Abstracts
Résumé
Bien qu’étant de plus en plus étudié dans le champ des comportements organisationnels positifs, de nombreuses zones d’ombre entourent encore le bien-être au travail. Notre ambition est de montrer l’intérêt de l’appréhender de manière différenciée plutôt qu’au travers d’un score global, afin de décrire les relations qu’il entretient avec des attitudes positives et négatives. Cette approche centrée sur les personnes est rendue possible par la multi dimensionnalité du concept. Cette particularité autorise le regroupement des participants à l’enquête en profils, c’est-à-dire en fonction de la composition des scores exprimés sur chacune des dimensions constitutives du bien-être. L’analyse en profils latents — Latent Profiles Analysis — d’un échantillon de 865 personnes fait apparaître cinq regroupements distincts. Le premier est celui des personnes qui rapportent les plus faibles scores alors que le second est celui des scores voisins de la moyenne de l’échantillon sur les quatre dimensions constitutives du bien-être. Ils sont respectivement nommés profils de bien-être « déficitaire » et de bien-être « de référence ». Le troisième est un segment de population caractérisé par une relation très positive au manager et à l’environnement physique de travail. Ces deux dimensions symbolisent l’organisation, c’est pourquoi nous le nommons profil de bien-être « organisationnel ». Le quatrième est qualifié de bien-être « complet », car aucune dimension constitutive du bien-être ne manque à l’appel. Enfin, le cinquième est un bien-être « social », puisqu’il est d’abord défini par la qualité des relations aux collègues. Sur ces bases empiriques, une régression logistique multinomiale révèle que les relations les plus positives entretenues avec des variables exogènes recherchées, telles que l’implication organisationnelle affective et la satisfaction au travail, concernent d’abord le profil de bien-être au travail « complet », puis, dans l’ordre, les profils trois, cinq, deux et un. L’association à l’intention de quitter est inverse. Ces résultats invitent les managers à différencier leurs pratiques incitatives en fonction du profil auquel les salariés appartiennent. Ils montrent également que les différentes dimensions du bien-être au travail ne sont pas gouvernées par un jeu de compensations entre elles.
Mots-clés :
- Bien-être au travail,
- profils,
- implication,
- satisfaction,
- intention de quitter
Abstract
Despite growing interest in organizational behaviour and, especially, in well-being at work, this concept still lacks clarity. Our aim is to show that it is more informative to study it in a differentiated manner than through a global score, in order to describe its links with positive and negative attitudes. The multidimensionality of well-being at work makes this person-centred approach possible. Thus, people can be clustered in profiles based on the composition of the specific score they gave on each dimension of well-being at work. A latent profiles analysis conducted on a large sample of 865 people reveals five distinct profiles. The first profile includes people who reported the lowest scores of the sample, whereas the second is close to the average of the four dimensions. We named them lack well-being and benchmark well-being profiles, respectively. Very positive relations with the supervisor and material environment characterize the third profile. These dimensions symbolized the organization. We therefore called it organizational well-being profile. We called the fourth one full well-being due to the highest positive relations recorded on all dimensions. The last profile is social well-being because of the high quality relations with coworkers. Based on these first empirical results, a multinomial logistic regression shows that the most positive links with expected exogenous attitudes, such as affective organizational commitment and satisfaction at work, involve the full profile, then, in order of magnitude, the organizational, social, benchmark and lack profiles. The association with intention to quit is the reverse. These results call for managers to differentiate their encouraging practices based on the well-being at work profile to which employees belong. They also show that the dimensions of the concept are not concurrent.
Keywords:
- well-being at work,
- profiles,
- commitment,
- satisfaction,
- turnover intention
Resumen
A pesar del interés creciente en el comportamiento organizacional, el concepto de bienestar en el trabajo comporta aún ciertos aspectos que necesitan mayor esclarecimiento. Nuestro objetivo es mostrar que es preferible estudiar el bienestar en el trabajo de manera diferenciada utilizando un puntaje global, de manera a describir sus relaciones con las actitudes positivas y negativas. El carácter multidimensional de este concepto justifica un enfoque centrado en el individuo. De esta manera, los resultados de los participantes pueden ser agrupadas en perfiles basados en la composición del puntaje específico obtenido por cada dimensión constitutiva del bienestar en el trabajo. Un análisis de los perfiles latentes – Latent Profiles Analysis - realizado con una muestra de 865 personas revela cinco perfiles distintos. El primero incluye los participantes con puntajes más bajos, mientras que el segundo representa los participantes con puntajes cercanos al puntaje promedio de las cuatro dimensiones del bienestar. Estos dos agrupamientos son identificados, respectivamente, como el perfil carente de bienestar y el perfil de referencia. El tercer perfil está constituido por las personas que mantienen relaciones muy positivas con el supervisor y con su entorno físico de trabajo. Estas dimensiones simbolizaban la organización; son por ello identificadas como perfiles organizacionales del bienestar. El cuarto perfil es calificado de bienestar completo dado los puntajes más elevados de relaciones positivas obtenidos por todas las dimensiones. El último perfil es el de bienestar social pues representa los puntajes más elevados de calidad de relaciones con los compañeros de trabajo. A partir de estos primeros resultados, una regresión logística multinomial muestra que los puntajes más elevados de relaciones positivas con las variables exógenas investigadas, tales como la implicación organizacional afectiva y la satisfacción de trabajo, incumben sobre todo el perfil bienestar completo, y luego, en orden de importancia, los perfiles organizacional, social y de carencia. La asociación con la intención de dejar el empleo va en el sentido contrario. En el terreno de la gerencia, estos resultados sugieren la necesidad de diferenciar las prácticas incitativas en función del perfil específico de los empleados. Los resultados muestran también que las dimensiones del bienestar en el trabajo no obedecen a una regulación de compensación entre ellas.
Palabras clave:
- bienestar en el trabajo,
- perfiles,
- implicación,
- satisfacción,
- intención de dejar el empleo
Appendices
Bibliographie
- Allen, Natalie J. et John P. Meyer. 1990. The Measurement and Antecedents of Affective, Continuance and Normative Commitment to the Organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 1-18.
- Anzieu, Daniel et Jean-Yves Martin. 1979. La dynamique des groupes restreints. Paris : PUF.
- Ashforth, Balke. E. et Allan. M. Saks. 1996. Socialization Tactics: Longitudinal Effects on Newcomer Adjustment. Academy of Management Journal, 39 (1), 149-178.
- Bakker, Arnold. B. et Wilmar. B. Schaufeli. 2008. Positive Organizational Behavior: Engaged Employees in Flourishing Organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29, 147-154.
- Biétry, Franck et Jordane Creusier. 2013. « Proposition d’une échelle de mesure positive du bien-être au travail (EPBET) ». Revue de Gestion des Ressources Humaines, 87 (1), 23-41.
- Bradburn, Norman. M. 1969. The Structure of Psychological Well-being. Chicago: Aldine.
- Brislin, Richard. W. 1986. The Wording and Translation of Research Instrument. Fields Methods in Cross-Cultural Research. W.W., Lonner et J., Berry, dir. Beverly Hill, CA: Sage. 137-164.
- Cameron, Kim. S., Jane. E. Dutton et Robert. E. Quinn 2003. Foundations of Positive Organizational Scholarship. Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline. K.S., Cameron, J.E., Dutton et R.E., Quinn, dir. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inch, 3-13.
- Carson, Jennifer et Julian Barling. 2009. Work and Well-being. The Sage Handbook of Organizational Behavior. S.R., Clegg et C.L., Cooper, dir. California: Thousand Oaks, 675-692.
- Cotton, Peter et Peter. M. Hart. 2003. Occupational Well-being and Performance: A Review of Organizational Health Research. Australian Psychologist, 38 (2), 118-127.
- Cropanzano, Russel et Thomas. A. Wright. 2001. When a Happy Worker is Really a Productive Worker. A Review and Further Refinement of the Happy-Productive Worker Thesis. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and research, 53 (3), 182-199.
- Daniels, Kevin. 2000. Measures of Five Aspects of Affective Well-being at Work. Human Relations, 53 (1), 275-294.
- Danna, Karen et Ricky. W. Griffin. 1999. Health and Well-being in the Workplace: A Review and Synthesis of the Literature. Journal of Management, 25 (3), 357-384.
- Diener, Ed. 1994. Assessing Subjective Well-being: Progress and Opportunities. Social Indicators Research, 31 (2), 103-157.
- Diener, Ed. 2000. Subjective Well-being: The Science of Happiness and a Proposal for a National Index. American Psychologist, 55 (1), 34-43.
- Dutton, Jane. E. et Mary. A. Glynn. 2009. Positive Organizational Scholarship. The Sage Handbook of Organizational Behavior. S.R. Clegg et C.L. Cooper, dir. California: Thousand Oaks, 693-711.
- Eisenberger, Robert, Florence, Stinglhamber, Christian, Vandenberghe, Ivan. L. Sucharski, Linda, Rhoades. 2002. Perceived Supervisor Support: Contributions to Perceived Organizational Support and Employees’ Retention. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (3), 565-573.
- Fineman, Stephen. 2006. On Being Positive: Concerns and Counterpoints. Academy of Management Review, 31 (2), 270-291.
- Frederickson, Barbara. L. 2003. Positive Emotions and Upward Spirals in Organizations. Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline. K.S., Cameron, J.E., Dutton et R.E., Quinn, dir. San Francisco: Berett-Koehler, 163-175.
- Gable, Shelly. L. et Jonathan, Haidt. 2005. What (and Why) is Positive Psychology?. Review of General Psychology, 9 (2), 103-110.
- Gilbert, Mickael. H., Véronique Dagenais-Desmarais et André Savoie. 2011. « Validation d’une mesure de santé psychologique au travail ». Revue européenne de psychologie appliquée, 61 (4), 195-203.
- Gouldner, Alvin. W. 1960. The Norm of Reciprocity: A Preliminary Statement. American Sociological Review 25 (2), 161-178.
- Harter, James. K., Frank. L. Schmidt et Corey. L.M. Keyes. 2003 Well-being in the Workplace and its Relationship to Business Outcomes. Flourishing: The positive person and the good life. C.L.M., Keyes et J., Haidt, dir. American Psychological Association, 205-224.
- Herzberg, Frederick. 1971. Work and the Nature of Man. London: Staples Press.
- Keyes, Corey. L.M. 2007. Promoting and Protecting Mental Health as Flourishing: A Complementary Strategy for Improving National Mental Health. American Psychologist, 62 (2), 95-108.
- Keyes, Corey. L.M., Carol. D. Ryff et Dov Shmotkin, D. 2002. Optimizing Well-being: The Empirical Encounter of two Traditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82 (6), 1007-1022.
- Kiziah, John. E. 2003. Job Satisfaction vs Work Fulfillment. Exploring Positive Experience at Work. Virginia: Virginia Commonwealth University.
- Lee, Kibeom et Natalie. J. Allen. 2002. Organizational Citizenship Behavior and Workplace Deviance: The Role of Affect and Cognitions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87 (1), 131-142.
- Locke, Edwin. A. 1976. The Nature and Causes of Job Satisfaction. Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology. M.D. Dunette, dir, Chicago, Rand McNally, 1297-1349.
- Lubke, Gitta et Bengt. O. Muthén. 2007. Performance of Factor Mixture Models as a Function of Model Size, Covariate Effects, and Class-Specific Parameters. Structural Equation Modeling, 14 (1), 26-47.
- Luthans, Fred. 2002. The Need for and Meaning of Positive Organizational Behavior. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23 (6), 695-706.
- Lyubomirsky, Sonja, Laura King et Ed Diener. 2005. The Benefits of Frequent Positive Affects: Does Happiness Lead to Success?. Psychological Bulletin, 131: 803-855.
- Massé, Raymond, Caroline Poulin, Clément Dassa, Jean Lambert, Sylvie Bélair et Alex Battaglini. 1998. « Élaboration et validation d’un outil de mesure du bien-être psychologique: L’ÉMMBEP ». Revue canadienne de santé publique, 89 (5), 352-357.
- McGregor, Ian et Brian. R. Little. 1998. Personal Projects, Happiness, and Meaning: On Doing Well and Being Yourself. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74 (2), 494-512.
- McMahan, Ethan. A. et David Estes. 2011. Measuring Lay Conceptions of Well-being: The Beliefs about Well-being Scale. Journal of Happiness Studies. 12 (2), 267-287.
- Meyer, John. P. et Lynne Herscovitch. 2001. Commitment in the Workplace. Toward a General Model. Human Resource Management Review, 11 (3), 299-326.
- Meyer, John. P. et Elyse. R. Maltin. 2010. Employee Commitment and Well-being: A Critical Review, Theoretical Framework and Research Agenda. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 77, 323-337.
- Meyer, John. P., Laura. J. Stanley et Robert. J. Vandenberg. 2013. A Person-Centered Approach to the Study of Commitment. Human Resource Management Review, 23 (2), 190-202.
- Mobley, Wiliam. H., Rodger. W. Griffeth, R.W., Herbert. H. Hand et B.M Meglino. 1979. Review and Conceptual Analysis of the Employee Turnover Process. Psychological Bulletin, 86 (3), 493-522.
- Morin, Alexandre. J.S., Julien Morizot, Jean-Sébastien Boudrias et Isabelle Madore. 2011. A Multifocal Person-Centered Perspective on Workplace Affective Commitment: A Latent Profile/Factor Mixture Analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 14 (1), 58-90.
- Muthén, Bengt. O. 2002. Beyond SEM: General Latent Variable Modeling. Behaviometrika, 29 (1), 81-117.
- Paillé, Pascal. 2006. « Les relations entre l’implication au travail, les comportements de citoyenneté organisationnelle et l’intention de retrait ». Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée, 56, 139-149.
- Podsakoff, Philip. M., Scott MacKenzie, Julie. B. Paine et Daniel. G. Bachrach. 2000. Organizational Citizenship Behaviors: A Critical Review of the Theoretical and Empirical Literature and Suggestions for Future Research. Journal of Management, 26 (3), 513-563.
- Roussel, Patrice. 1996. Rémunération, motivation et satisfaction au travail. Ed. Economica, Paris.
- Roussel, Patrice, François Durrieu, Eric Campoy et Assaâd El Akremi. 2002. Méthodes d’équations structurelles: Recherche et Applications en gestion. Paris: Editions Economica.
- Ryff, Carol. D.. 1989. Happiness is Everything, or is it? Explorations on the Meaning of Psychological Well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57 (6), 1069–1081.
- Ryff, Carol. D. et Corey. L.M. Keyes. 1995. The Structure of Psychological Well-being Revisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69 (4), 719-727.
- Ryff, Carol. D. et Burton Singer. 1998. The Contours of Positive Human Health. Psychological Inquiry, 9 (1), 1-28.
- Schneider, Benjamin, Paul. J. Hanges, D. Brent Smith et Amy. N. Salvaggio. 2003. Which Comes First: Employee Attitudes or Organizational Financial and Market Performance? Journal of Applied Psychology, 88 (5), 836-851.
- Seligman, Martin. E.P. et Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. 2000. Positive Psychology: An Introduction. American Psychologist, 55 (1), 5-14.
- Seligman, Martin. E.P., Tracy. A. Steen, Nansook Park et Christopher Peterson 2005. Positive Psychology Progress. Empirical Validation of Interventions. American Psychologist, 60 (5), 410-421.
- Speece, Deborah. L. 1994. Cluster Analysis in Perspective. Exceptionality, 5 (1), 31-44.
- Staw, Barry. M. et Sigal. G. Barsade. 1993. Affect and Managerial Performance: A Test of the Sadder-but-wiser vs. Happier-and-smarter Hypothesis. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38 (2), 304-331.
- Suh, Eunkook, Ed Diener, Shigeiro Oishi et Harry. C. Triandis. 1998. The Shifting Basis of Life Satisfaction Judgments across Cultures: Emotions versus Norms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74 (2), 482-493.
- Tannenbaum, Scott. I., Rebecca. L. Beard et Eduardo Salas. 1992. Team Building and its Influence on Team Effectiveness: an Examination of Conceptual and Empirical Developments. Advances in Psychology, 82: 117-153.
- Wang, Mo et Paul. J. Hanges. 2011. Latent Class Procedures: Applications to Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods, 14 (1), 24-31.
- Warr, Peter. 1990. The Measurement of Well-being and Other Aspects of Mental Health. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 63, 193-210.
- Waterman, Alan. S. 1993. Two Conceptions of Happiness: Contrasts of Personal Expressiveness (Eudemonia) and Hedonic Enjoyment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64 (4), 678-691.
- Watson, David, Lee. A. Clark et Auke Tellegen. 1988. Development and Validation of Brief Measures of Positive and Negative Affect: The PANAS Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54 (6), 1063-1070.
- Weiss, David. J., Rene. V. Dawis, George. W. England. 1967. Manuel for Minnesota Satisfaction Questionnaire. Industrial Relations Center, University of Minnesota.
- Wright, Thomas. A. 2003. Positive Organizational Behavior: An Idea Whose Time has Truly Come. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 437-442.
- Wright, Thomas. A. et Douglas. G. Bonett. 1997. The Role of Pleasantness and Activation-Based Well-being in Performance Prediction. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 2 (3), 212-219.
- Wright, Thomas. A. et Barry. M. Staw. 1999. Affect and Favorable Work Outcomes: Two Longitudinal Tests of the Happy-Productive Worker Thesis. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20 (1), 1-23.