crafting. 42

3.1 T-Test Analysis for Gender and Interest Value. 43

3.2 T-Test Analysis for Gender and Social Value. 44

3.3 T-Test Analysis for Gender and Economic Value. 45

3.4 T-Test Analysis for Gender and Development Value. 46

3.5 T-Test Analysis for Gender and Application Value. 47

3.6 T-Test Analysis for Gender and Security Value. 48

3.7 T-Test Analysis for Gender and Job Crafting. 49

4.1 T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Interest Value. 50

4.2 T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Social Value. 51

7
4.3 T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Economic Value. 52

4.4 T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Development Value. 53

4.5 T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Application Value. 54

4.6 T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Security Value. 55

4.7 T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Job Crafting. 56

5.1 Relationship between Highest Qualification and Interest Value. 57

5.2 Relationship between Highest Qualification and Social Value. 58

5.3 Relationship between Highest Qualification and Economic Value. 59

5.4 Relationship between Highest Qualification and Development 60

Value.
5.5 Relationship between Highest Qualification and Application Value. 61

5.6 Relationship between Highest Qualification and Security Value. 62

5.7 Relationship between Highest Qualification and Job Crafting. 63

6.1 Relationship between Salary Range and Interest Value. 64

6.2 Relationship between Salary Range and Social Value. 65

6.3 Relationship between Salary Range and Economic Value. 66

6.4 Relationship between Salary Range and Development Value. 67

6.5 Relationship between Salary Range and Application Value. 68

6.6 Relationship between Salary Range and Security Value. 69

6.7 Relationship between Salary Range and Job Crafting. 70

8
 CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION

Introduction
The idea of employee autonomy is undoubtedly significant in the context of education, where a
number of studies have linked improved performance to more teacher empowerment and
9
autonomy (Pearson and Moomaw, 2005). Discussing if and how structurally enabling practices
like leadership contribute to teacher autonomy, as seen in both attitudes and proactive behavior,
becomes important as a result. Whereas in Indian schools, Teacher autonomy is typically
undermined by structural issues like rule-driven institutions, textbook-centric education, and a
lack of adequate resources. Finding ways to promote teacher autonomy or empowerment is
urgently needed (Kumar, 1988). By fostering a supportive environment, authority people in an
organization can help employees feel more psychologically empowered (Spreitzer and Doneson,
2005). It has been demonstrated that job crafting increases employees' perceptions of control and
meaning, which is expected to diminish alienation from work and boost affective commitment
(Tummers and Dulk,2013). The importance of professional job crafting is rising. Job crafting
describes adjustments that employees make on their own initiative to their jobs. Job crafters can
improve job resources, seek out job challenges, and decrease job demands by changing the
cognitive, task, and relational limits at work. By doing this, they can ensure person-job fit and a
balance between job demands and resources. Such proactive behavior in the workplace has been
proved to produce favorable results: Work engagement, task performance, extracurricular
behavior, and career success are all positively correlated with job crafting.

Despite these developments, the majority of research on this subject has been on job crafting as a
consistent between-person phenomenon. In other words, job crafting is typically explored as
people's concurrent efforts to modify their jobs. The early conception of work crafting as an
iterative procedure that "unfolds over time" is starkly at odds with such a focus.

Employees' efforts to construct their jobs may change over time according to a number of causes.
A worker's ability to maintain job crafting behavior over time is frequently constrained by
complicated and shifting work demands that force them to adjust to new tasks and
responsibilities. The status quo may be challenged and even disrupted when one makes changes
to their workplace, which may result in resistance from others. Additionally, people's efforts to
extend their employment responsibilities may lead to a rise in extra-role behaviors that can
compete for important resources needed for additional job creation. To adopt significant changes
to the job for one's career growth, it can be difficult to maintain effort over time. As a result, each
person's job crafting maintenance routine may be different: Some people put more work into

10
their job crafting, some people maintain a consistent level of effort, and some people see their
job crafting decline over time."
Practically speaking, studying work crafting at the between-person level of analysis can even
result in incorrect results when people are on various phases of their job crafting trajectories.
Only two published studies have so far examined the long-term changes in job crafting. They
found that changes in job crafting tied to promotion focus facilitated work engagement and
adaptively and that changes in job crafting, such as seeking resources, benefited work
engagement, task performance, and career satisfaction.

Thus, by taking a self-regulatory viewpoint to explore how people retain job crafting across time,
we want to contribute to this growing body of research. Given the challenges of maintaining
change initiatives at work, individuals would need to keep an eye on the job-crafting options that
are available to them, evaluate where they stand in regard to the intended fit with their jobs, and
control further levels of job crafting. Examining intra-individual changes in job design over time
can show if people make consistent efforts to redesign their occupations or if they give up after a
while. A deeper understanding of the characteristics that support ongoing involvement in job
creating over time will be made possible by identifying change patterns in the job crafting
process.
Available resources and motivating elements can promote self-regulation over time because
persistent self-regulation in job crafting can drain personal resources and result in tiredness. We
emphasize autonomy as a crucial structural job resource that creates possibilities for continuing
to craft jobs. Additionally, we point to family and friend support for careers as a motivating
factor that, in tough circumstances, concentrates employees' persistent attention and effort
towards job creation.
In conclusion, this study seeks to make two significant contributions to the development of jobs
in career research. First, by conceptualizing work crafting maintenance as an ongoing self-
regulatory process, we close the intra-individual trajectory of job crafting change gap. Second,
we look at how cross-domain resource interaction affects task crafting upkeep. Organization-
driven job design approaches are insufficient and ineffective in addressing emerging work
challenges in today's technologically dependent workplace with rapidly changing work methods
and structures as a result of organizations struggle for innovation, superior quality, and the recent

11
COVID-19 pandemic. These unique work arrangements necessitate a more pro-active and
involved reaction from employees in order to modify their careers and establish the greatest
match possible. This instance highlights the value of proactive work design strategies that are
employee-driven, including job crafting. A new area of research in job design called "job
crafting" offers organizations and workers long-term benefits. It holds people accountable for the
creation, execution, purpose, and well-being of their own jobs.

Problem definition:

Organizational research has given a lot of attention to job crafting, the process by which
employees actively shape and redesign their work duties, relationships, and perceptions. It is
acknowledged as a useful tactic that enables workers to maximize their work-related experiences
and improve their general job satisfaction and performance. There is still a need to investigate
the factors that motivate people to engage in job crafting behaviors within organizations, despite
the increased interest in this topic. Organizations must comprehend the elements that affect job
crafting behaviors if they are to establish work environments that support employee autonomy,
engagement, and wellbeing. Organizations can create targeted interventions and policies to
support and facilitate job crafting among their workforce by understanding the primary
antecedents of job crafting.

Background of the study:

In recent years, organizations’ perspectives on employee engagement and well-being have

undergone a paradigm change. A strategy that is more dynamic and individualized is replacing
previous methods that just considered job fit and work assignments. Wrzesniewski and Dutton's
(2001) concept of "job crafting" has become a useful foundation for comprehending how
employees actively construct and remodel their work experiences.
In order to match their work with their own preferences, abilities, and motivations, employees
adjust their job tasks, interpersonal interactions, and cognitive perspectives through a process
known as "job crafting." Employees must take initiative to change their work duties, interactions
with coworkers, and the significance they place on their employment.

12
Even though the advantages of work crafting are clear, further research is required to understand
the factors that motivate individuals to engage in job creative behaviors. For organizations
looking to promote an empowerment and autonomy culture, understanding the elements that
affect job crafting is essential. Organizations can create interventions and policies that support
and encourage job crafting among their employees by identifying these antecedents.

Need for the study

Understanding Well-being of employees:

Job crafting is associated with positive outcomes for employees, including increased job
satisfaction, engagement, and overall well-being. By understanding the antecedents of job
crafting, we can identify factors that contribute to employees' ability to shape their work
experiences in line with their preferences and strengths.

Employee Autonomy:
Job crafting reflects employees' ability to have a sense of autonomy and control over their work.
Organizations that value and promote employee autonomy tend to have more satisfied and
motivated employees. Investigating the antecedents of job crafting can help us gain insights into
the factors that facilitate employee autonomy and provide guidance on how to enhance it.

HR Practices and Interventions:

Knowledge of the antecedents of job crafting can guide the development of human resource
practices and interventions. For example, organizations can incorporate job crafting into
performance management systems, provide training and resources to develop employees' job
crafting skills, and align job designs to support job crafting behaviors. This study can provide
valuable on effective strategies Used by organizations to promote job crafting among their
workforce.

Employee Engagement and Performance:

13
 Job crafting has been linked to higher levels of employee engagement and improved job
performance. When employees have the freedom to shape their work roles and tasks, they are
more likely to be motivated and invested in their work. This study helps us understand how the
antecedents of job crafting increase employee performance.

Objectives

1)To identify the individual-level antecedents of job crafting.

2)To examine the social and contextual antecedents of job crafting.

3)To explore the interactions and moderating effects among antecedents.

4)To gain practical insights for organizations.

14
 CHAPTER – 2
Literature Review

15
1.SANKET SUNANAD DASH AND NEHARIKA VOHRA (2015) Referred about “The
leadership of the school principal Impact on teachers” job crafting, alienation and
commitment.

In most situations, little research has been done on the mechanisms by which the leadership
styles of superiors and the internal thoughts of subordinates influence the actual behavior and
attitudes of the latter. In order to close the gap between principals' empowering leadership
style and teachers' job crafting and attitudes (work alienation and organizational
commitment), this paper examines the mediating role of teachers' cognitions (psychological
empowerment).

The association between empowering leadership and job crafting is somewhat mediated by
psychological empowerment, whereas the relationship between empowering leadership, work
alienation, and affective commitment is partially mediated by job crafting. The association
between job crafting and affective commitment is somewhat mediated by work alienation.
Job crafting is directly impacted by empowered leadership.

2. HUANGE AND XIE (2022) Referred about maintaining job crafting over time: joint
effect of autonomy and career support from family and friends.

The intraindividual trajectory of job crafting change through time is the study's main area of
interest. This study investigates how career support from family and friends interacts with job
autonomy to influence the change pattern of job crafting by integrating the self-regulation
and demands-resources perspectives.

Over the course of a semester, there was a general tendency toward job crafting decline. The
relationship between job autonomy and maintaining job crafting was tempered by support
from family and friends for one's career. Particularly, job autonomy was inversely correlated
with maintaining job crafting when career support was poor.

3. SYED MUHAMMED IRFAN, FAISAL QADEER, MUHAMMED IBRAHIM

ABDULLAH, MUDDASSAR SARFRAZ (2022) Referred about Employer’s investments
in job crafting to promote knowledge worker’s sustainable employability: a moderated
mediation model.

16
The main goal of the study is to determine whether managerial support influences job
crafting and sustainable employability and, using a moderated mediation approach, to what
extent work uncertainty moderates the correlations between managerial support and
sustainable employability that are mediated by job crafting. Due to the lack of prior research,
this study uses the work demands and resources (JD-R) theory to identify new job crafting
precursors and results.

The findings of this study confirm the formulated hypothesis by showing that managerial
assistance directly promotes job creation and long-term employability. Additionally, job
designing mediates the connections between management backing and long-term
employability. This supports the JD-R theory's premise that managerial support acts as a job
resource to start a motivating process through job designing, with the goal of achieving long-
term employability as the result. Additionally, the moderated mediation results demonstrate
that workers are more involved in job crafting to increase their long-term employability when
there is considerable work uncertainty.

4. ALKA RAI (2018) Referred about Job crafting intervention: fostering individual job
redesign for sustainable organization.

This paper serves three purposes: first, it provides an overview of job crafting
conceptualizations; second, it illustrates various job crafting interventions that have been
suggested by academics to influence and promote job crafting behavior among workforce;
and third, it highlights the importance of job crafting interventions in predicting various
favorable individual and organizational outcomes based on research findings. At the end, as a
managerial implication, the importance of job crafting interventions in organizations is
explored.

The bottom-up redesign strategy that is most frequently mentioned and is growing in
popularity in the literature on job design is job crafting. The urgency of implementing job
crafting interventions within organizations is understood by scholars and practitioners, who
recognize the significance of such interventions.

17
5. NEHA GARG, WENDY MARCINKUS MURPHY, PANKAJ SINGH (2021) Referred
about Reverse mentoring and job crafting as resources for health: a work engagement
mediation model.

This study investigates whether employee-driven job creation and reverse mentoring methods
increase work engagement, which in turn raises the likelihood of future mental and physical
health.

The results show that job designing and reverse mentoring are both strongly related to work
engagement. In contrast to the partial mediation of the negative relationships between reverse
mentoring and physical illness and job crafting and mental illness, work engagement fully
mediated the negative relationships between reverse mentoring and mental illness and job
crafting and physical illness.

6. JIN-FENG UEN, RAMA KRISHNA KISHOR VANDAVASI AND KUN LEE,

PRASANTHI YEPURU AND VIPIN SAINI (2021) Referred about Job crafting and
psychological capital: a multi-level study of their effects on innovative work behaviour.

This study intends to investigate the mediating impacts of team psychological capital
(PsyCap) on individual creative work behavior (IWB) and the cross-level effects of team job
crafting on IWB.

The findings showed that team job crafting was positively associated to individual IWB, with
team PsyCap serving as a mediator of the relationship.

7. HAEMI KIM, JINYOUNG IM, HAILIN QU, JULIE NAMKOONG (2017) Referred
about Antecedent and consequences of job crafting: an organizational level approach.

In order to encourage employees to engage in job crafting, this study will look into the
conditions that must exist as well as the effects of such conduct. Employees who actively
adapt duties, manage social interactions, and alter workplace cognition are said to be "job
crafting."

Employees start creating their jobs when they feel supported by the organization. Relational
and cognitive crafting follow task crafting. Task crafting does not improve employees' fit

18
with the organization; rather, relational and cognitive crafting do. Job happiness is strongly
correlated with employees' organizational fit.

8. PHILIPP WOLFGANG LICHTENTHALER AND ANDREA FISCHBACH (2018)

Referred about Leadership, job crafting, and employee health and performance.

This essay aims to incorporate the impacts of top-down leadership and bottom-up job
crafting behaviors on worker performance and well-being. The authors anticipated that top-
down employee-oriented leadership would be linked to employee performance and health
through the use of employees' promotion- and prevention-focused job design.

The health and productivity of employees were positively correlated with promotion-focused
job crafting, but prevention-focused job crafting was negatively correlated. Promotion-
focused job crafting and employee-oriented leadership were positively correlated, whereas
prevention-focused job crafting was not. Through promotion-focused job crafting, employee-
oriented leadership was indirectly linked to health and performance. Additionally, proactive
job crafting had the biggest negative impact on task performance, proactive job crafting had
the strongest negative impact on adaptive job crafting, and finally promotion-focused job
crafting had the strongest positive influence on adaptive performance.

9. JAE YOUNG LEE AND YUNSOO LEE (2018) Referred about Job crafting and
performance: Literature review and implications for human resource development.

Although work design is an important theoretical pillar of human resource development

(HRD), academics in the HRD area have paid it very little attention. We analyse job crafting,
one of the most significant and current work design theories, to assist correct this error. We
analyse 28 empirical studies that looked at the connection between job construction and
performance, and then we address potential future research directions and how they can
affect HRD theory and practice. We encourage HRD scholars and practitioners to broaden
their understanding of and use of job crafting because it has been demonstrated to have a
favourable association with performance.

10. HUATIAN WANG, PEIKAI LI, SHI CHEN (2020) Referred about The Impact of
Social Factors on Job Crafting: A Meta-Analysis and Review.

19
The impact of social elements on job crafting has not received enough attention, despite the
research's heavy emphasis on job characteristics and individual heterogeneity. This meta-
analysis analyses the relationships between social factors (i.e., organizational insiders and
outsiders) and work crafting, as well as how these social elements contribute to employee
outcomes through their job crafting, based on social interaction and job crafting research.

11. PETRON, P., DEMEROUTI, E., & SCHAUFELI, W.B. (2015) Referred about Job
crafting in changing organizations: Antecedents and implications for exhaustion and
performance.

The current study focused on how employees crafted their jobs in light of organizational
transformation. We looked at factors that affect job crafting at both the organizational and
individual levels. It was anticipated that job crafting behaviors will predict task performance
and weariness. Structural equation modeling was used to evaluate two-wave longitudinal data
from 580 police officers who were undergoing organizational changes. The results showed
that employee desire to change was associated with seeking resources and taking on
challenges, whereas the degree to which changes influence employees' daily work was
associated with lessening pressures and tiredness.

12. MARIA TIMS, AENOLD B. BAKKER, DAANTJE DERKS (2014) Referred about
Job crafting and job performance: A longitudinal study.

We investigated whether job crafting behaviors and intentions resulted in higher levels of
anticipated work engagement and job performance in this three-wave study (N = 288). We
defined job crafting as the self-initiated adjustments that employees make to their job
demands and resources within the theoretical framework of the Job Demands-Resources
model. Respondents evaluated their actual work creative behaviors one month after reporting
their objectives. They assessed their levels of job engagement, in-role performance, and
organizational citizenship behavior toward individuals (OCBI) once more after a month.

20
13. PARASKEVAS PETROU, EVANGELIA DEMEROUTI, WILMAR B.
SCHAUFELI (2016) Referred about Crafting the change: The role of employee job crafting
behaviors for successful organizational change.

Today's organizations must adapt constantly. There is little research on how organizational
change communication influences more pro-active employee responses to change, despite the
fact that both practitioners and scientists believe that it is the most effective method for
improving employee adjustment to change. The goal of the current study is to examine how
employees respond to and deal with organizational change by using job crafting behaviors.
Using the regulatory focus theory, we propose that employees respond to organizational
change communication by designing job behaviors that further help or impede their ability to
adjust to change, depending on whether they are focused on promotion or prevention.

14. MARIA TIMS, ARNOLD B. BAKKER, DAANTJE DERKS (2012) Referred about
Development and validation of the job crafting scale.

In three distinct investigations carried out in The Netherlands, we created and validated a
scale to quantify job crafting behavior. Job crafting is the self-initiated adjustments workers
make to their own job requirements and employment resources in order to achieve and/or
optimize their individual (work) goals. The factor structure, reliability, and convergent
validity of the Dutch Job Crafting Scale (JCS) were designed and tested in Studies 1 and 2.
Study 3 looked at the JCS's criterion validity. According to the findings, there are four
distinct job crafting dimensions, namely enhancing social job resources, structural job
resources, challenging job demands, and lowering hindering job demands. With 21 pieces,
these dimensions could be measured accurately.

15. HEATHER J. GORDON, EVANGELIA DEMEROUTI, PASCALE M. LE

BLANCA, ARNOLD B. BAKKER, TANJA BIPP, MARC A.M.T. VERHAGEN (2018)
Referred about Individual job redesign: Job crafting interventions in healthcare.

The effects of general and specific job designing interventions on the satisfaction and
effectiveness of work among healthcare professionals. Following training, each participant
set personal job-crafting objectives for a three-week period. Multiple repeated measures
analyses revealed that both therapies were effective. In comparison to the control groups, the

21
medical specialists and nurses who participated in the job crafting intervention groups
showed an increase in job crafting behaviors, well-being (i.e., work engagement, health, and
reduced exhaustion), and job performance (i.e., adaptive, task, and contextual performance).
We draw the conclusion that work crafting is a promising job redesign intervention technique
that individual employees can utilize to improve their well-being and job performance,
despite the fact that we did not find a substantial intervention effect on objective
performance.

16. PATRICK F. BRUNING, MICHAEL A. CAMPION (2019) Referred about exploring

job crafting: Diagnosing and responding to the ways employees adjust their jobs.

The concept of "job crafting," which describes how employees alter their employment on
their own to enhance performance and wellbeing, has been thoroughly studied in recent
years. According to this study, businesses, managers, and employees all need to have a better
understanding of how to manage job crafting in order to reap its benefits and cut costs. This
article will assist organizations in identifying the seven distinct types of job crafting,
including work role expansion, social expansion, work role reduction, work organization,
adoption, metacognition, and withdrawal. It will also help organizations distinguish between
goal-oriented approaches to job crafting and withdrawal-oriented avoidance job crafting. We
finish with suggestions on how to diagnose and handle job crafting for managers, employees,
and organizations.

17. HAI-JIANG WANG, EVANGELIA DEMEROUTI, PASCALE LE BLANC (2017)

Referred about Transformational leadership, adaptability and job crafting; The moderating
role of organizational identification.

This study aims to investigate the relationship between job crafting and transformative
leadership. We predict that by boosting an employee's adaptability, transformational
leadership will encourage job crafting (seeking resources, seeking challenges, and lowering
demands), but that it will be less effective when an employee has a higher level of
organizational identification. We gathered information from 185 pairs of subordinates and
managers. Subordinates evaluated their own job crafting and organizational identification,
whereas supervisors evaluated their own transformational leadership and subordinates'

22
adaptation. Our hypotheses were somewhat supported by the findings of analyses using
structural equation modeling. Our research generally indicates that transformative leadership,
especially for workers with lower organizational identification, is linked to more job
expansion (seeking resources and seeking challenges) via flexibility. We come to the
conclusion that transformative leadership is a significant predictor of employee flexibility
and initiative at work.

18. PELIN KANTEN (2014) Referred about The antecedents of job crafting: Perceived
organizational support, job characteristics and self-Efficacy.

The purpose of this study is to look into various job crafting antecedents. According to
studies in the literature, several individual and organizational factors may cause employees to
Adapt their work to their skills, preferences, and requirements. Therefore, within the context
of the study, self-efficacy, perceived organizational support, and work characteristics are
seen as predictors of job crafting. In order to conduct the research, 252 hotel employees'
survey responses were used to collect data, which was then analyzed using structural
equation modeling. According to the study's findings, self-efficacy has a favorable and
significant impact on work crafting from the perspective of the individual antecedents.
However, from an organizational standpoint, research findings show that some work feature
dimensions, such as skill variety and feedback, have a favorable impact on job crafting, in
contrast to task. The autonomy and significance dimensions have no discernible effects on
job crafting. It is also clear that perceived organizational support characteristics have no
bearing on employment creation.

19. DORIEN T.A.M. KOOJI, MARIA TIMS, JOS AKKERMANS (2016) Referred about
The influence of future time perspective on work engagement and job performance: the role
of job crafting.

Future time perspective (FTP) was investigated as an antecedent of job crafting in this two-
wave study, and job crafting was then examined as a mediator in relationships between FTP
and work outcomes. We anticipated that open-ended and constrained FTP would elicit
various forms of job constructing, which in turn would be related with variations in work
engagement and job performance, based on the lifetime socio-emotional selectivity theory. In

23
line with our predictions, we discovered that workers whose open-ended FTP increased over
a year also created more challenging job demands and more job resources, giving them more
opportunities to gain knowledge. This led to higher levels of work engagement and job
performance.

20. Petrou, P (2013) Referred about Crafting the change: the role of job crafting and
regulatory focus in adaptation to organizational change.

Background Organizations today undergo rapid transformation. However, little is known

about how people might successfully adjust to the new circumstance that develops during
organizational transition. The current dissertation focused on job crafting as a proactive
employee tactic to deal with and adapt to organizational changes. These actions were part of
the job crafting conceptualization that was used. Lowering demands on the job or looking for
new challenges. The results showed that job crafting behaviors, such as looking for resources
and challenges, generally help workers stay motivated, healthy, and effectively complete
their jobs throughout organizational change. Reducing demands behaviors were found to be
less effective and were associated with feelings of weariness in future employees. It is
advised that additional employee strategies, such as job crafting, be considered in future
studies on how employees adjust to organizational change. Managers could encourage and
enable those job crafting behaviors that have the potential to benefit employees through
coaching, training, or individual development plans.

21. MINSEO KIM, TERRY A. BEEHR (2021) Referred about The role of organization-
based self-esteem and job resources in promoting employees’ job crafting behaviors.

The ability of individuals to construct their jobs is crucial because it can lead to improved
performance and person-job fit, which benefits both employees and companies. We
investigated the impact of environmental resources (job security, autonomy, and feedback)
on employees' crafting behaviors using organization-based self-esteem, based on theories of
resource conservation and job crafting. It reduced the strength of the favorable relationships
between environmental resources and organizational self-esteem, moderating the potential
indirect theoretical influence that resources might have on job creation.

24
22. Philipp Wolfgang Lichtenthaler, Andrea Fischbach (2018) Referred about
Leadership, job crafting, and employee health and performance.

This essay aims to incorporate the impacts of top-down leadership and bottom-up job
crafting behaviors on worker performance and well-being. The authors anticipated that top-
down employee-oriented leadership would be linked to employee performance and health
through employees' promotion and prevention-focused job design. The health and
productivity of employees were positively correlated with promotion-focused job crafting,
but prevention-focused job crafting was negatively correlated. Promotion-focused job
crafting and employee-oriented leadership were positively correlated, whereas prevention-
focused job crafting was not. Through promotion-focused job crafting, employee-oriented
leadership was indirectly linked to health and performance. Additionally, proactive job
crafting had the biggest negative impact on task performance, proactive job crafting had the
strongest negative impact on adaptive job crafting, and finally promotion-focused job
crafting had the strongest positive influence on adaptive performance.

23. HUATIAN WANG, PEIKAI LI, SHI CHEN (2020) Referred about The Impact of
Social Factors on Job Crafting: A Meta-Analysis and Review.

The impact of social elements on job crafting has not received enough attention, despite the
research's heavy emphasis on job characteristics and individual heterogeneity. This meta-
analysis evaluates the relationships between social factors (i.e., organizational insiders and
outsiders) and job crafting and how these social elements contribute to employee outcomes
through their job crafting. It is based on social interaction and job crafting literature. By
incorporating social aspects into the job crafting model and illuminating how the social
backdrop of the workplace—in particular, organizational insiders—plays a critical role in
influencing employees' job crafting behavior—our study makes a valuable contribution to the
literature on job crafting. We also stress how important job crafting is for converting precious
social resources into better work outcomes. We explore how our findings may suggest
practice in terms of job crafting training, and we offer future directions for job crafting
research based on our findings.

25
24. HUDA MASOOD, MARK PODOLSKY, MARIE-HELENE BUDWORTH,
STEFAN KARAJOVIC (2023) Referred about Uncovering the antecedents and
motivational determinants of job crafting.

This mixed-methods study's objective is to investigate the environmental preconditions and

motivational drivers of individual job crafting behaviors. There is a clear connection between
various methods of job crafting and expectations for career outcomes. An indirect association
between expectations for professional outcomes and approach formulation through external-
social regulation was revealed by mediation analysis. The authors found evidence to support
the idea that turnover intentions have an outsized influence on expectations for career
outcomes as well as external social and material regulations. Such expectations might be
connected to different kinds of external rules governing the workplace and might encourage
job-crafting actions. The people displayed these habits as they planned to leave their jobs.

25. ELS VANBELLE, ANJA VAN DEN BROECK, HANS DE WITTE (2019) Referred
about Job crafting: Autonomy and workload as antecedents and the willingness to continue
working until retirement age as a positive outcome.

In this study, which focuses on job crafting, autonomy and workload are examined as
antecedents and the willingness to work until retirement age as a favorable result of job
crafting in a group of workers between the ages of 45 and 65. Making adjustments to one's
employment to improve one's performance in terms of well-being, work-related attitudes, or
behavior is what we refer to as "job crafting." We anticipate that job crafting will be an
effective aging strategy that increases the willingness to continue working, building on the
selected optimization compensation idea. Additionally, based on Karasek's activation theory,
we anticipate that workers in active positions will have more control over how much of their
work is created. Results from 1168 public servants generally supported our hypotheses. An
active work environment with high autonomy and workload is indirectly linked to an
increased propensity to work longer through job customization.

26
 CHAPTER – 3
RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY

27
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Employees working for numerous companies in various industries make up the target

demographic for this study. Convenience sampling has been used to choose the sample.

The results of this study will advance our knowledge of the organizational elements that

affect job crafting behaviors and can help know about methods used to support job

crafting and improve employee performance.

1. Sample

The demographic segment or group picked for the study is referred to as the "sample" in

this context. The sample for this study includes all employees who work in

organizations.

2. sample size

Number of sample units are selected from the universe to form a sample is called

sample size. 150 respondents are taken from employees employed in various

organizations.

28
 1. Sampling procedure:

The convenience sampling technique was adopted to select the respondents for this

study purpose. Questionnaire method was used to collect the data.

2. Sample Design:
Data has been shown with the help of Bar Graphs and Pie Charts.

STUDY LIMITATIONS:

1) Generalizability: Because of the particular sample and setting chosen for this study, its
findings may not be highly generalizable.

2) Self-report Bias: Participants may give answers that are impacted by their own biases or social
desirability.

3) Missing Variables: Although every effort was made to include a complete list of job crafting
antecedents, there may still be more factors that were not taken into account in this study.

4) Limited responses: It was challenging to get feedback from the working population.

SOURCES OF DATA COLLECTION:

Primary data were gathered for this research's goal. Primary data is information that has been
collected for the first time. For this inquiry, primary data were gathered by questionnaires. The

29
construction of this questionnaire was influenced by the study's goal. The questionnaire contains
both open-ended and closed-ended questions.

Tools for Analysis:

Following tools are used in the study:

 T-test analysis
 ANOVA Test

CHAPTER 4

30
DATA ANALYSIS AND
INTERPRETATION

Data Analysis and interpretation

Table NO 1.1: Gender wise classification

Classification of respondents on the basis of Gender

Percentage (%)
Sl.No Gender Respondents
1 Male 80 53%
2 Female 71 47%
Total 151 100

31
 GENDER

47% 53%

Male Female

Interpretation:
According to the above table and figures, out of 151 respondents 80 were male, accounting for
53% and 71were female, accounting for 47%. It was found that a large number of respondents
are male in the study undertaken.

Table NO 1.2: AGE wise classification

Classification of respondents on the basis of AGE

SI.NO AGE Respondents Percentage (%)

1 21-30 107 70.9%

2 31-40 30 19.9%

3 41-50 11 7.3%

4 51-60 3 2%

32
 AGE

11 3

30

107

21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60

Interpretation:
From the above table and figure, out of 151 respondents 107 respondents are aged 21-30, 30
respondents fall in the age group 31-40, 11 respondents are aged 41-50, 3 respondents are aged
51-60. Majority of the respondents belong to the age group of 21-30.

Table No 1.3: Marital status wise classification

Classification of respondents on the basis of Marital status

33
 Sl.No Marital status Respondents Percentage (%)
1 Single 113 74.8%
2 Married 38 25.2%
Total 151 100%

Marital status

25.2%

74.8%

Single Married

Interpretation:
As per the above table and figure, out of 151 respondents, 113 were singles, accounting for
74.8%, 38 were married, accounting for25.2%. It was found that a more number of respondents
were singles in the above study.

Table No 1.4: Education wise classification

Classification of respondents on the basis of Education Qualification

Education Respondents Percentage

Sl.No Qualification (%)
1 Diploma 7 4.6%

2 Graduate 49 32.5%
3 Professional Graduate 20 13.2%
4 Post Graduate 71 47%
5 Ph.D 1 0.7%
6 Others 3 2
Total 151 100%
34

Education Qualification
 13 7

49
71

20

Diploma Graduate Professional Graduate

Post Graduate Ph.D Others

Interpretation:
From the above table and figures, out of 151 respondents, 7 Respondents have pursued their
Diploma, 49 are Graduates, 20 are Professional graduates, 71 are post graduates, 1 are Ph. D, 3
are others and are currently working.

Table No 1.5: Salary range

Sl.No Salary Range Respondents Percentage (%)

1 Less than 1,00,000 31

20.5%

2 1,00,000-3,00,000 56 37.1%

3 3,00,000-5,00,000 45 29.8%

4 Greater then 5,00,000 19 12.6%

Total 151 100

Classification of respondents on the basis of their salary

35
Interpretation:
The analysis of the table reveals the salary range of the respondents. Out of 151 respondents 31
were less than 1,00,000 accounting for 20.5%, 56 were 100000-3,00,000 accounting for 37.1%,
45 were 3,00,000-5,00,000 accounting for 29.8%, 19 were Greater then 5,00,000 accounting for
12.6%. It found that the majority of the respondents 56 and their salary range is between
1,00,000-3,00,000.

Table No 2.1:

Relationship between Age and Interest Value.

ANOVA
INT_AVG
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares

Between Groups 17.619 3 5.873 1.290 .280

Within Groups 669.401 147 4.554
Total 687.020 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.280). Therefore, no significance difference was found in the mean scores of self emotion
appraisal of the age groups of employees.

36
 Table No 2.2:
Relationship between Age and Social Value.

ANOVA
SOC_AVG
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Between Groups 9.145 3 3.048 .471 .703
Within Groups 952.232 147 6.478
Total 961.377 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.703). Therefore, no significance difference was found in the mean scores of self emotion
appraisal of the age groups of employees.

37
 Table No 2.3:
Relationship between Age and Economic Value.

ANOVA
ECO_AVG
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Between Groups 10.462 3 3.487 .436 .727
Within Groups 1174.756 147 7.992
Total 1185.219 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.727). Therefore, no significance difference was found in the mean scores of self emotion
appraisal of the age groups of employees.

38
 Table No 2.4:
Relationship between Age and Development Value.

ANOVA
DEV_AVG
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Between Groups 5.369 3 1.790 .221 .882
Within Groups 1190.512 147 8.099
Total 1195.881 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.882). Therefore, no significance difference was found in the mean scores of self emotion
appraisal of the age groups of employees.

39
 Table No 2.5:
Relationship between Age and Application Value.

ANOVA
APP_AVG
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Between Groups 11.568 3 3.856 .432 .731
Within Groups 1313.372 147 8.935
Total 1324.940 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.731). Therefore, no significance difference was found in the mean scores of self emotion
appraisal of the age groups of employees.

40
 Table No 2.6:

Relationship between Age and Security Value.

ANOVA
SEC_AVG
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Between Groups 9.002 3 3.001 .382 .766
Within Groups 1154.044 147 7.851
Total 1163.046 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.766). Therefore, no significance difference was found in the mean scores of self emotion
appraisal of the age groups of employees.

41
 Table No 2.7:
Relationship between Age and Job Crafting.

ANOVA
JC_AVG
Sum of df Mean Square F Sig.
Squares
Between Groups 14.098 3 4.699 .481 .696
Within Groups 1435.796 147 9.767
Total 1449.894 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.696). Therefore, no significance difference was found in the mean scores of self emotion
appraisal of the age groups of employees.

42
 Table No 3.1:
T-Test Analysis for Gender and Interest Value.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for t-test for Equality of Means
Equality of
Variances
F Sig. t df Sig. (2- Mean Std. 95% Confidence
tailed) Differen Error Interval of the
ce Differen Difference
ce Lower Upper
INT Equal 2.798 .097 -.33 149 .737 -.11796 .34998 -.80952 .57360
_A variances 7
VG assumed
Equal -.33 141. .738 -.11796 .35226 -.81432 .57840
variances not 5 668
assumed

Interpretation:

43
 Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is less than 0.05 (0.097). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.737)
so it can be said that there is no significant difference in the mean scores of Social Value for
Marital Status.

Table No 3.2:

T-Test Analysis for Gender and Social Value.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for
Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means

Std. 95% Confidence

Mean Error Interval of the
Sig. (2- Differenc Differenc Difference
F Sig. t df tailed) e e Lower Upper
SOC Equal variances
.475 .492 1.159 149 .248 .47782 .41231 -.33691 1.29254
_AV assumed
G Equal variances 148.4
1.171 .243 .47782 .40788 -.32819 1.28383
not assumed 46

44
 Interpretation:
Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is more than 0.05 (0.492). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.248)
so it can be said that there is no significant difference in the mean scores of Social Value for
Marital Status.

Table No 3.3:

T-Test Analysis for Gender and Economic Value.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for

Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

95% Confidence
Interval of the

Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error Difference

F Sig. t df tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper

ECO Equal variances

.348 .556 .925 149 .356 .42412 .45854 -.48196 1.33020
_AV assumed
G Equal variances 148.2
.928 .355 .42412 .45722 -.47939 1.32763
not assumed 31

45
Interpretation:
Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is more than 0.05 (0.556). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.356)
so it can be said that there is no significant difference in the mean scores of Social Value for
Marital Status.

46
 Table No 3.4:
T-Test Analysis for Gender and Development Value.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for

Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means

Std. 95% Confidence Interval of

Mean Error the Difference
Sig. (2- Differenc Differenc
F Sig. t df tailed) e e Lower Upper

DEV Equal variances

.046 .831 -1.325 149 .187 -.60845 .45922 -1.51588 .29898
_AV assumed
G
Equal variances 147.6
-1.327 .187 -.60845 .45856 -1.51464 .29774
not assumed 34

Interpretation:
Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is more than 0.05 (0.831). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.187)
so it can be said that there is no significant difference in the mean scores of Social Value for
Marital Status.

Table No 3.5:

47
 T-Test Analysis for Gender and Application Value.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for

Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error
F Sig. t df tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper

A Equal variances
.170 .681 -.022 149 .982 -.01092 .48620 -.97166 .94983
P assumed
P_
Equal variances
A 143.83
not assumed
-.023 .982 -.01092 .47740 -.95453 .93270
V 2
G

Interpretation:
Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is more than 0.05 (0.681). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.982)
so it can be said that there is no significant difference in the mean scores of Social Value for
Marital Status.

48
 Table No 3.6:

T-Test Analysis for Gender and Security Value.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for

Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error
F Sig. t df tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper

SEC Equal variances

.065 .798 .196 149 .845 .08926 .45547 -.81076 .98928
_AV assumed
G
Equal variances 148.92
.197 .844 .08926 .45281 -.80549 .98401
not assumed 9

Interpretation:
Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is more than 0.05 (0.798). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.845)
so it can be said that there is no significant difference in the mean scores of Social Value for
Marital Status.

49
 Table No 3.7:
T-Test Analysis for Gender and Job Crafting.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test for

Equality of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

95% Confidence
Interval of the
Difference
Sig. (2- Mean Std. Error
F Sig. t df tailed) Difference Difference Lower Upper

JC_ Equal variances

.002 .968 .151 149 .881 .07658 .50858 -.92837 1.08154
AV assumed
G
Equal variances 148.43
.151 .880 .07658 .50680 -.92488 1.07805
not assumed 6

Interpretation:
Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is more than 0.05 (0.968). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.881)
so it can be said that there is no significant difference in the mean scores of Social Value for
Marital Status.

50
 Table No 4.1:
T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Interest Value.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Significance Std. Difference
One- Two- Mean Error
Side Side Differe Differe
F Sig. t df dp dp nce nce Lower Upper
INT Equal .152 .698 -.49 149 .311 .623 -.1984 .4023 -.9934 .5966
_A variances 3 2 4 5 2
VG assumed
Equal -.50 65. .309 .619 -.1984 .3967 -.9907 .5939
variances 0 269 2 5 3 0
not
assumed

Interpretation:
Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is less than 0.05 (0.698). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.623)
so it can be said that there is no significant difference in the mean scores of Interest Value for
Marital Status.

51
 Table No 4.2:
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Significance Std. Difference
One- Two- Mean Error
Side Sided Differe Differe
F Sig. t df dp p nce nce Lower Upper
SO Equal 4.703 .032 -.50 149 .306 .612 -.2422 .47592 - .69823
C_A variances 9 0 1.1826
VG assumed 2
Equal -.60 92.3 .272 .545 -.2422 .39819 - .54860
variances 8 02 0 1.0330
not 0
assumed
T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Social Value.

Interpretation:
Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is less than 0.05 (0.032). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.612)
so it can be said that there is no significant difference in the mean scores of Social Value for
Marital Status.

Table No 4.3:

52
 T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Economic Value.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Significance Std. Difference
One- Two- Mean Error
Side Side Differe Differe
F Sig. t df dp dp nce nce Lower Upper
EC Equal .411 .522 .796 149 .214 .427 .4201 .5277 -.6227 1.4630
O_ variances 2 7 5 0
AV assumed
G Equal .828 68.4 .205 .410 .4201 .5072 -.5919 1.4322
variances 09 2 5 6 0
not
assumed

Interpretation:
Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is less than 0.05 (0.522). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.427)
so it can be said that there is no significant difference in the mean scores of Economic Value for
Marital Status.

Table No 4.4:
53
 Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Significance Std. Difference
One- Two- Mean Error
Sided Sided Differe Differe
F Sig. t df p p nce nce Lower Upper
DE Equal .119 .731 .881 149 .190 .380 .46670 .52988 -.5803 1.5137
V_A variances 6 6
VG assumed

Equal .937 71.4 .176 .352 .46670 .49786 -.5259 1.4592

variances 65 0 9
not
assumed
T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Development Value.

Interpretation:
Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is less than 0.05 (0.731). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.380)
so it can be said that there is no significant difference in the mean scores of Development Value
for Marital Status.

Table No 4.5:

54
 T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Application Value.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Significance Std. Difference
One- Two- Mean Error
Sided Sided Differe Differe
F Sig. t df p p nce nce Lower Upper
APP Equal 1.886 .172 1.08 149 .139 .278 .60643 .55698 -.4941 1.7070
_AV variances 9 8 3
G assumed

Equal 1.35 101. .090 .179 .60643 .44821 -.2826 1.4954

variances 3 614 4 9
not assumed

Interpretation:
Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is less than 0.05 (0.172). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.278)
so it can be said that there is no significant difference in the mean scores of Application Value
for Marital Status.

Table No 4.6:

55
 T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Security Value.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Significance Std. Difference
One- Two- Mean Error
Side Side Differe Differe
F Sig. t df dp dp nce nce Lower Upper
SE Equal 7.968 .005 1.41 149 .079 .158 .7377 .5204 -.2905 1.7661
C_A variances 8 7 2 8 3
VG assumed

Equal 1.77 103. .040 .079 .7377 .4164 -.0880 1.5636

variances 2 078 7 1 7 1
not
assumed

Interpretation:
Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is less than 0.05 (0.005). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.158)
so it can be said that there is significant difference in the mean scores of Security Value for
Marital Status.

Table No 4.7:
56
 T-Test Analysis for Marital Status and Job Crafting.

Independent Samples Test

Levene's Test
for Equality of
Variances t-test for Equality of Means
95%
Confidence
Interval of the
Significance Std. Difference
One- Two- Mean Error
Side Side Differe Differe
F Sig. t df dp dp nce nce Lower Upper
J Equal 5.624 .019 1.88 149 .031 .061 1.0903 .57811 -.0519 2.2327
C variances 6 6 9 1
_ assumed
A
Equal 2.42 110. .008 .017 1.0903 .44929 .20004 1.9806
V
variances 7 929 6 7
G
not
assumed

Interpretation:
Group statistics contains fundamental information on group comparisons, such as sample size
(n), mean, SD, and standard error for job satisfaction. The independent samples test, the second
section, reveals the most relevant results from the independent samples t test. There are two
parts that provide various pieces of information: The first line has to be used as levene’s test
significance is less than 0.05 (0.019). The 2-tailed significance value is more than 0.05 (0.061)
so it can be said that there is significant difference in the mean scores of Job Crafting for
Marital Status.

Table No 5.1:
57
 Relationship between Highest Qualification and Interest Value.
ANOVA
INT_AVG

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Between Groups 43.468 5 8.694 1.959 .088

Within Groups 643.552 145 4.438

Total 687.020 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.088). Therefore, no significance difference was found in the mean scores of Interest Value
of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Table No 5.2:

Relationship between Highest Qualification and Social Value.

58
 ANOVA
SOC_AVG
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between 96.577 5 19.315 3.239 .008
Groups
Within Groups 864.801 145 5.964
Total 961.377 150
Descriptives
SOC_AVG
95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Std. Std. Lower Upper Minim Maxim
N Mean Deviation Error Bound Bound um um
diploma 7 7.5714 2.22539 .84112 5.5133 9.6296 4.00 11.00
Graduate 49 6.4286 2.25462 .32209 5.7810 7.0762 4.00 12.00
Professional 20 7.1000 1.71372 .38320 6.2980 7.9020 4.00 12.00
Graduate
Post 71 8.1831 2.74283 .32551 7.5339 8.8323 4.00 16.00
Graduate
Ph.D 1 8.0000 . . . . 8.00 8.00
Others 3 8.6667 2.08167 1.2018 3.4955 13.8378 7.00 11.00
5
Total 151 7.4503 2.53164 .20602 7.0433 7.8574 4.00 16.00

Interpretation:
Statistically is significant difference were found at ‘p’ less than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.008). Therefore, there is significance difference found in the mean scores of Social Value
of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Table No 5.3:

Relationship between Highest Qualification and Economic Value.

59
Interpretation:

ANOVA
ECO_AVG
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between 79.243 5 15.849 2.078 .071
Groups
Within Groups 1105.975 145 7.627
Total 1185.219 150

Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.071). Therefore, there no significance difference found in the mean scores of Economic
Value of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Table No 5.4:

60
Relationship between Highest Qualification and Development Value.

ANOVA
DEV_AVG
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between 96.781 5 19.356 2.554 .030
Groups
Within Groups 1099.100 145 7.580
Total 1195.881 150

Descriptives
DEV_AVG
95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Std. Std. Lower Upper Minim Maxim
N Mean Deviation Error Bound Bound um um
diploma 7 7.4286 2.22539 .84112 5.3704 9.4867 6.00 12.00
Graduate 49 7.0816 2.10987 .30141 6.4756 7.6877 4.00 10.00
Professional 20 8.2500 2.91773 .65242 6.8845 9.6155 4.00 14.00
Graduate
Post Graduate 71 8.8451 3.10598 .36861 8.1099 9.5802 4.00 19.00
Ph.D 1 7.0000 . . . . 7.00 7.00
Others 3 7.3333 3.05505 1.7638 -.2558 14.9225 4.00 10.00
3
Total 151 8.0861 2.82357 .22978 7.6321 8.5401 4.00 19.00

Interpretation:
Statistically is significant difference were found at ‘p’ less than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.030). Therefore, there is significance difference found in the mean scores of Development
Value of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Table No 5.5:

Relationship between Highest Qualification and Application Value.

61
 ANOVA
APP_AVG
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between 208.505 5 41.701 5.416 <.001
Groups
Within Groups 1116.435 145 7.700
Total 1324.940 150

Descriptives
APP_AVG
95% Confidence
Interval for Mean
Std. Std. Lower Upper Minimu Maxim
N Mean Deviation Error Bound Bound m um
diploma 7 7.4286 2.43975 .92214 5.1722 9.6850 4.00 12.00
Graduate 49 7.1224 2.18549 .31221 6.4947 7.7502 4.00 14.00
Professional 20 8.0000 2.15211 .48123 6.9928 9.0072 4.00 13.00
Graduate
Post 71 8.2958 2.62621 .31167 7.6742 8.9174 4.00 14.00
Graduate
Ph.D 1 9.0000 . . . . 9.00 9.00
Others 3 15.333 11.84624 6.8394 -14.0944 44.7610 8.00 29.00
3 3
Total 151 7.9801 2.97203 .24186 7.5022 8.4580 4.00 29.00

Interpretation:
Statistically is significant difference were found at ‘p’ less than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.001). Therefore, there is significance difference found in the mean scores of Development
Value of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Table No 5.6:

Relationship between Highest Qualification and Security Value.

62
 ANOVA
SEC_AVG
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between 65.933 5 13.187 1.743 .128
Groups
Within Groups 1097.113 145 7.566
Total 1163.046 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.128). Therefore, there no significance difference found in the mean scores of Economic
Value of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Table No 5.7:

Relationship between Highest Qualification and Job Crafting.

63
 ANOVA
JC_AVG
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between 84.500 5 16.900 1.795 .117
Groups
Within Groups 1365.394 145 9.417
Total 1449.894 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.117). Therefore, there no significance difference found in the mean scores of Economic
Value of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Table No 6.1:

Relationship between Salary Range and Interest Value.

64
 ANOVA
INT_AVG
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between 2.305 3 .768 .165 .920
Groups
Within Groups 684.715 147 4.658
Total 687.020 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.920). Therefore, there no significance difference found in the mean scores of Economic
Value of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Table No 6.2:

Relationship between Salary Range and Social Value.

ANOVA
65
Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.818). Therefore, there no significance difference found in the mean scores of Economic
Value of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Table No 6.3:

Relationship between Salary Range and Economic Value.

ANOVA
ECO_AVG
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between 56.124 3 18.708 2.436 .067
Groups
Within Groups 1129.095 147 7.681
Total 1185.219 150

66
Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.067). Therefore, there no significance difference found in the mean scores of Economic
Value of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Table No 6.4:

Relationship between Salary Range and Development Value.

ANOVA
DEV_AVG
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between 54.779 3 18.260 2.352 .075
Groups
Within Groups 1141.102 147 7.763
Total 1195.881 150

67
Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.075). Therefore, there no significance difference found in the mean scores of Economic
Value of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Table No 6.5:

Relationship between Salary Range and Application Value.

ANOVA
APP_AVG
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between 41.512 3 13.837 1.585 .196
Groups

68
Within Groups 1283.429 147 8.731
Total 1324.940 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.196). Therefore, there no significance difference found in the mean scores of Economic
Value of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Table No 6.6:

Relationship between Salary Range and Security Value.

ANOVA
SEC_AVG
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between 15.892 3 5.297 .679 .566
Groups

69
Within Groups 1147.155 147 7.804
Total 1163.046 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.566). Therefore, there no significance difference found in the mean scores of Economic
Value of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Table No 6.7:

Relationship between Salary Range and Job Crafting.

ANOVA
JC_AVG
Sum of Mean
Squares df Square F Sig.
Between 20.542 3 6.847 .704 .551
Groups

70
Within Groups 1429.352 147 9.723
Total 1449.894 150

Interpretation:
Statistically no significant difference were found at ‘p’ more than 0.05 level, In the above case
(P=0.551). Therefore, there no significance difference found in the mean scores of Economic
Value of the Highest Qualification of employees.

Findings

The major findings of the study are as follows:

 A majority of the respondents are male

 Most of the respondents are belonging to the age group of 21-30 years.

 A majority of the respondents are Singles.

 Many of the respondents have pursued their Post Graduate

 The majority of the respondents (37.1%) earn 1,00,000-3,00,000.

71
  Majoring of the population believe that they are working in an exciting and challenging

environment.

 47.7% of employees feel they have innovative employer and a novel work environment.

 Majority believe that the organizations produce high quality product.

 Many feel that they have a happy work environment.

 40.4% of respondents believe they have a good relation with their superiors.

 Many agree with the fact that they have supportive and encouraging colleagues.

 Employees feel that they are given the above average salary and are provided good

promotion opportunities in the organization.

 Respondents strongly agree to receive an opportunity to share real experiences with

everyone in the organizations.

 Majority believe to have job security in the organization.

 Employees tend to develop themselves professionally and learn new things at work.

Recommendation:

 Boost Organizational Culture: Encourage a culture that respects employee initiative,

innovation, and autonomy. Encourage your staff to adopt a growth attitude so they can

define their own responsibilities.

 Offer employees the chance to grow their skills and abilities through training and

development programmes so they can better do their jobs.

72
  Supportive Leadership: Training and development in supportive leadership will help

leaders adopt a style that promotes job-crafting. Give advice on how to empower

workers, assign authority, and foster a great workplace culture

 Employees should be given enough time and assistance so they may participate in job-

crafting activities without feeling overburdened by their current responsibilities.

 Encourage employees to share their job-creating experiences, best practices, and success

stories by creating channels and venues for communication.

 Measuring and evaluation: Create metrics and measuring tools to gauge the influence of

job crafting on worker satisfaction, performance, and engagement.

 Determine how well implemented job crafting methods and efforts are working on a

regular basis.

Conclusion:

In this study, we looked at the factors that led to job crafting, a proactive behaviour in which

workers restructure and reevaluate their job duties and responsibilities inside an organization.

Proactivity and self-efficacy are two personality traits that have been demonstrated to have a

good correlation with job crafting. The fulfilment of fundamental psychological demands, such

73
as autonomy, competence, and relatedness, is a key factor in encouraging employees to

participate in job creation. People are more likely to actively shape their jobs when they feel a

sense of autonomy and competence in their work. Employees can successfully tailor their work

to suit their preferences and strengths thanks to the organization's tools and support. This study

therefore emphasizes the necessity of supporting and fostering this behaviour inside

organizations by highlighting the individual-level and contextual antecedents of job crafting.

74
 CHAPTER 6

Bibliography

References

Mohamad, A., Haroon, A.

&Najiran, A. (2009).
75
Development of Electronic
Money and its Impact on
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1534484318788269?journalCode=hrda

https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/21/8016

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2015-12642-001

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1359432X.2014.969245

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0149206315624961?journalCode=joma

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001879111000789

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S000187911730060X

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0007681319300734

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0001879117300271

https://d1wqtxts1xzle7.cloudfront.net/34606439/EJBSS-1445-14-
THE_ANTECEDENTS_OF_JOB_CRAFTING-libre.pdf?1409669173=&response-content-
disposition=inline%3B+filename
%3DTHE_ANTECEDENTS_OF_JOB_CRAFTING_PERCEIVE.pdf&Expires=1685612637&Signature=X
dVwHMpzsp73KgZcTx3pKUvOfdd36LCbPpoRJcIe-
hp4HiTJXjtwoeJ35qwNMhHmXM4WIJ3Xub5gKfabWqieIv4iXZqpl8D0E3MMnpM8zOy0bA81BER
XFVZHI3KJq0sC4~btQdtjuZLWthYE3Vkrq~bnklrwnpeNaEl7opdYL~6rtJ6ZTPxEuCErAUGp-
QyezckF7ZTjno7w8e-tQaG-
HtJY47AXKQjynz3XGVFhfszbWD4j5cGuOBdcADtXzROgDu6gSbMFB8xln4NdUv8QyVfC9yj~LZ0~la
dpiKS7ZRl355dTdqL1s9A3EADYNsOjdI71nn9Sn0~hKXgswIGEOg__&Key-Pair-
Id=APKAJLOHF5GGSLRBV4ZA

76
CHAPTER 7

ANNEXURE

77
 A study on the antecedents of job crafting in organizations
A research project for academic purpose only. Kindly fill the questionnaires with utmost care.

(Tick the appropriate box)

1. Gender Male Female

2. Age 21-30 years 31-40 years

41-50 years 51-60 years

3. Marital Status Single Married

4. Highest Qualification Diploma

(full time)
Graduate

Professional Graduate

Post Graduate

Ph.D.

Others

5. Name of your organization_________________________

6. Grade _____________________________________________

7. Current department __________________________________

8. How long have you been with your present employer? ___________ years

9. How long have you been in your profession/service? ____________ years

10. Salary range per annum less than 1,00,000

78
 1,00,000 – 3,00,000

3,00,000 – 5,00,000
Greater than 5,00,000

Sl.No. Statement Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

agree disagree
INT1. I am working in an
exciting/challenging
environment
INT2. I have an innovative
employer where we have
novel work practices/
forward-thinking.
INT3. My organization produces
high-quality
product and services
INT4. My organization produces
innovative
products and services.
SOC5. I have a happy working
environment.
SOC6. I am having a good
relationship with superiors.
SOC7. I am having a good
relationship with colleagues.
SOC8. My colleagues are
supportive and encouraging.
ECO9. An attractive overall
compensation package.
ECO10. I get an above-average basic
salary.
ECO11. I have good promotion
opportunities within the
Organization.
ECO12. My organization has good
allowances for
Employees.
DEV13. I get
recognition/appreciation
from management.
DEV14. My organization will
support me for future
employment.
DEV15. I feeling more self-confident
as a result of

79
 working for the company.
DEV16. I am gaining career-
enhancing experience here
APP17. I have an opportunity to
apply what was learned at
tertiary institution.
APP18. I get an opportunity to teach
others what you have
Learned.
APP19. The organization is
customer-oriented.
APP20. I get opportunity to share
real experiences with
everyone in the
organization.
SEC21. I am sure that I will be able
to keep my job as long as I
wish.
SEC22. I have job security within
my organization.
SEC23. My organization supported
employees during COVID-
19.
SEC24. The organization I work
with is always safe in the
work environment (no
abuse, harassment etc.)
JC 1 I try to develop my
capabilities.
JC 2 I try to develop myself
professionally
JC 3 I try to learn new things at
work
JC 4 I make sure that I use my
capacities to the fullest
JC 5 I decide on my own how I
do things

Thank you for your responses 😊

80
81